I'll try to be brief.
Mr. Chairman, the process of levels planning is not quick, it's not political, it's not arbitrary; it's a long arduous process. It takes about nine months. There are widespread consultations with provinces, academics, statisticians, stakeholders, employers, unions. All of that is fed into a process that is led by the department. They come forward.... Yes, ultimately the overall levels plan goes to cabinet; it is then presented to Parliament. But then the particular targets within it are assessed by the officials according to such factors as inventories and the number of applications.
Pulling the camera back, Mr. Oliphant has pointed to some employers wanting more federal skilled workers. Eight of the ten provinces want significantly more provincial nominees. Refugee advocates want more refugees. Many families in Canada want more family members, more parents and grandparents. You have all of these countervailing pressures, and one has to make choices.
The easy thing to do is sit on the sidelines and say this one should be higher and that one should be higher. What you would end up with is an immigration level that is unsustainable.
We now have the highest relative level of immigration in the developed world, with the largest level of intake last year in 57 years and the second-highest level of intake in nine decades. We had the majority of Canadians, 77%, in a poll last September say that immigration levels should either be kept the same or decreased. In Mr. Oliphant's own province of Ontario, only 15% say that overall levels should be increased. So we have to keep in mind public opinion. We ought not to be arrogant and dismiss it.
Taking all of that into account, we've come up with a plan that balances economic, family class, and humanitarian in a way that I think is the best response we can make to the expectations of people.