Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 25th, 2011

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Let me switch to the question of resettlement. Another change under this government is that resettlement programs have been more robustly funded than previously. I'm wondering what your comment is on that in terms of backlog as well. Has having better resettlement programs contributed to the progress we've made on reducing backlogs?

[Joseph Ben-Ami]

I don't think it has an impact whatsoever on the backlog.

Concerning allocating resources to resettlement, I have a fundamental problem. I've been involved in some discussions around what we're trying to accomplish by resettlement. I touched on it very briefly in my presentation. It's largely cultural integration—helping people adapt to Canadian values, learn the language, all of these things. These are all noble goals, but of course it begs the question, why we are bringing in people we have to spend money on to educate them in Canadian values?

To me, there's something fundamentally wrong with that equation. If people don't want to learn either French or English in this country, if they don't want to be part of the broader Canadian society, then how is it that they've been selected to come here in the first place? And then we have to invest resources in changing their minds on these things.

I think the whole area of immigrant resettlement is an area that needs to be looked at that is not being handled well.

[John Weston, Conservative, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Of course you're operating on a premise that they don't want to. I think the minister would suggest that they want to and that these resettlement programs just make it easier for them.

Mr. Grady, would you care to comment?

[Patrick Grady]

I think the government spending on resettlement recognizes the fact that over many years many immigrants have been admitted without language skills, without job skills, without knowing how to get a job. We have to spend this money: these people are here; they're Canadians now. We have to spend money helping them to integrate. The other question is, would it not in the future be better to bring in immigrants who don't require such large resettlement expenditures?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Weston.

Madame Groguhé.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for being here.

I would just like to say that, in terms of immigration, I think everyone here, those around the table and everyone else, would recognize the major role that demographics and the economy play. In my opinion, that's not a matter for debate.

For example, I would quote what the Minister of Immigration said last week to stress the importance immigration has for Canada. He pointed out that we are competing with other countries for immigrants.

At one point, you said that quantity is certainly not key to our plans and our immigration choices. We have to look at quality too. Quality considerations come into play and are just as important in dealing with the backlog. As a result, the immigration process may well become more selective, as is already happening elsewhere. The plan for qualified immigrants includes precise targeting of the manpower the country finds useful.

With those qualitative aspects, shouldn't we expect that the delay in processing applications open up? In other words, don't we have to put qualitative steps in place in order to reduce the delay n processing applications?

[Patrick Grady]

I think you are raising a very important point. It is absolutely necessary to reduce the delays in processing applications.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Grubel.

[Herbert Grubel]

I would like to say generally that I have great respect for my friend Mr. Kenney, the minister, but I think he's wrong. He's wrong that immigration is not needed in order to increase per capita income. It is possible to increase per capita income if we select the right kinds of immigrants.

I would dispute Mr. Lamoureux's assertion that just because these immigrants came to Manitoba, income per capita in Manitoba went up. I'd like to see the evidence on this. This is part of the Canadian myth. This is part of what we have been propagandized into believing. It is simply not true. Show me the evidence.

On demographics, the C.D. Howe Institute and demographers everywhere know that our problem of aging cannot be solved by more immigration. Immigrants themselves will age. They themselves will need social security benefits.

[Sadia Groguhé, NDP, Saint-Lambert, QC]

Mr. Ben-Ami, do you have any concrete solutions for the committee in terms of recognizing foreign credentials? If so, what are they?

[Joseph Ben-Ami]

Frankly, I haven't come here today prepared to address the specific issue of credentials. I suppose that if we were to convene a forum that is going to focus on this, I'd be happy to do some preparatory work.

The main point I'm raising is that we're not dealing with this problem and other associated problems effectively. And once again—I'm a broken record—if we're not going to deal with those issues first, then all of this other stuff is irrelevant.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Leung, you have two minutes.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll make my comment very brief.

It's a pleasure to be in the company of economists, because I think we can speak on a macro and a micro scale.

We're talking about immigration purely from a numbers point of view, and I think that is totally wrong. If you are students of economics, you will remember the very basic macroeconomic model of the IS-LM curve, whereby you need to have your manpower, your money supply, your interest, and your labour in balance.

For those of you who are not familiar with the IS-LM curve, I'll bring it down to a micro level. When you run a company, if you're an entrepreneur you go out and hire the people you want to run your business in order to grow your business.

Perhaps the three of you could quickly comment on how immigration should really serve the economy, rather than the other way around, and what the best solution is. What is the vehicle? What is the policy we should put in place to do this?

Anyone...?

[Herbert Grubel]

Let the people whose own money is involved in hiring people decide whether the person who lives in a foreign country and wants to come to Canada has the qualifications and abilities to earn the wage they have to pay, rather than have some technocrat in some remote embassy decide: “Oh, he has so many points for education. Well, I'm not quite sure whether a PhD in Greek studies from a university in Manchuria is adequate or proper, but after all, Ottawa has said that if he has a PhD, we should let him in.” Then he comes here and we find out that his ability to teach Greek in a university is not there. This is a caricature of the problems we face.

My wife is a doctor. I can tell you that the amount of knowledge she has to acquire every day in order to keep current is unbelievable. I do not see how people graduating from a medical school in some remote university in a developing country claim that they are doctors, yet are running around driving taxis and telling everybody who will listen, “I am a poor discriminated-against doctor who could help Canada so much.” Who is going to decide on these qualifications? Would you be willing to admit this person to treat your daughter?

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Grubel, the time has come to say good-bye. I want to thank you, Mr. Grady, and Mr. Ben-Ami, for coming. You've given us food for thought—three most interesting people. Thank you very much.

We will suspend for a few moments.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

This is the second hour of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. We have three witnesses: Mr. Tom Pang, from the Chinese Canadian Community Alliance--good afternoon, sir; Ms. Amy Casipullai, senior policy and communications coordinator of the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants; and finally, we have Mr. Thomas Tam, chief executive officer of an organization called SUCCESS. That's a great name—you'll have to tell us what it means when you get your chance.

[Thomas Tam, Chief Executive Officer, SUCCESS]

It means “successful”.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Being successful—well, we need that in this country. Thank you.

Each of you has up to eight minutes to make a presentation.

Mr. Pang, we will start with you. Good afternoon, sir.

[Tom Pang, President, Chinese Canadian Community Alliance]

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, ladies and gentlemen, my name is Tom Pang and I'm here representing the Chinese Canadian Community Alliance, a community organization in Toronto, Ontario. I was, during the late 1980s, the president of the Chinese Community Centre of Ontario, which is an umbrella group of over 40 Chinese Canadian organizations. Later I also served as co-chair representing Ontario on the National Congress of Chinese Canadians, a national umbrella group of over 200 organizations.

Back in 2008, when the federal government proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act in order to reduce immigration application backlogs and improve wait times, the Chinese Canadian community, at large, was very divided on this issue, and mostly on the pro side. After studying these changes thoroughly, the Chinese Canadian Community Alliance decided to support this view. During that period I was often invited to appear on radio and TV interviews, public forum debates, and also to write columns for the local Chinese paper to explain the true nature of the changes. Looking back, I'm glad the Chinese Canadian Community Alliance made the right decision.

MinisterKenney commented recently that the backlog of federal skilled worker applications is now half of what it was in 2008; however, this is just the first step. On June 24 of this year, Minister Kenney announced additional measures to further improve our immigration system.

Back in the 1980s, I once remarked to the media that if Canada needs taxi drivers, let's bring in taxi drivers, let's not bring in highly educated people who will wind up driving taxis. I understand changes are made to give priorities to applicants of arranged employment and also to applicants with experience in an occupation in high demand. This is really what I would call a great leap forward.

However, I will emphasize that foreign credential recognition is still a major problem. I appreciate that the ministry has been working very hard on trying to solve this issue. The complications seem to be with dealing with various provincial governments and professional groups.

The ministry has also kept new federal investor applications. One thing that often puzzles me is the investor program. Obviously, it is a common and acceptable practice for investor applicants to borrow the capital from local financial institutions, provided they pay the interest on the money up front. If this is true, there doesn't seem to be any new capital coming to Canada. How does this plan benefit our economy?

I have also noticed Minister Kenney put emphasis on official language skills. I totally agree that new immigrants should brush up their English or French language skills before--and not after--their landing in Canada. Canada's also increasing refugees under the United Nations refugee program from 10% to 20%: taking in two out of ten refugees worldwide. On the other hand, more than 50% of refugee applicants were rejected. This is of course due to some unethical so-called consultants and human smugglers. The ministry is obviously doing a good job to stop those criminals. But the problem is not only limited to consultants and smugglers. On several occasions I personally have witnessed some goings on in that regard.

Finally, let me talk about family reunification. At present there's a huge backlog of parents and grandparents trying to come to Canada. Indeed, if they only want to come to Canada to be with their family and not to take advantage of our generous social programs, then all we need to do is to give them an extended visa. They will pay for their own transportation, their own health insurance, their own living expenses. That way we solve the backlog problem and they get to be united with their family.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and honourable members, for your time.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Pang.

Ms. Casipullai, you have up to eight minutes.

[Amy Casipullai, Senior Policy and Communications Coordinator, Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants (OCASI)]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee members.

The Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants--OCASI--is the umbrella organization for immigrant- and refugee-serving agencies in Ontario. OCASI is a registered charity founded in 1978. We are governed by a volunteer board of directors. At present, we have more than 200 member agencies in communities across Ontario, including a very active community agency in committee member Rick Dykstra's riding of St. Catharines.

OCASI acts as the collective voice of our member agencies on the issues and priorities that impact on them and the communities they serve. For more than 30 years, OCASI has worked with communities, government, and policy- and decision-makers to advance the economic, social, and political rights and interests of immigrants and refugees in Ontario. Our work is informed by the experience of our member agencies and the experience of the communities they serve. We also work to build the capacity of our membership through training and professional development for agency workers, management, and boards, and through developing tools and materials to strengthen areas such as service delivery and governance. We also manage the website settlement.org, a premier resource for immigrants in Canada and those who intend to come to Canada, as well as for those who work with them.

The council has had the opportunity and privilege to appear before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration as well as other parliamentary committees on a number of different issues that affect immigrants and refugees. We thank you for granting us this opportunity to present our position with respect to immigration application backlogs in light of the government's action plan for faster immigration.

Family reunification, or family class sponsorship, continues to be one of the foremost priorities for immigrant and refugee communities and the agencies that serve them. The other priority, of course, as it is for many other equity-seeking groups, is effective labour market integration.

For more than ten years, family reunification has taken a back seat to the economic class immigration to Canada. Immigrant selection has favoured skilled immigrants since the mid-1990s. Family class immigration, which was over 50% at that time, began dropping steadily. Throughout the early 2000s the rate was between 30% and 25%, and by 2010 it was at an all-time low of approximately 21% of all immigration. Canada received 280,674 immigrants in 2010, and less than a quarter of that number, 60,220 immigrants, were sponsored family members.

Over the last six years the government has shifted its focus from prioritizing permanent resident applications, both in the skilled worker class and the family class, to applications under the temporary foreign worker program. It has meant that applicants in the family class have to compete for processing resources with an even greater number of people who want to come to Canada, even if they were coming as guest workers.

OCASI is troubled by what this shift might mean for Canada in the long term. On the economic front, we already recognize that immigration is the primary source for labour force growth. The Conference Board of Canada has said that even if immigration levels were to rise to 350,000 by 2030, that will not bring in enough workers to arrest Canada's declining overall economic growth potential. And this was in a report that was published last year.

A media story in the Calgary Herald in September this year noted that the Petroleum Human Resources Council and others have estimated that Alberta will experience a labour shortage of up to 77,000 people in the coming decade, unless companies again take steps to connect with under-employed groups in Canada, such as women and native people. And they also suggested bringing in temporary foreign workers.

Some jobs are clearly temporary in nature, and it makes sense to bring in temporary workers to fill them. We are troubled, however, by what appears to be a growing tendency to turn to temporary foreign workers to fill, in a number of different industries, jobs that are not temporary. A media story from an Alberta newspaper last week narrates the experience of about 200 insulators who were laid off, while the company went on to hire more than 100 temporary foreign workers to do the same type of work.

On the social and political front, it will be difficult if not impossible to build a sense of social cohesion and community among a population that is not expected to stay beyond four years at the most, and who have few rights and entitlements or obligations because of their temporary resident status. Temporary residents cannot develop and in fact they are not encouraged or allowed to develop an attachment or commitment to a community.

We believe that one of the results of the shift from permanent to temporary residency is the increased delay in processing applications for permanent residency, with the lowest priority for resources being given to family class. We believe that shift has contributed to the backlog in applications.

OCASI is also troubled by the fact that the longest delays are occurring at visa posts in countries with a significant racialized population. The longest processing time for sponsorship of parents and grandparents is 55 months at Accra, Ghana, and 51 months in Nairobi, Kenya. These are the times that are posted on the CIC website. In reality, we know that many sponsors wait much longer than four or five years to reunite with parents and grandparents.

As the total number of family class applications approved every year has declined, so has the acceptance rate of parents and grandparents. In 2010, parents and grandparents were 25% of all family class immigrants, approximately 5,000 less than the number accepted in 2006.

The current immigration system has a number of challenges and barriers, such as cost, challenges in obtaining required documentation, long wait times, sponsorship breakdown, and exclusion from family class such as the prohibition to sponsor a family member who was not declared at the time the sponsor applied to become a permanent resident.

Helping clients with immigrant sponsorship applications is a significant and time-consuming part of the workload for many immigrant service workers, and I'm sure in many of your constituency offices as well. In addition, they have been called upon to help clients deal with processing delays, long wait times, the uncertainty—

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You have one minute, please.

[Amy Casipullai]

I'm going to fast-forward to my recommendations.

We will likely see an increase in family class sponsorship applications, particularly as Canada's foreign-born population increases. Family reunification has been credited as one of the reasons for Canada's success in attracting and retaining so many experienced and highly skilled professionals. It's a popular and well-used aspect of Canada's immigration program from as far back as the 1950s, when Canadian residents sponsored thousands of dependent relatives.

Apparently over 90% of the people sponsored at that time were Italians and their sponsored relatives. The settlement and integration experience of Canadians of Italian origin is evidence of the success of the family reunification model. In fact, parents and grandparents, like most other sponsored relatives, bring their knowledge and skills as well as a commitment to Canada.

There is no evidence one way or the other that speaks to the benefit or the downside or the cost of family reunification or bringing in sponsored relatives—parents and grandparents—so it's really hard to conclude that they will be a drain on our economy and our resources.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you for your presentation.

Mr. Tam, I've been waiting patiently to find out what SUCCESS means.

Thank you, and you have up to eight minutes to make your presentation, sir.

[Thomas Tam]

Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable members of the standing committee.

I am Thomas Tam, from SUCCESS, which is a multicultural organization that serves new immigrants in British Columbia. We serve over 180,000 people through over 20 offices in greater Vancouver and Fort St. John--that's in northern B.C.--and through our three overseas offices in China, Korea, and Taiwan.

The focus of my presentation here today is on how to deal with the application backlog that has accumulated over the previous years. I will address four major aspects.

First is administrative measures. Canada has a public consultation process on how many immigrants should be accepted into the country per year and what classes of immigrants will be accepted and in what quantity. SUCCESS supports ongoing government consultation.

As for the implementation, capping intake quotas for a specific period of time or adjusting them to meet changing labour market demand for economic class applicants is a reasonable way to stabilize and rebalance the system. We also support capping the number of applications. However, the backlog in family class applications has not been effectively addressed. The existing long waiting time of seven to ten years is totally unacceptable.

I think the government's latest intention to apply the same administrative measure by capping the quota on parents and grandparents should be more carefully examined, with more consultation with ethnic communities. Family unification is an important issue in Asian cultures. Given that the Asia-Pacific is and will be the main source of immigrants into the future, that is where we as service providers in ethnic communities have heard the most complaints.

There are economic reasons for most Asian immigrant families to sponsor parents and grandparents to immigrate to Canada. They take care of the young and the domestic affairs of the household while both adult immigrants, driven by economic necessity, are often hard at work re-establishing themselves in the host country. We agree with the minister that we need to calibrate those limits based on our economic needs. My opinion is that maintaining an overall annual target of 1% of Canada’s total population while being flexible about the parents and grandparents would make a good policy.

As a matter of fact, Canada's ability to compete for skilled immigrants from some Asian countries also hinges on this preparedness and flexibility to accept the parents or grandparents down the road. A group of child psychiatrists and psychologists working with immigrant families at Richmond Hospital in B.C. is drawing increasing attention among the allied professions to the “satellite baby” syndrome. Satellite babies are infants or preschoolers who are sent to a parent's country of origin to be raised for a period of time by other family members. This type of separation has far-reaching mental health implications for the child and family, and it eventually affects the greater community, including the school system. Satellite babies are one of the sad situations caused by parent and grandparent backlogs.

As for the flexibility and efficiency in the system, I notice that there are significant variances in processing time for family class applications across different CIC visa offices and different regions, which is not happening with the economic class applications. I believe that CIC knows its own statistics. The action plan for faster immigration is not happening fast enough. The unwanted and unwelcome variances for family class applications across CIC visa offices in all continental regions must be eliminated. A global central processing system inside Canada should be considered.

The third area is about fairness and transparency. In light of the action plan for faster immigration, a consistent application service standard across the board is required in dealing with backlogs and moving on to the future. A consistent service standard for each class of applicant will ensure efficiency, accountability, and a sense of fairness and open process for all applicants across the world.

Finally, in terms of the outcome evidence, drawing a baseline, setting a benchmark, establishing a worldwide service standard, posting the objective evidence publicly on the CIC's website, and delivering annual reports to Parliament, we will stand up to the measure of public accountability and provide evidence of achievements in addressing the backlogs and meeting the preset immigration targets per year. I believe the people of Canada want to see that progress is being made by the government to close the gap and achieve the goals. I expect this government will continue to do just that with vigour and openness for all to see.

Honourable members of the standing committee, I respectfully submit my testimony for your deliberation.

Thank you.