Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 26th, 2015

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

I'd like to thank the five witnesses for coming here. I really see how you all are very passionate, because when we're watching one person's answer, the others are nodding. You really know your fields. I appreciate the work you do. I think that immigrants who come to your communities are very lucky to have agencies like yours.

I come from rural Alberta. One of the things our government is encouraging is that immigrants become fully part of the Canadian economy and integrate into the communities as soon as possible.

You have the facilities in your communities to give that to people. In the rural communities, whether it be in Ontario, Alberta, or wherever, we don't have facilities like that. On many occasions, we are leaving it up to the employer that hires that person, especially when we bring a person in on the express entry program, where you specialize. We don't have agencies such as yours to go to. We're leaving it to the employer in a lot of cases to give that help to the new person coming into our community.

I'll start with Debbie, and then maybe go to John.

You people probably do some tracking within your organizations. What can we do to assist the immigrants coming into Canada in the outlying communities? Personally, I think that sometimes there are much better economic opportunities for them in coming to smaller communities. What can we do to help support that?

Debbie first, please.

[Debbie Douglas]

It's one of the major challenges facing our sector in terms of how we ensure service supports in rural areas, especially as we're wanting immigrants to go where there are good jobs. The conversation has been around the use of technology for distance learning. Then we run into whether or not there are enough things such as bandwidth, and where people will be able to access computers.

The role of public institutions in rural communities becomes even more important in terms of the kinds of support roles they can play in partnering with community service agencies outside of the rural areas so that they're able to at least create the space and the technology whereby the immigrant working there can have access to services from someone in a larger city.

It's still at the early stages. We're not sure how much it will cost. Cost continues to be an issue. Citizenship and Immigration Canada is certainly looking at this, as are the provinces. Ontario is certainly looking at it as we look at how we can populate our northern region, especially given the great hopes we have for our Ring of Fire and wanting to bring immigrants there, but recognizing the need for service supports in those areas.

At OCASI we believe that technology really is the way to go. We have to be looking at the kinds of investments that are required, as well the kinds of partnerships we need to develop with public institutions that are located in those areas already.

[Jim Eglinski, Conservative, Yellowhead, AB]

Thank you.

[Prof. John Shields]

I would agree that online services do provide an avenue to enhance supports, so I think they're going to be really critical. However, the human touch is still very much necessary. In smaller communities, there's evidence to suggest that newcomers who are coming to smaller communities actually are doing very well, because they are filling gaps.

This is a really important investment for those communities. This is where I think the municipalities and other types of institutions can play a really important role. Certainly, some of these organizations have tried to create welcoming communities that are trying to attract immigrants and retain immigrants. I think that becomes critical. It's about working with those types of partnerships.

I think employers are very important in this, but they can't do it alone. I think that if it's simply left to the employers, we're not going to have results that would be as satisfactory as if we were to bring the communities right into this.

Again, I agree with Debbie. IT is really important here, but it alone is not going to solve the problem.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you.

Ms. Blanchette-Lamothe, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Ms. Douglas, when Mr. Chan talked about conditional permanent residency, you seemed to have an opinion on that. Would you like to add something? Could this have an impact on the economic integration of women?

Mr. Chan, you said something about that. I want to know if Madam Douglas has any comments to add, as she was nodding while you were speaking.

[Debbie Douglas]

I'm sorry, you'll have to repeat the question.

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

Yes, no problem.

[Debbie Douglas]

I was going to wait while Sherman chats.

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

Mr. Chan talked about the impact the status of conditional permanent resident can have on sponsored spouses who arrive in Canada. As we know, women are often the ones who must live with that status during the first two years of their life in Canada. Mr. Chan talked about the possible repercussions of that.

Do you have any comments to make on that? I saw that you were nodding while he spoke. I wondered if you wanted to add something.

[Debbie Douglas]

Absolutely, the conditional permanent residence rules that we have disadvantage women. While the government has listened to our concerns around violence against women and has put in an exemption, we know that immigrant women do not have the kinds of information in terms of how it is that they find the kinds of support if violence is happening. Even when it isn't explicit violence, we know that the threat of deportation often keeps women in relationships that are not healthy for them, so we really have to seriously reconsider this whole notion of conditional permanent residency.

It all speaks to the whole temporariness of status that we've been seeing more and more as we've made changes in our immigration program. It means that women are not able to exercise their agency if they need to be dependent on a spouse who has sponsored them and they're having to do everything the spouse says because of fear of deportation if they were to leave the relationship before two years of conjugal cohabitation. It means that we are putting women in unnecessarily vulnerable positions when, in fact, we want women who immigrate to Canada to also meet their full potential to be able to access services when and where they choose, to be able to do the kind of upgrading they may require, or not, to be able to enter the labour market, the job market, as soon as they are able to do that. When you have a system that says, “If I sponsor you to Canada you must stay with me for at least two years or else your status is in jeopardy”, that puts an undue burden on the spouse, especially on women who tend to be vulnerable anyway.

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

Thank you.

A little earlier, you spoke about family reunification and its importance for economic integration. Recently, I met with some people who were demonstrating against delays in family reunification and the sponsorship of people living in Canada, known as “inland sponsorship” in English. The waiting periods have gone from 6 months to 25 months in the last few years. They told me that waiting for a reply for all those months could have repercussions on their partner's entry into the labour market.

What is your opinion regarding the impact of these delays on the sponsors? Since these people are already living in Canada, one would think that they could begin their economic integration into the workplace. Do you think this could have an impact?

[Debbie Douglas]

We've been hearing the stories from sponsored spouses who are already here, but because the process is taking such a long time, they haven't been able to engage with the labour market.

We know that some spouses are choosing to return to their countries of origin, because they can't afford not to work. We know that health care becomes an issue for some folks, because the cost is prohibitive and they're not permanent residents, so they have no access to provincial health care programs. While these are anecdotal, we need to pay attention to it because it begs the question that if we can do express entry and expect to land folks within six months of invitation, why can't we put the same kinds of resources into inland sponsorship of spouses, into family reunifications?

The Canadian Council for Refugees, for example, has a campaign about family reunification linking it to the express entry platform, which is an excellent idea that at least we should be exploring as a country, if we truly believe that family reunification is a cornerstone of social and economic integration of immigrants.

Yes, the long wait times, the lack of transparency in terms of processes; some of the complaints we hear all the time are that folks are just not clear why it is that their spouse is already here and they are waiting 14, 16, 18, 24 months before they are processed through the system.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Ms. Douglas.

Mr. Menegakis.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

First of all, I want to state a few points.

I heard some discussion about family reunification and parents and grandparents. Just to set the record straight, since 2012 we have admitted 70,000 parents and grandparents. That's the highest level in two decades of parents and grandparents who have come to Canada. I heard the number 5,000, and that's true. We opened it up in January for 5,000 new applicants as we're dealing with a reduction in the backlogs. That has come down by some 54%. It is a primary focus of ours, and our immigration stream is certainly focusing on that.

There was some discussion about child care provision, particularly for newcomers who are availing themselves of the services that are available at different agencies, to have somewhere to put their children. That is also a focus of our government. I can tell you that I visited the Unemployed Help Centre of Windsor. I did the grand opening of care for newcomer children. That was an addition to the facility, which is basically a day care centre. I had the opportunity to speak to the mothers and fathers who were there learning one of the two official languages, learning how to prepare their resumé, and so forth. I heard how comfortable it made them feel knowing that their children were no more than 30 to 60 seconds away from them being cared for in a fully serviced, and furnished with toys, day care centre right in the facility. It is something we are focusing on, to be sure.

I know that both the Regional Municipality of Durham as well as you, Mr. Chan, in your capacity at your day job with MOSAIC, where I visited and met you, work closely with Citizenship and Immigration Canada. I'm not going to talk to the specifics of funding, because that's not the purpose of this meeting here, but perhaps you can help us by telling us how that relationship is going, how you work with CIC to ensure we are getting the best bang for our dollars that are going out there.

I'll start with Ms. Andrews, and then we'll go to you, Mr. Chan.

[Audrey Andrews]

Through the chair, thank you for the question.

Durham region started to receive funding for our LIP in 2009. That money has been leveraged to bring on board other partners who make financial contributions. When I say that we leverage funding in the community, I mean we host an event into which we bring three or four partners. One partner pays for the venue, and another partner pays for catering, let's say, and another partner pays for the printing of the brochure. That return on investment that CIC has made is quite high. So CIC has invested...let's just say it has paid the staff to make this happen, but that staff in turn has turned around and mobilized all of these people to, one, share the vision of collective responsibility, and two, actually throw some money at it and say, “Okay, how do we do a learning event or an information sharing event? How can I contribute?”

Leveraging dollars in the community for our mutual event is a huge return on investment for CIC, as far as I can see. We take those primarily staffing dollars, to be frank, and we turn them into a lot of deliverables that change how the community feels about newcomers and what its responsibility is.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Thank you.

Mr. Chan.

[Sherman Chan]

My experience working in Vancouver with CIC is a good one. First of all, CIC returned to B.C. about a year ago and many of the staff are new. About 50 or 60 new staff members are working with us. They are really responsive. They are quick in replying to our queries. They visit agencies. They come and talk to us and to the clients.

We, and when I say “we” I mean I and my colleagues in the sector, feel that they understand what we are going through and what we are working on. I think it's a good bridging right now with CIC officers. Of course, the funding or call for proposals is beyond the regional level; we understand that. I think that we engage in good discussion about what we are working on and then they support what we do.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We finished a round. We're now on the seven-minute rounds, which you will never finish.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

I heard a little about the conditional PR and the impact on spouses who find themselves in abusive relationships. I can tell you this committee is very pleased with the very extensive study we did where we looked at the abuse of women in Canada's immigration system. I believe, Ms. Douglas, you were one of the witnesses who appeared for that study as well.

Certainly in the recommendations in the report of those findings, one of the things we focused on was trying to ensure how we can advise women particularly of their rights here in Canada, because that's where the abuse is mostly happening. They are not obliged to stay in an abusive relationship. In many cases a lot of women do not know their rights here, so they find themselves stuck in that relationship.

It's important for us to inform and educate newcomers before they come to Canada of their rights here, and to know that in this country when you speak up, you get protection.

Many of them, of course, depending on where they come from around the world, are worried about the stigma on them and their families, and how their family is going to be perceived if they leave their spouse. That's not the Canadian way.

We have a bill before the House now, which we're going to be studying in the next few weeks, which deals with another aspect of what we call barbaric practices in certain situations.

It is something we're focusing on, and that's why we took a very long time to study that very issue.

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

Mr. Chair, on a point of order, the government side said it was out of order to discuss the long form census because that wasn't within the scope of this study.

I don't understand why this boasting about a report, which flagrantly ignored the problem of the condition of permanent residence for spouses, is within the scope of our study.

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

We never....

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Mr. Menegakis, do you have a response to that?

[Costas Menegakis, Conservative, Richmond Hill, ON]

Yes, I do.

He heard the government side say something about the long form census. Perhaps Mr. McCallum's attending a different meeting than I am because I didn't hear anything about the long form census here, sir.

We have the right.... By the way, when you speak, we allow you to speak. You're allowed to say whatever you like, and I have the right to set the record straight on behalf of the government.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I think it's a good time to adjourn the meeting.

I want to thank our guests for coming and making their presentations.

This meeting is adjourned.