Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Feb. 17th, 2011

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

So in the other provinces we want the funding to follow the immigrant and we want the funding to be at a level of where the immigrants are going at an immigration level, but with Quebec it doesn't depend on that at all.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Yes, they're different formulas, and it is true that we don't get a lot of information from Quebec on how much of the transfer, whereby next year we give them $258 billion—million, excuse me, a Freudian slip—goes to settlement services.

My deputy points out that the broader Canada-Quebec immigration accord also, of course, gives Quebec the power of selection over economic immigrants. So notionally, part of this transfer is to help them deal with that as well.

[Tim Uppal, Conservative, Edmonton—Sherwood Park, AB]

Thank you.

We've seen how, just with Mr. Wrzesnewskyj's questioning, they twist the numbers around to try to fit their own purposes. Funding for settlement services has increased three times since 2005, since the Liberal term. There's actually a Liberal MP who said that, considering our reallocations recently announced, the government wanted the Liberal immigrant experience in Canada to fail.

Can you comment on that, considering that we've increased funding? How does increasing funding...? I would say it helps the immigrant. Could you talk about why we've increased the funding? Why is immigrant settlement services funding important to this government? Why do you feel it's important? And how does it help the immigrant?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

First of all, I'd underscore the imposition of the right-of-landing fee by the previous government in 1995, which was $975 or $985 on each adult permanent resident. It was a very heavy burden for a lot of newcomer families, people who often have limited means, and it imposed an immediate financial burden and handicap on them upon their arrival, which is why our government followed through on a commitment to cut the right-of-landing fee in half. As I underscored, that has saved newcomers over $300 million, collectively, since 2006, over $180 million alone for newcomers settling in Ontario. But in addition, from 1993 to 2005, federal settlement funding was essentially flat, so in real terms it was declining year after year. The only place it was going up was Quebec.

When we came to office, we said this was not working for the provinces that were struggling with settlement costs. Those same provinces, by the way, had to undergo about 20% or 25% cuts in federal transfers to the provinces in the mid-1990s for things like health care and higher education.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Could you wind up, Mr. Minister?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

So we said we were going to put more money on the table, try to provide better services, like free language classes. We also created the pre-arrival orientation to give people a bit of a head start, and I think we see the results. In our research we're starting to see better economic results, particularly for federal skilled workers, and a better distribution of newcomers across the country.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Shory.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for keeping everybody in a timely manner.

Minister, thank you and your department so much for doing all the hard work, not only hard work but smart work as well, and getting results. I also thank you for bringing the highest numbers to Canada in 2010.

Let me tell you my own story. One of the reasons I chose Canada was that I was convinced the fairness rule prevails here. I touched Canadian soil in Toronto, then we lived in Montreal for a couple of years, then we moved to B.C., and ultimately we settled in Calgary. I can tell you thousands of stories, same with my nephew--he landed in Toronto, settled in Calgary.

The fact is we can all agree that the settlement pattern.... First of all, it is not always necessary that immigrants will settle at the place they land. We also can agree that settlement patterns haven't changed. I can see that. As I said, I can give you thousands of examples. But I was surprised to hear in recent weeks that the Ontario government condemned the new arrangements.

Minister, why does the Ontario government feel that Ontario is entitled to receive ever-increasing amounts of federal settlement funding, when the number and proportion of immigrants is decreasing in Ontario? And it is substantially increasing in my own province of Alberta and other provinces—Manitoba, B.C., Yukon, you name it. Why are immigrants in those provinces considered of less value than those in Ontario?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

You know, I think this is an important point. What we're trying to do with the new federal settlement funding formula is ensure equal treatment of newcomers across the country. Newcomers in one province ought not to be receiving more services than in another; they're not worth more than immigrants in another region. And what we're trying to do is equalize this.

Right now, the per-immigrant settlement funding for Ontario, in the current fiscal year, is about $3,500 per immigrant, and in Alberta it's $2,700 per immigrant. That's an $800 difference that puts your immigrants, in your constituency, at a disadvantage. As a result of these changes, this will be equalized, more or less, starting next year.

I'd also point out to my friends in Ontario that a number of provinces, such as Manitoba, Alberta, and Saskatchewan, which have seen very significant increases in immigration in the past five years, have also stepped up to the plate and are investing significantly more in settlement services themselves. They regard themselves as partners with us in welcoming newcomers, in improving settlement services.

But based on our calculations—and there might be some dispute on this, because it's hard to define exactly what constitutes a settlement service—in 2005 Ontario was investing $94 million in settlement services and in 2009-10 about $133 million, a very nominal increase.

So we increased by over 300% in Ontario, and they've increased settlement services in their own province by 30%. Put it this way: I think the Government of Ontario would be a little more credible on this issue if they actually put their money where their mouth is.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

I also understand, Minister, that when the settlement funds are given to any service-providing agency, they are of course periodic; they are not forever. They have no automatic renewal option.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

They absolutely do not.

I find this peculiar. Yes, in Ontario, about 15% of the organizations that used to get funding will no longer be continued, but we're bringing on board 30 new organizations that have never received settlement funding in the past.

And by the way, of the 37 organizations in Ontario that are being discontinued for contribution agreements, 30 of them—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

No, that's it; we're finished. We're over time.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

—got nothing before 2005.

My point is that we need renewal in this sector. To say that you get a blank cheque, that once you get a contribution agreement for one year you get a permanent right to taxpayer funding, is ridiculous. People have to perform; they have to be located in the right areas; we have to avoid duplication; they have to demonstrate efficiency; they have to demonstrate innovation. If they don't, we're going to have a healthy competition within the settlement sector, and we'll replace those who aren't performing up to standard—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

—with new organizations who we think can.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Minister.

You're coming on in a few minutes, Mr. Shory. Just be patient.

Mr. Trudeau.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Thank you, Chair.

I'd like to go back, first of all, to one of the things you said. You keep talking about the fact that in 2006 you “decided” to triple settlement funding, that “we increased” it. You seem to not reference the fact that the settlement funding increases, by 300%, started in 2005 in an agreement signed by the previous government—the Liberal government—in November of 2005.

You simply agreed to continue with agreements that were signed by a previous government, increasing settlement funding initially, which covered a five-year range that has now ceased. That agreement has ceased, and that's where you're looking at decreasing overall—yes, shifting internally, but overall decreasing—by $53 million.

In the fall, the estimates and the annual report indicated that you were going to be keeping the numbers stable in 2010; that was what you were proud of talking about. Suddenly we realize, with the new numbers, that we have increased to unprecedented, record numbers. The decision to cut this $53 million from settlement funding agencies happened when you thought things were stable. Now that you're admitting that the numbers have increased, why are you continuing to insist on cutting settlement agency funding?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

First of all, with respect to the funding increase that was never actually delivered by the previous government, that's the famous argument, you know: 13 years and we almost got it done--

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

We signed that agreement in November. It got done.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

To quote Mr. Ignatieff, on immigration, we, “the Liberal Party”, just didn't get it done--

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

That's a paraphrase. He was talking about the environment, Minister.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

After 13 years, the numbers are black and white.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Come on.

He's being disingenuous, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You know what? This is great sport, but I think we will just have to pause a little bit.

Mr. Minister.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

The numbers are black and white. After 13 years, settlement funding was flat, with the exception of the province of Quebec, and the total overall national budget was $200 million. Yes, the Canada-Ontario immigration agreement was signed, but what about all the Atlantic provinces? What about all the western provinces? Why weren't they included?

We stepped up to the plate in 2006 and this was a real investment. This was a real choice that we made. We made a choice to forgo now several hundred million dollars in revenue reductions in the right-of-landing fee. That's money out of the budget of my department. We stepped up to the plate and added an increment over the past five years of $1.4 billion in additional settlement funding that was not put on over 13 years.

I think that reflects the kind of priority that the previous government had. In fact, if you look at the cuts in 1995, which overall were necessary, one of the departments that was most deeply cut was Citizenship and Immigration Canada. If you want evidence of that, look at the number of landings in this country. In 1997 it went down to 175,000 landings, 100,000 less than this year, Mr. Chairman.

So I don't accept the notion at all that the previous government took immigration seriously. They chose not to invest in it.