Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 7th, 2013

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You're finished.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Madame Blanchette-Lamothe.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you kindly, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank our witnesses for being here today and for giving such an informative presentation.

Before starting, Mr. Chair, I wonder if we would have unanimous consent to continue our meeting until 1 p.m., if our guests are able to stay, as we have the opportunity to ask questions. I just want to see if the committee agrees.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

We have no objection.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I see three heads nodding. I see four heads nodding. We're okay.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Without further ado, I will get to my questions.

Subsection 10.3(2) reads as follows:

(2) For greater certainty, an instruction given under paragraph (1)(j) may provide that the number of invitations that may be issued in any specified period in respect of a class be zero.

Why was that indicated in the bill? Why can the number of invitations issued in a specified period be zero? Could you help me understand that?

[Maia Welbourne]

That just allows us to adjust, to make sure.... Again, going back to one of the primary objectives, which is to align our application intake with our processing capacity, it's just to allow us not to draw, if we're on a bi-weekly schedule and we've established that we will draw x number or we will invite x number of applicants to apply every two weeks, it allows us to modify that to zero if we already have enough applications in the system. It's essentially just to be able to align the intake of applications with our processing capacity.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Will targets be set in terms of the number of invitations per period?

[Maia Welbourne]

Again, just to recall that the annual levels plan is the instrument that will set out on a yearly basis what the planned ranges are and the targets are for each of the streams, including those that will be managed through EOI. It will be our job essentially to ensure that we are inviting enough applicants, individuals to apply, to align over the course of a year with the admissions that we expect in a year in question. It's a bit of that science of figuring that out.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

Thank you.

If I understand correctly, this involves setting up a new program that won't replace other programs. But we know that annual targets are set for different classes. If you set up a new program allowing immigration through that program, will you reduce the targets for other programs or classes? How are you going to manage that? Which classes could be affected? What type of worker or immigrant could be subject to reduced targets because of the new program?

[Maia Welbourne]

I go back again to the annual levels plan that sets ranges and then targets by program stream, which will continue to exist once we've introduced EOI. The current thinking about those streams that would be affected in the first instance is yet to be confirmed, but the federal skilled worker program, the federal skilled trades program, and the Canadian experience class.... In addition, we're discussing with provinces and territories their interest in potentially running part or all of the provincial nominee programs through EOI. All of that is to be confirmed.

I do think it's important to note that the use of EOI in the legislation is restricted to economic immigration programs. It is intended to apply only to economic immigration streams, not the non-economic side of things. Again, going back to the annual levels plan, that's the policy tool for balancing the multiple objectives that immigration meets, the economic with the social and humanitarian, and so on. Again, that will be the frame for whatever happens through EOI, but EOI will only apply to economic programs.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I want to make sure I've understood you. The existence of the new program may change the targets. Could we see lower targets for social and humanitarian reasons, for example, to accommodate higher targets in the worker class? Or would they be completely separate? Would the social and humanitarian classes change?

[Maia Welbourne]

It's completely separate. Again, the annual levels plan is where you see that balance between the economic and the non-economic streams kind of reflected. That will be determined through the process that leads to the annual levels plan being tabled every year.

Again, what EOI is intended to do is align our application intake with our processing capacity, but also maximize the economic benefits or the chances of success for those immigrants who do come to Canada. That's really an important focus as well as increasing the role the provinces and territories and employers play.

[Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe, NDP, Pierrefonds—Dollard, QC]

I agree entirely. Helping immigrants integrate and meeting Canada's economic needs are important objectives. But I don't think the focus should be solely economic. Canada has numerous needs as far as immigration is concerned. Economic considerations do factor in, yes, but they aren't the only ones that matter.

You also mentioned stringency as regards the new program and the fact that criteria would be more stringent.

What does that mean? Why do you need to make certain criteria more stringent? What's the relationship between those criteria and the current scoring system?

[Maia Welbourne]

As noted, the EOI is not a new program. It would become a mandatory pre-application step to apply to certain economic programs; the current thinking, but to be confirmed, is for the federal skilled worker program, the Canadian experience class, and the federal skilled trades program.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. McCallum has up to five minutes.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

I think this expression-of-interest idea is a good one in principle, but I also think the devil is in the details.

My first question is not a criticism; it's just for clarification. In terms of this notion of not displacing Canadian workers, I think that's true for the temporary foreign worker program, but I don't think it's true for this, because you don't have labour market opinions.

You see if they have a job offer, but it doesn't matter if the job offer is in an area where Canadians are available. Is that right?

[Maia Welbourne]

Well, those are some of the details that we're working out with ESDC. I think, depending on the.... There are a lot of discussions under way obviously about the temporary foreign worker program and the—

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

I'm not talking about that. It's this one.

[Maia Welbourne]

Understood, but it's also the labour market opinion process, which currently applies to certain streams of permanent immigration. The labour market opinion is a requirement as part of the federal skilled worker program where there is a job offer when that individual is coming in.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

So you're saying that a person who's a permanent resident applicant would not be allowed to receive an offer for a job for which a Canadian is qualified?

[Maia Welbourne]

I'm saying that currently under the federal skilled worker program there is a stream that's related to arranged employment, and if that individual is benefiting from a job offer from a Canadian employer as a way to come in under the federal skilled worker program, that employer has to go through the labour market opinion process.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Markham—Unionville, ON]

Okay. I guess where the concern with the details lies is that, of course, in principle it's good to pick the best and the brightest, but we're concerned about who does the picking and according to what criteria. Under ministerial instructions, one of them involves a criteria for issuing invitations to apply.

To the extent that those criteria are determined by the minister—and far be it from me to say that this would happen, but it's theoretically possible—in theory, the criteria could involve a preference for politically sensitive ridings or communities. One wants to know, especially as an opposition party, that these are indeed neutral and objective, rather than in any sense politically biased.

My first question is whether all of these ministerial instructions will be made public, and second, whether there will be open public discussion about all of them.

[Maia Welbourne]

The ministerial instructions will certainly be made public in two ways. The more stable ones, the ones that we're talking about in terms of what criteria have to be met by candidates in order to be invited to apply, will be published in both the Canada Gazette and on CIC's website—