Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 1st, 2011

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

So 5,000 principal applicants. Wonderful. Thank you very much. I do appreciate it.

There is a great deal of concern, from Manitoba's perspective, that we be able to continue to maintain our numbers. As other provinces tend to want to pick up on the program now, is there any thought being given to Manitoba's numbers being reduced from Ottawa?

[David Manicom]

Not to my knowledge.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Given the idea that different provinces all have different programs being made available, quite different in terms of the way in which they're broken down—who would be eligible, who's not to be eligible—and given the fact that we're trying to deal with the issue of backlogs, and backlogs have been a really important issue for us, do you feel there would be any value, as a committee, to being able to get a better assessment and a comparison of the different provinces and the potential backlog that could be created as a result?

Keep in mind that provinces like Manitoba are in a position where we do not want to lose any of our ability to issue those 5,000 certificates. I think we've been at that now for two years.

[David Manicom]

The allocations will be largely dependent on the overall level framework, as determined by the Government of Canada. As I say, there's no indication that Manitoba's allocation would be reduced, that I know of.

With regard to the accumulation of backlogs or inventories that my colleague was speaking to earlier, the purpose of the allocation formula is to prevent the accumulation of backlogs in the provincial nominee program. If we did not manage the number of certificates being issued, we would lose control of the number of provincial nominee applications we are receiving, and then we wouldn't be able to process them all within the levels framework.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Okay.

Do you provide multi-year forecasts for the provincial nominee program? For example, is it safe to assume that Manitoba will be able to get the 5,000 again in 2013?

[David Manicom]

No, at this time it's done on an annual basis. But we are beginning the process of the multi-year planning my colleague referred to. I think it's foreseeable, if that process is successful, that in the future provinces may have a three-year planning horizon.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Okay.

I noticed that there were a number of provinces, and you made reference to them, that have been audited. Was that done by their own provincial auditors who took the initiative themselves, or was it something the local governments requested?

[David Manicom]

I referred to the reports of the provincial auditors general on individual provincial nominee programs. In addition, the Auditor General of Canada made reference to the provincial nominee program as a whole in the report of 2009, I believe.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a couple of questions on the economic issues and on citizenship. But I want to follow up on one point Rathika made.

David, in response to the question on what Ontario is giving up to Alberta in the circumstance of the numbers, you said it was good will. I thought that was a great answer. But I actually think it goes a little bit deeper than that. When you see the reduction in immigration in the province of Ontario, from 64% to 52%, and the other provinces not picking up the slack.... Quite honestly, they're actually invigorated in terms of their immigration policy as it's focused on economic development for the country. What I see Ontario trading off for the exchange, or the lack of enthusiasm for this program, is settlement funding. That leads me to ask the question about the relationship between the provincial nominee program and settlement funding.

I know you're not the experts on settlement funding, but I wonder if you could comment on the fact that we have other provinces, such as Manitoba, that are obviously, as Mr. Lamoureux has indicated, using this program to its fullest extent. Should that settlement funding, in fact, follow where the immigrants are moving? I would ask if there is a relationship between the provincial nominee program and the use of settlement funding to assist them.

[David Manicom]

Yes, it's slightly indirect. In other words, the federal government's funding formula for settlement is based on the number of arrivals, with an adjustment with regard to refugees because of the higher settlement needs of refugees. There's a slightly different per-head allocation for refugees. Other than that, it's based on the number of arrivals, regardless of the program.

A province that brings in more immigrants through the provincial nominee program will increase its overall number of immigrant arrivals, and therefore, under the settlement allocation formula, would, in the following year, receive an increased proportion of whatever overall funding is available.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Please stop the clock for a minute.

Just to inform the members of the committee, this committee apparently went to each capital in the country in 2003 on this topic. It was a similar topic. There's a report on the website that maybe you should all have a look at.

Sorry, Mr. Dykstra. The clock will begin again.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

That's no problem. I don't think I lost my train of thought. I'll do my best.

The other aspect of this you noted in your introductory remarks is in relation to the program itself. While it may be a pathway to citizenship, it is not in fact a Canadian citizenship program. I wonder if you could just expand on that a little bit, because I think people need to understand that the stated purpose of the provincial nominee program, along with the federal skilled worker program, isn't necessarily to create new Canadian citizens. But it does lead to that based on their involvement here in the Canadian economy and the Canadian community.

[David Manicom]

Like all of Canada's immigration programs, we certainly hope and encourage immigrants to become Canadian citizens. Historically, for many years, and it's a trend we're happy to see continuing and even improving, a very high percentage of Canadian immigrants—I believe it is in the order of 75% to 80%—eventually become Canadian citizens, a level that is, to my knowledge, unmatched by any country in the world.

Interestingly, immigrants in economic streams have an above average uptake of citizenship. It is even higher than in the immigration program as a whole. And the provincial nominee program outcomes are consistent with that. A very high percentage of provincial nominees do become Canadian citizens.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

Thank you.

I know we've all alluded to this to a certain extent, but another aspect of the program itself is really a potential for each of the provinces to use it as an economic driver. You touched on this in your opening remarks. Could you outline the importance of how you view the program in its essence? That is, it is an economic assistance to the provinces to deliver on, obviously, skilled worker positions and in fact assists them with respect to their provincial economies, but the larger outcome is that it assists us in terms of the strength of our Canadian economy.

[David Manicom]

It's always a challenge to ask a public official to give you the essence of a program. When I'm in multilateral fora talking about Canadian immigration policy, what we tend to find ourselves saying about the provincial nominee program is that, given its focus on successful economic establishment as a baseline and the positive demonstrated outcomes that we'll see in the report that will be issued in a couple of months, Canada has produced a very interesting hybrid where we can have broad human capital national programs on a considerable scale yet have programs within that overall ambit that meet a variety of specific local and regional needs, whether that be extremely highly skilled people in a certain domain in the Lower Mainland, community building in Manitoba, or skilled tradespersons in Alberta. All of them are doing well both in the short term and in the long term—by global standards extremely well—and eventually becoming Canadian citizens. I think it gives us a policy nuance or agility or responsiveness that probably would be beyond the design capabilities of a federal government because of the way in which we do our business. That's what I'd say about it.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I really just want to confirm.... You noted that in Prince Edward Island, 98% of their immigrants are coming from this program; Manitoba, 92%; Saskatchewan, 86%; the Yukon, 87%; New Brunswick, 78%; and Newfoundland and Labrador, 52%. I don't necessarily need you to respond specifically to this, but the point I'm trying to make is that we've understood, from policy, political, and implementation perspectives, that the provinces have actually, by and large—there are a couple at the tail end of this, and I put Ontario in that category—determined that this is a program that works for them and a program that, from the policy perspective, works for the country.

[David Manicom]

I don't think that was quite a question, but I'd only add that the kind of nuance we see is, for example, the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador needing nurses in outports and setting up individual relationships with nursing training institutes in southern India, and going to India in person to work with those local schools to develop programs that benefit both Newfoundland and the training institute in southern India. I can't really imagine the federal government undertaking that kind of nuanced approach.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Kellway and Madame Groguhé, you have less than five minutes.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Oh my goodness. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Very quickly, David, you mentioned earlier that the provinces want more. Have you aggregated the demand coming from the provinces to a new level? Have you figured out how much more they want?

[David Manicom]

No, I don't believe so. I don't think, to my knowledge, at least since my taking up this post, that we've tended to see specific numerical requests from the provinces, although I'll ask Natasha if she hears differently. Generally, it's just more, and therefore the challenge to the government has been the request for more and higher numbers from each provincial government, yet an apparent broad public consensus is that the current levels are about right, producing a bit of a mathematical conundrum.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Natasha, do you have a number?

[Natasha Parriag]

I don't have an overall number. These are typically numbers that would be tabled in a province's immigration strategy, for example, where they would state their own interests on an individual basis.

[Matthew Kellway, NDP, Beaches—East York, ON]

Okay.

Very quickly, I understand in 2002 the department committed to enhancing immigration in francophone minority communities and that the 2006 strategic plan to foster immigration to francophone minority communities set a minimum target of 4.4% in terms of immigration in minority francophone communities. I understand Manitoba has voluntarily accepted that as a linguistic target. Is the federal government imposing that linguistic target on other provinces or making any effort to fulfill that commitment?