Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 13th, 2012

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

That's my ruling.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Does the minister believe the average immigrant family from the Philippines or India has the extra $4,000 necessary to purchase health insurance so they can apply for a super visa?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, just on your point, Mr. Chairman, if I get imprecise questions, it's not possible to provide a one-word answer.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I'll tell you what we're going to do—and I'm not stopping the clock.

If you continue on, we'll just move on to the next questioner. You have to let him answer the question.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

The answer to this last question is that I think it is entirely reasonable that we ask elderly visitors who have much higher rates of health care consumption to obtain private health insurance if they're coming to Canada on extended visits, so that those costs do not fall to taxpayers through provincial health care systems. Yes, I think it's entirely reasonable, and it's precisely through that program integrity measure that we've been able to expand access for longer visits for parents and grandparents.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Does the minister believe that the average immigrant family from the Philippines or India has the extra $4,000 necessary to purchase health insurance so they can apply for a super visa?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

I reject the premise of the question.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Okay.

The provincial nominee program has been a huge success in the province of Manitoba. Will the minister provide a guarantee that Manitoba will be able to maintain its current number of certificates that have been issued to it in the past couple of years?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Mr. Chairman, levels planning is done in consultation with the provinces on an annual basis, not spontaneously at committee. I don't know what Manitoba is going to ask for in future years. I don't know what other provinces are going to ask for. So the answer to that question will be made through consultations with provinces, including Manitoba, in our annual levels planning.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Stop the clock.

Mr. Lamoureux, you and I don't seem to be getting along today, but you have to talk slower so the translators can translate your questions.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Yes.

Manitoba is very dependent on the nominee program, and I would ask the minister to what degree he is prepared today to give assurances that they'll be able to continue to use that program as a way in which they can acquire the needs they have for provincial growth for their economy.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, I just had a very good conversation with the new Manitoba minister for immigration on this point, and we agreed that the PN program has been a great success in Manitoba, thanks in part to our government expanding the PN nationally by more than tenfold over the past five years. And I expect that will continue—not that rate of growth, but rather the current levels for PNs nationally will continue.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have less than a minute, Mr. Lamoureux.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Winnipeg North, MB]

Okay. So based on that answer, is the minister then implying that for the Province of Manitoba we would be able to continue with the same sorts of numbers that we've had in the past? Could you give us that assurance for the next year or two?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Again, I'm not making the annual levels plan here at this committee prior to consultations with the provinces. We have massively increased the PN program. I'm happy generally with the results.

We have asked provinces to tighten up the program in some respects, such as bringing in mandatory minimum language requirements, to avoid nominating people who have access to permanent residency through federal programs, and we look forward to working with the provinces on that.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Lamoureux.

Mr. Menegakis.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, welcome. Thank you for appearing before us again today.

Thank you to the senior officials for taking the time to join us as well.

I know, Madam Deschênes, that certainly you've been here before.

Also, Mr. Sylvester and I were together this morning at the languages committee.

Minister, I know that Quebec has a different arrangement when it comes to immigration than the other provinces do, and that also appears to be the case when it comes to settlement funding. I also know that you've moved all the other provinces—outside of Quebec—into a national funding formula that is based on the number of people who settle there.

It seems to me to be the fairest way of distributing the funding, the money. Is Quebec's settlement funding determined the same way? Can you explain what formula is used?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

Well, you will note that there is a $25 million adjustment in the supplementary estimates for the Canada-Quebec accord on immigration. That is because every year there is a huge increase in federal transfers to the Government of Quebec to provide notionally for settlement services as per the Canada-Quebec immigration accord.

When that accord was negotiated, it established a funding formula that obliged us to increase transfers based on a formula of the number of non-francophone immigrants arriving and based on increases in federal government spending. There is no ceiling on that formula, but there is a floor. For example, if we cut federal spending this year in the budget, that will not negatively affect Quebec's transfers. But in some previous years, we've seen between 7% and 8% increases in federal funding, and therefore the Quebec transfer has gone up, even though the number of immigrants arriving in Quebec has not gone up and even though they haven't increased proportionately their investment in settlement services.

This is a concern now, because we are arriving at a situation where the per-immigrant funding for settlement services across the country outside of Quebec is about $3,000 per immigrant, and it's now about $6,000 per immigrant, or it's headed toward $6,000 per immigrant, in Quebec. This inequity is a reflection of the funding formula.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

Minister, I'm curious about the Institute for Canadian Citizenship. I know we fund them. Why do we fund them, and what are their activities? What do they pursue?

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

This is a non-governmental organization that was established as a result of an agreement between the Government of Canada—the previous government, actually—and former Governor General Clarkson in 2005. I gather it's become a tradition for governments to establish so-called legacy projects with former governors general.

In this instance, Madam Clarkson and at the time the government of Prime Minister Martin agreed that the government would provide matching funds of up to $7 million a year in a contribution agreement to this organization, which promotes the value of Canadian citizenship and civic literacy, if you will, or an understanding of the obligations of citizenship. They work with my department in many ways, promoting special citizenship ceremonies and projects like the parks pass and the museums pass for new immigrants.

So we have a legal obligation to fund matching contributions of up to $7 million a year as a result of the 2005 agreement.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

How am I doing for time, Mr. Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have about three minutes.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Wonderful.

I'd like to weigh in on the discussion on biometrics, if I may. A previous witness to the committee was concerned about privacy issues around biometrics. He used the example that if 99% of the people are not a security risk, why are we putting the system in place?

I made the point, and I think it's a valid one, that even if 99.9% of people who come to Canada are not a security risk, that 0.1%, if you take the average of 254,000 people who come into the country, would mean that we would allow 254 people a year into Canada who are a risk.

I'd just like to get your feelings on the importance of biometrics and how close it will come to reducing the risk of those high-risk people coming into our country.

[Jason Kenney, Conservative, Calgary Southeast, AB]

The introduction of biometric visas and their eventual global application will be by far, by orders of magnitude, the most important measure that Canada has ever taken I think with respect to immigration security.

We all know, in the post-9/11 environment in particular, that immigration security is essential to national security, that there are people around the world who would do us harm. We must take every prudent measure to prevent such people from being able to enter Canada. This will allow us to do that—not with 100% certitude, but with a much, much greater level of integrity than in the past.

As I say, given the level of technology we have at our disposal in the 21st century, it's a bit ridiculous that our entire immigration security system is based on biographic data on old paper documents that are easily forged.

So it's really about getting with the times.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Great.

Is it fair to assume that by sharing some of this information with other countries that have biometrics and that are friendly to us, when we know that the integrity of their security system is—?