Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Nov. 21st, 2013

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

We can start this fourth meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Thank you all for being here today.

According to our agenda, we'll spend the first hour studying the possibility of suggesting amendments to the Standing Committee on Finance. In the second hour of our meeting, witnesses from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration will join us for an information session, which will be followed by a question and answer period.

For this first hour of our meeting, which will run until noon, I'd like to remind everyone that on November 5, the Standing Committee on Finance sent us a letter inviting us, should the committee so wish, to convey our recommendations, including any suggested amendments in relation to clauses 174 and 175 and 290 to 293 of Bill C-4.

In carrying out its work, the committee may choose to hear witnesses—which we did in the last two meetings— may choose to recommend changes or propose amendments to the Standing Committee on Finance, which will then take these into consideration during its clause-by-clause study of Bill C-4.

For the first hour of the meeting, we have with us Mr. McNamee, Director, Immigration Strategies and Analysis, Ms. Welbourne, Senior Director, Strategic Policy and Planning, Ms. Imrie, Director General, Passport Program Transition Office, and Ms. Dikranian, Senior Analyst, Passport Program Transition Office. Thank you for being here this morning.

These witnesses are here to answer questions and provide clarification on any topic that may influence our decision to send amendments, suggested amendments or suggested changes to the Standing Committee on Finance.

Honourable members of the committee, the floor is yours. I'm waiting to see if you have any suggested amendments to send to the Standing Committee on Finance.

Mr. McCallum, you have the floor.

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

Merci.

I have one proposed amendment that I think you have received. I'll just read it. It proposes adding a subsection 10.1(3.1):

Despite subsection (3), an instruction given by the Minister under this section takes effect on the 30th day after it is given.

The idea here is that, rather than having ministerial instructions go out with zero opportunity for the public or for experts to respond, there would be a 30-day period during which the minister could get advice. During those 30 days, the minister might choose to change or amend the instructions. I think that's consistent with what Richard Kurland said in evidence about the lack of due process. I think it's also consistent with a letter from the Canadian Bar Association, which said:

The CBA section has concerns about the limited consultation on this important change to Canadian immigration law and policy.

It goes on in that vein. I think one could even argue that it's in the interest of the government. If one puts out instructions that one later learns are imperfect, then it's embarrassing, but if one has a 30-day period of consultation to listen to alternative points of view, the end product might be better for all concerned.

That is my proposed amendment.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, Mr. McCallum.

Ms. Sitsabaiesan, you have the floor.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

On the subject of amendments to Bill C-4, a bill that the House of Commons has sent to the finance committee, I don't find it appropriate for us to be proposing amendments at this stage, because the bill is being studied at finance.

What I would like to see happen is that the bill be broken up so that we as the immigration committee have the power to study it. Right now we don't have the power to study the bill and I'd like us to have that power. At this stage, we're not really proposing amendments; we're proposing suggestions to the finance committee.

We're not doing a study of the bill and we're proposing to write a letter to the finance committee rather than make amendments. At this stage, I think I am fair in speaking on behalf of my colleagues in the NDP. We are saying that we cannot support this amendment or any amendment. We don't have the authority to make amendments, because of the process that's being followed here. This is in violation of proper due process, in my opinion. I can't support this amendment right now.

Thank you, Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, Madame Sitsabaiesan.

Now, Mr. Menegakis, you have the floor.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

I would like to move that we go in camera, Madam Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

This is not a debatable motion. So we will vote on the motion to go in camera.

[Rathika Sitsabaiesan, NDP, Scarborough—Rouge River, ON]

Can I have a recorded vote, please, Madam Chair?

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Certainly.

Madam Clerk, I'll let you proceed.

(The motion is carried 6 to 4.)

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

The committee has decided to continue the meeting in camera. I will suspend the debate. I ask those who are not authorized to follow in camera proceedings to leave the room. We will resume our meeting in a minute.

[The meeting continues in camera.]

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

We are resuming the fourth meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

In this second hour, we have the following witnesses: David Manicom, Director General, Immigration Branch, Diane Burrows, Director General, Operational Management and Coordination, Jean-Pierre Lamarche, Director General, Passport Program Management and Strategic Initiatives, and Caitlin Imrie, Director General, Passport Program Transition Office.

I'd like to thank you all very much for being here. You will make an opening statement, which will be followed by questions. The floor is yours.

[David Manicom, Director General, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'm pleased to be here today to answer the questions of committee members about the programs, policies and operations of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration.

My name is David Manicom, and I am the director general responsible for immigration policies. I have three colleagues with me today to help me answer your questions.

Diane Burrows is the director general of the operational management and coordination branch and can speak to our processing network and a broad range of operational issues. As I mentioned, I'm the director general of the immigration branch, with responsibility for program policy relating to all permanent and temporary-entry programs, with the exception of refugees.

Jean-Pierre Lamarche is the director general for passport program management and strategic initiatives, and will be able to speak to questions about the passport program, as will Caitlin Imrie, the director general of the passport transition office.

We have provided members with a large 11-page document that provides a great amount of detail on the operation of our department and the range of programs we administer. It will also situate some of the challenges and opportunities the department has.

I hope this document will be useful reference material for committee members, given that since 2006 CIC has embarked on one of the most ambitious rounds of immigration reform in many years. In the interest of time and to allow more opportunity for your questions, I would like at this time to provide a brief overview of the contents of that document rather than walking through it in detail, which would take up much of the committee's time here today.

Page 2 gives significant detail on our operational network around the world and in Canada, as well as on some of the service innovation steps the department is taking to modernize our processing network. This section gives the committee members a glimpse of the complexity of managing an effective immigration system. My colleague Diane can provide you with further details on our operational network.

Pages 3 to 5 give an overview of temporary and permanent migration to Canada, some numbers and categories, as well as what we do in the area of refugee protection. There have been some significant changes to these program areas since 2006, which are highlighted in the document. We would be pleased to respond to your questions about these changes. I would be happy to provide you with more information on temporary and permanent immigration programs.

Page 6 describes the immigration continuum from the intention to immigrate, to the granting of citizenship. This page offers an important reminder that the process of immigration begins long before an individual lands at our border and doesn't end until residents are fully engaged Canadian citizens.

Page 7 details how we construct the annual levels plan, which is Canada's main tool for establishing the level, the number, and the mix of immigrants accepted as permanent residents on an annual basis. If you wish, I can provide you with a more detailed explanation of our levels process.

Some of you may have heard of the planned expression of interest application management system, which was inspired by similar systems in Australia and New Zealand. We include information about how we anticipate the system will work in Canada when it's implemented in 2015. Let me know if you have any questions related to the proposed EOI system.

Pages 8 and 9 give an overview of our integration, citizenship, and multiculturalism programs.

Page 10 offers a reminder that CIC does not operate alone and that there are many other players involved across the full program spectrum, including other orders of government and the private sector. This page gives some perspective on the full range of partnerships we have.

Finally, page 11 gives some statistics about the work our processing network completed in 2012, including admissions of permanent and temporary residents. Diane is well-positioned to elaborate on these statistics if it's needed.

We would be pleased at this point to walk you through certain sections of the document in order to describe in further detail the information you see in front of you. If you wish, I could provide more detailed information on levels, planning, the expression of interest system, or general information on our integration, citizenship, and multiculturalism programs.

Diane can talk to you about processing times, application intake, and our overseas and domestic processing network, and I can provide further details on our family and economic classes, as well as on the temporary immigration of workers, students, and visitors.

Finally, Jean-Pierre and Caitlin will be to answer your questions regarding the passport program. As we don't have experts on all areas of the program attending here today, if we are unable to answer any specific questions, the department will be happy to follow up with the clerk as soon as possible. Otherwise, we look forward to any specific questions you may have.

Merci beaucoup.

[The Vice-Chair, NDP, Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe]

Thank you, Mr. Manicom.

We will now move on to questions.

Mr. Menegakis, you have the floor for seven minutes.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you very much to our officials from Citizenship and Immigration for taking the time today to present these placemats—I think that's what we call them—that clearly give us an overview of what the department does.

It is very comprehensive and we deem it very important, not only for new members who have just joined the committee since this session began on October 16, but even for members who have been here before and who have an opportunity to refresh their knowledge of everything the department does.

We have a number of questions we'd like to pose, and I'd like to know where we are today with a couple of things that have been discussed in the past. Specifically, does the department have a sense of how many people, such as skilled workers, have abandoned their applications to come to Canada and chosen to emigrate to another country because of the backlog or wait times?

Do we keep statistics on that kind of information?

[Diane Burrows, Director General, Operational Management and Coordination, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

My understanding is no, not at this point. We do not have any information that would lead to a greater understanding of the question that you're asking, sir.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

As you might recall, earlier this year we passed the Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act. I believe it got royal assent. I was very pleased that it was passed.

What that piece of legislation did was to limit the right of appeal to criminals and modified the ministerial relief process for persons inadmissible to Canada on grounds of security, violation of human rights, organized crime, and so forth.

Is there evidence available on how this legislation has impacted the safety of Canadians?

[David Manicom]

With regard to the number of removals and the categories of removals, those statistics would be with the Canada Border Services Agency. I'm afraid I don't have that material in front of me. We would have to provide that as a follow-up.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

In the package you gave us, I noticed that we have the immigration levels plan for 2012. The minister very recently tabled the levels for 2014 in the House. Would it be possible to provide us with a copy of the latest table the minister provided so that we can update this package?

[David Manicom]

Yes, sir.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Of course, do that through the clerk, so that all members can receive it.

[David Manicom]

Certainly.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

My next question is as follows. Our government believes that integration is key to the success of immigrants in Canada, and we want to ensure that immigrants can speak one of the two official languages of Canada, English or French. That way, they can enter the labour market faster, with work that matches their skill sets as quickly as possible. Despite settlement funding having been frozen for a good decade by the previous Liberal government, this government has tripled it. If we were to drastically increase immigration levels, as some members of the opposition have suggested in the past, the ability to integrate immigrants would diminish, we believe.

Would you agree with that?

[David Manicom]

I guess your question, sir, was whether an increase in levels would lead to a decrease in the ability of immigrants to integrate.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes.

[David Manicom]

I think it would depend on the volume of the increase, the selection criteria and profile of the immigrants being brought in, the status of the Canadian labour market at the time, and the settlement funding available.

I think it's a rather complex question to answer, sir.