Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 12th, 2015

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. McCallum, as you know and as I said to you in the last meeting, in camera, I might add, the document that you produced for us will not be accepted by this table. It was out of order for the reasons given then, and the same reasons apply now. Such a motion is completely out of order and will not be debated.

Thank you. Your time has expired.

Mr. Leung.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, officials, for attending today.

I wish to focus my thoughts on citizenship. I notice that in here, under the fourth item, there's an allocation of $800,000 for the Institute for Canadian Citizenship. I'd like you to give this committee a little bit more detail regarding what this institute does. What is its mandate? Who is it led by?

The reason I'm asking these questions is that I thought that the overall citizenship process was under CIC, and that we did our citizenship education through LINC classes and citizenship classes. I just want to know how the ICC fits into that overall picture of strengthening the Canadian Citizenship Act.

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

It is certainly true that the department works to provide services to those interested in applying for Canadian citizenship. It provides information and documentation in order to ensure that permanent residents can apply, and can prepare for citizenship testing and oath-taking.

The Institute for Canadian Citizenship is a charitable organization. It was established in 2006 to raise awareness and promote citizenship. It was founded and is co-chaired by the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson and Mr. John Ralston Saul. It features a lot of successful programs, such as the cultural access pass, which allows new citizens to access cultural organizations across Canada. It received an initial grant from the Government of Canada of $3 million in 2006-07, and under a formal agreement approved by the Treasury Board, the government has committed to matching funding for the ICC, so that when it raises funds annually, the government matches those.

In this final year of the matching agreement, the grant amount that we will be paying to the ICC is $800,000, which appears in the supplementary estimates.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Last year we approved the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act. We also probably welcomed the greatest number of citizens into Canada. I understand that this is the first reform of the Citizenship Act in almost 38 years since the last reform in 1977.

Can you give us a comparison of our numbers in 2014 after the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act came into effect versus what it was before, please?

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

Sure, and I'll turn to Bob Orr as well to support me on this.

Certainly, we did undertake significant Citizenship Act changes, which were approved by Parliament last year. A number of these did come into effect over the last year, in particular, the new decision-maker model, which streamlined the way that decisions were made so that the period of time that permanent residents have to wait for their applications to be processed could be streamlined. We began to implement that immediately after the legislation came into force last August. We were able to accelerate to a significant degree the annual processing of citizenship applications. In fact, last year we approved more citizenship applications than we had in Canadian history. So we are very happy with the initial results of the rollout of these citizenship changes within the decision-maker model.

Bob, I'm sure, will have some stats for you.

[Robert Orr]

As the deputy mentioned, last year we welcomed the highest number of new citizens in Canadian history, 262,550 new citizens in 2014. That compares with the previous year of 2013's total of 129,029 individuals. It more than doubled in 2014.

Under the new decision-maker model we're very much on track to eliminate the citizenship application backlog. We're working to achieve a working inventory next fiscal year, in 2015-16. Likewise, we are reducing processing times. We're very much on track to meet the processing time commitment to have cases processed in 12 months by 2015-16. Indeed, the applications received since the new streamlined decision-maker model was put in place are already normally being processed in less than a year.

[Chungsen Leung, Conservative, Willowdale, ON]

Can you share with me the improvement in the processing time in terms of months? What was it prior to the implementation of the new system versus the old system? Second, what are the numbers in the inventory, in the applications coming through, for 2014 and up?

[Robert Orr]

The processing times themselves, when you look at them as a block, are rather difficult. We're now working through some old cases, and that inevitably means processing times go up before they come down again.

What I think is important is that we are on track to meet that commitment, by the end of March 2016, that we will be below 12 months, having worked through the inventory of cases. I think that's the important part. Already 30% of cases are now being processed in less than 12 months. We're already starting to see some improvements for new cases coming through the system. As the older routine and non-routine cases are cleared from the inventory, that's when we're really going to see the impact on processing times overall for citizenship.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Mr. Orr.

Ms. Mathyssen.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Thank you.

I want to pursue something you said, Madam Vreeswijk, in regard to plans that have shifted. I wonder if you could go into some detail on that. Exactly what were you referring to there?

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

When we prepare the supplementary estimates, like all departments, we go to the Treasury Board and we seek approval, expenditure authority, from the Treasury Board. Once the Treasury Board approves that expenditure authority, these are prepared for supplementary estimates. In order to facilitate the preparation of the supplementary estimates, these plans and these approvals are sought well in advance of the tabling of the supplementary estimates.

The intent of these funds was to have expenditures related to the newcomer program. The approvals would have been sought last fall. Since that time the plans have shifted, and the funds, as they are ring-fenced funds, will simply go back to the consolidated revenue fund. This is prudent management in that when we feel that we need to access funds, we seek the approvals. They are included in supplementary estimates. But if we do not access the funds, they simply go back to the consolidated revenue fund.

So it is plans that we had in the fall that, here in March, we will not be utilizing.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Now, I understand that the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade is paying the department for International Experience Canada staff. How many staff does that cover? You talked about working on backlogs and improving processing time. Are those folks working full time on assessing applications and promoting the program? Does the department have staff assigned to promoting the program in Canada, or is it just abroad?

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

The International Experience Canada program was transferred to CIC in 2013. This program is a vote-netted program, so under the public accounts we have to report all of it within CIC's expenditures. What these supplementary estimates are essentially doing is that those funds that were previously in DFATD are simply being moved into the CIC estimates and DFATD will charge us for that. In this way Parliament can see the full expenditure of the program.

In terms of how we promote the program, this is an important program both for Canadians and for young people from abroad. We have 32 agreements. What we are trying to do is to promote it to both young Canadians as well as young people abroad. Foreign Affairs works with us to do that promotion abroad and we are trying to promote it here in Canada as well, so that young people take the opportunities to gain global experience and bring back what they've learned to Canada.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

I want to shift gears a little bit. We know that the refugee determination system reforms of December 2012 included a transfer of responsibility for pre-removal risk assessment from CIC to the IRB. I wondered if you could provide us with an update in regard to this transfer of responsibility. How is it working? Is it effective? What's the impact of that particular transfer?

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

The intent was to transfer this responsibility, but the transfer is being delayed. We are planning an evaluation of the new asylum system later on this year, in 2015-16 to be exact, so that transfer has not yet occurred. In fact in this supplementary estimate the funds that were transferred to the Immigration and Refugee Board to undertake these activities are being returned to us because we continue to administer this program. Once the evaluation is complete then we will assess the readiness and the transfer.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Ms. Vreeswijk.

Mr. Shory.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses as well.

We always talk about how we can have a system where immigrants, new Canadians, have success in Canadian society whether that is economically or in civil society. When we talk about it I believe, this is my belief, that those who have knowledge of one of the official languages have more chances of success, fast and better success. I know that in our Canadian Citizenship Act we have had a requirement of adequate language knowledge since 1947. Recently with the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act we extended the language and knowledge requirement from 14 to 64 years of age as well.

When we extended this was there any research that showed that language helps new immigrants to succeed more quickly, and to succeed in a better manner? When we extended this age, why did we need to extend the age and what are we looking for as an outcome?

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

I will reply, but I'll also turn to the ADM who's responsible for research within our department, the ADM policy staff.

Certainly, when we look at the research and determinants of good outcomes for immigrants, having language skills and having a post-secondary education, those two determinants are critical. There is evidence in terms of how well they integrate into the labour market and how resilient they are when there's a downturn. Also, the express entry system gives significant points in recognition of this. Those immigrants who have solid official languages skills do very well in terms of integration, particularly in comparison to those who do not.

It is for those reasons that we have placed throughout the immigration system as well as the citizenship system such an emphasis on official languages skills. Even when you look at the settlement program, the training and support we give new immigrants so that they can obtain these skills is significant, and we do this in collaboration with community service providers.

So the reasons that we have integrated it so closely throughout all of our programming is based on the evidence and that research.

Did you want to add anything?

[Catrina Tapley]

With respect to citizenship, I would just add the requirement, as the member has noted, has been in place since 1947, since the first act of Canadian citizenship. The requirement is for a Canadian language benchmark 4, which is a pretty basic level of speaking English or French. We feel it's part of good citizenship, as was the intent of the act.

The changes that came in were changes on wanting evidence of language ability. We have a very broad range of evidence that we'll accept. For those who have completed secondary or post-secondary education in English or French, we will accept that. We accept as evidence the results of the completion of studies of those who come through language training programs with us, or with certain provinces as well.

Also, as Ms. Vreeswijk has indicated, we feel it helps significantly with integration. As she noted, it is the single biggest factor in effective integration. To put it the other way, the single biggest barrier to effective integration in settlement in Canada is not having an official language, neither English nor French.

[Devinder Shory, Conservative, Calgary Northeast, AB]

Let me ask you a quick question on what I believe, but I want to confirm it. Do you think integration into civil society is a factor in the success of a new immigrant? When I say “into civil society”, I mean when we talk about other privileges, etc. If new immigrants know about their responsibilities and they go volunteer with, say, a school sports team or other organizations like that, would that help new Canadians to be successful?

[Catrina Tapley]

We agree, and certainly, Mr. Chair, I have evidence to support that as well. There are a number of factors in effective integration and settlement, and one is community connection or the establishment of a network. There are many ways to do that, through sport or through the work of parents in their children's schools. We have a program there called the settlement workers in schools program.

But the establishment of effective professional, personal, or societal networks are also pretty key to an immigrant's success and really help to overcome that sense of isolation or loneliness that can sometimes happen when new immigrants come to Canada.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Mr. Eglinski.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to thank the four board members for coming out today and presenting the supplementary estimates budget. It looks as though it's going to be a very rewarding year coming up. I'd really like to thank you for the express entry program that you just recently brought in.

When you come out with new programs such as express entry and then you invite people into the program who might have been in the LMIA, labour market impact assessment program, or something like that, do you run scenarios by your committee members or yourselves to see the complications? I'm just going to go through a little scenario here.

A gentleman received his ITA—which is an express entry invitation under the Canadian experience class—on February 27, giving him 60 days to apply for his PR. He has a new LMIA and an employment contract, which is part of his express entry profile. However, the new LMIA expires on March 24 of this year. His issue is that he cannot apply to extend his work permit because he has a four-year, cumulative duration limit as of April 1 of this year. It is impossible for him to remit his ITA CIC application for permanent residency along with the required police clearances from the country he's been in and receive a letter of confirmation of application back from the CIC.

Is there some way he could be granted a waiver of his four-year program? We're running into a number of these in our riding for people who have been in the programs. It's not your department's fault. I think it's more Alberta's fault for having great delays in their paper process.

[Wilma Vreeswijk]

You've asked both a policy question and an operations question.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I'll throw them both in, because they fit together.