I appreciate that since, in my 16 years in this place, it's the first time I've seen a member during the testimony of a minister, not actually allow a question to be answered. I appreciate the opportunity.
First of all, Mr. Lamoureux suggested that all of the backlog reduction was a function of the legislated elimination of the 100,000 files in last year's budget implementation act. In point of fact, as you see, the backlog has gone from over one million to just over 600,000, a reduction of 400,000.
About 280,000 of those persons—not 400,000—were affected by the legislated FSW backlog reduction last year. The balance was thanks to pauses or limits on new applications, which were opposed by Mr. Lamoureux's party, and by an increase in admissions.
The average number of permanent residents admitted between 1994 and 2005—that is to say, during the tenure of the previous government—was 222,000. The average number of permanent residents admitted from 2006 until 2012 has been 256,000. There has been a 14% increase in total admissions, which has helped modestly deal with inventories, but most importantly it has been....
But here is the point. Had none of those actions been taken, we would be on track, as I've pointed out, for a total backlog of over two million.
Mr. Lamoureux may have another opportunity on this committee and I would ask him to explain what he would have done to prevent a backlog of two million from developing in the current system.
I would also point out to him that the previous Liberal government, when Mr. Coderre was in my position, sought also to eliminate hundreds of thousands of backlogged applications in the federal skilled worker program, when he sought to retroactively apply new selection criteria for the federal skilled worker program in 2003.
So the Liberal government sought to—in Mr. Lamoureux's words—“delete” hundreds of thousands of applications from that backlog. Oh, it did. It's remarkable that he doesn't even know what the Liberal government sought to do. But Mr. Chairman, the difference is that they did it incompetently, because the Federal Court said that the way they attempted to apply those rules retroactively was illegal.
However, I would point out to this committee that the Federal Court responded to an application for judicial review of our legislative backlog reduction just two weeks ago by confirming its legality, that this was a legitimate application of the law. So we have successfully and competently done what Mr. Lamoureux's government unsuccessfully and incompetently sought to do.
I would also point out that he talks about the parent and grandparent program. He doesn't like the fact that there has been a two-year temporary pause. He never mentions the 60% increase in admissions in that program. He never mentions the super visa, which is an excellent alternative that 16,000 people have so far availed themselves of.
I again challenge him to tell us what the Liberal Party would do with the parent program, because without the temporary pause in applications we would be on track for an estimated backlog of 251,000 people in that program by the end of 2015, with a 15-year wait time.