Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 5th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Pursuant to the motion adopted by the committee on Tuesday, April 12 and the subcommittee report adopted earlier today, the committee will now begin its consideration of the main estimates 2016-17, votes 1, 5, and 10 under Citizenship and Immigration, and vote 1 under Immigration and Refugee Board.

I would now like to offer the floor to the minister.

Minister, welcome. Please proceed, if you have any opening remarks.

[John McCallum, Liberal, Minister of Immigration]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Good afternoon, everybody. It's a pleasure to be back.

I will have a few remarks, but I want at the beginning to thank all of you for your work on Bill C-6. I understand that you did all the clause-by-clause consideration in one meeting, so congratulations to everybody on that. I understand that we had two amendments accepted. That's good.

Also, I made a commitment some time ago that we would move forward in the fall on a proper appeal right on the issue of citizenship revocation. I know you heard from various witnesses.

I have said from the beginning that we would do it, but we also don't want to delay this bill unduly. To do it will require certain legislative changes and possibly even machinery-of-government changes, which don't happen overnight. We therefore couldn't include it in this bill, but we are clearly committed to move forward on it in the fall, working with you, who have been listening to witnesses on the subject and I'm sure have some ideas on the best method of going forward on that issue.

I turn now to the estimates.

I'm very pleased to be here today to present Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada's main estimates for fiscal year 2016-17.

I think you've met my officials before, but I should say who they are. We have the deputy minister, Anita Biguzs, and David Manicom, Robert Orr, Dawn Edlund, and Tony Matson, who are all here to possibly answer some questions or give me advice. We're all pleased to be here.

I will focus on some of the most significant allocations we're requesting to help our department meet our goals. As I said in a previous appearance before this committee, these goals are in service of our government's commitment to strengthen our generous and welcoming country through the immigration system and to open Canada's doors to those who want to contribute to our prosperity and to the success of our country.

I can report that our department's main estimates have an overall net increase of $186.2 million from the previous year. Most of that increase—the great majority of it, $179.3 million—is for funding to implement our response to the Syrian refugee crisis.

As you know, we achieved our goal of resettling 25,000 Syrian refugees by the end of February, and we will continue to welcome refugees from Syria throughout this year, as our efforts focus more and more on settlement and integration.

On that issue of integration, I can report that the latest numbers state that 97% of the refugees are now in permanent housing. I think that's good news. We still have 3% to go, but we're almost there.

That doesn't mean everything is solved. There is still the question of jobs, and there is still language, but housing is a big part of the trip.

The majority of the funds we are requesting in these main estimates for Syrian refugee resettlement will be in the form of grants and contributions. This grants and contribution funding will be used for resettlement assistance through income support for newcomers to cover items such as food, clothing, and shelter, or to fund NGOs for the many critical services they provide during the resettlement process.

Grants and contributions funding will be used, for example, to support third parties who provide settlement assistance, such as language training, orientation to life in Canada, and counselling.

Another notable increase in these main estimates is $29.3 million requested to continue to implement and administer reforms to the temporary foreign worker program and the international mobility program. Most of that comes in the form of operating expenditures in order to implement the changes that were introduced in June 2014. These expenditures are related to initiatives and activities that will help to balance our interest in attracting international talent with existing labour market needs.

Mr. Chair, my department's main estimates for 2016-17 also include an increase of $17.9 million in funding for the passport program, and an increase of $14.9 million in funding related to the expansion of biometric screening in Canada's immigration system.

There are a number of other items I could mention but I think I'll come to a close to leave more time for questions.

I would conclude by saying that welcoming newcomers and helping them to settle and integrate well into Canadian society is critical to our country's future and has always been an important part of our history.

The Government of Canada is committed to ensuring the success of the immigration system, and the main estimates that we are discussing today reflect that commitment.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I'm happy to answer any questions committee members may have.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Minister McCallum.

Mr. Ehsassi, for seven minutes, please.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Minister McCallum, welcome once again before this committee. Obviously, as you can appreciate, every time you make yourself readily available to us, that actually assists with the work of this committee.

In addition, I want to congratulate you on Bill C-6. As you alluded to in your opening remarks, we did go through a clause-by-clause review of Bill C-6. As you're well aware, there were a number of amendments that were suggested either by members of this committee or witnesses who appeared before us. Those amendments fell beyond the scope of the bill.

Just in terms of clarification, you did suggest that your department would be very interested in making additional changes. Could you kindly elaborate on that point and perhaps inform us whether your department is currently considering any amendments to the Citizenship Act?

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

I think as I and the Prime Minister and others have said, in general terms, we're always open to amendments, because anything that will make the bill a better bill, anything that will improve it, we're open to it. In this particular case there were two amendments we were able to agree on together. There is this firm and absolute commitment I've made to move forward on the grounds for appeal for citizenship revocation.

There are various different models that could be followed. I'm not sure exactly which one I think.... You heard a lot of witnesses. Some of you may have views on that. We would like to work with you to figure out the best way to implement this appeal right. I've said for a long time that I was open to that, and would welcome that. The exact form remains to be discussed. There may be some amendments that we would have gone with had they been in scope, but they were not in scope. It's possible that at a future date there are other changes we might also consider, but I think in terms of firm commitments we have the two amendments that I think were proposed by the NDP. Perhaps I shouldn't say that; perhaps it was collaborative. However they came, we welcome them, and there's a firm commitment on citizen revocation, and there could be other things but no commitment at this time.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you very much. That's very good to hear.

If I could turn your attention to the new estimates that you've provided, there are a few questions I have with respect to the biometrics program and the passport Canada program.

With respect to biometrics, I understand that you're allocating $14.9 million toward the expansion of biometrics screening. Could you kindly explain to us what is meant to be achieved with this new program that's being introduced?

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

I'd be happy to do that. The funding will support the expansion of biometric screening to verify the identity of all visa-required travellers seeking entry into Canada. Funding for the second phase will be used to support an additional 44 full-time equivalent staff, as well as non-salary expenditures for activities, as biometric screening will be expanded to all visa-required entries.

There are various items listed, but it's basically to support the expansion of biometric screening and to hire 44 new full-time equivalent staff.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Just out of curiosity, apart from the new estimates that have been provided, could you share with us how much money has been spent to date on the biometric system?

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

We'll have to get back to you with a precise number. We don't have it with us at the moment.

[Tony Matson, Assistant Deputy Minister and Chief Financial Officer, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

In 2015, funds were authorized of $175.6 million from 2015 to 2019-20. In terms of our total spend to date, we can get back to you with that total figure.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you kindly.

I'd like to turn now to the passport Canada estimates. Obviously that particular program is done on a full cost-recovery basis. Would you mind explaining how the revolving fund works in that particular instance, and how it would be affected?

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

Perhaps I'll ask one of my colleagues here to explain in detail, but as you say, it is a full cost-recovery system. In a sense, it's a model for other things we do, because it does give rise to very quick processing times in general, compared with other things we do. I think on the whole it is a model that works well.

I would ask one of the officials to answer your more specific question.

[Anita Biguzs, Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Perhaps I'll open, and then I'll turn to Mr. Orr to provide further details.

It is correct that the passport fund operates off a revolving fund. That means it essentially has a permanent authority that allows it to use its revenues against its expenditures and to carry forward any surpluses or deficits.

These estimates in 2016-17 were forecasting a net decrease in the surplus in the fund of $17.9 million. That's mostly due to the fact that we have a forecasted increase in terms of spending required to actually continue to support the modernization of the program and in terms of the various measures we're putting in place to ensure that the services are responsive to Canadians. Modernization spending compared to the previous year and other adjustments were related to the forecasted net revenues that come in as a result of passport fees.

I don't know, Bob, if you wanted to add to that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

You have 10 seconds, Mr. Orr.

[Robert Orr, Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Okay.

Well, I think that essentially covers it. It's a self-funding process, and the deputy explained the surplus.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

Ms. Rempel, you have seven minutes, please.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Minister, for being here today.

My questions relate to the resources scheduled for visa reviews. It's the government's six-month anniversary, roughly. Congratulations. I know that in the campaign platform of the governing party, there's a quote saying, “As a first step, we will immediately lift the Mexican visa requirement that unfairly restricts travel to Canada....”

We're six months in, so maybe “immediately” has a little bit of a different definition. I note the upcoming three amigos meeting. I'm wondering if the minister can inform my colleagues here if the Department of Citizenship and Immigration has conducted a formal visa review, including a technical visit to the country, to provide a holistic, evidence-based assessment of Mexico's eligibility for a visa exemption under Canada's objective visa policy framework.

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

I can ask my colleagues to go into more detail on that, but I can tell you that we have been working very hard. My officials and I have been working very hard, and not just us, but in collaboration in particular with two other departments, Foreign Affairs and CBSA. We all have a strong interest in this.

We are certainly working with the Mexicans at various levels to ensure that they work with us when the visa lift occurs and prior to the visa lift, to ensure that conditions are such that we will have a successful visa lift, which will give rise to important increases in tourism and greater friendship between us and our second North American partner. We want to do this without the adverse effects arising that caused the visa to be imposed in the first place.

We are working very hard within the government and with our Mexican partners to ensure that the conditions for success will be realized.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you, Minister.

In terms of a yes or no answer, would I be correct in understanding that a formal visa review has not yet been completed?

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

I didn't say that. I have told you all the ways in which we are reviewing the situation.

On that specific issue, do we have a colleague who would like to comment?

[David Manicom, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

No, we have not conducted the same degree of formal visa review that we have done in other circumstances. We have engaged in a number of technical trips to Mexico and, in combination with the Canada Border Services Agency and Global Affairs Canada, we are working with Mexican officials to identify elements we can undertake to reduce the risk of a visa lift and mitigate security and other concerns. A formal visa review, as it is normally done, has not yet been conducted.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Mr. Manicom, with the work that has been completed on a visa review, even though a technical review hasn't been completed, could you explain which indicators Mexico currently meets? Or actually, for the sake of time which indicators does Mexico currently not meet, in terms of being eligible, in terms of best practice, for lifting a visa review.

[David Manicom]

Mexico's visa refusal rate is still somewhat above the rate of our objective criteria. The visa violation rate is also somewhat above the normal rate. In many other regards, with regard to socio-economic indicators, Mexico is meeting, or close to meeting, the indicators.

[Michelle Rempel, Conservative, Calgary Nose Hill, AB]

Thank you.

I will give the rest of my time to Mr. Tilson.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Carrying on with visas, Minister, or perhaps members of the department, we have had visa problems for some time with Bulgaria and Romania. There were also problems with the Czech Republic, but they have been resolved.

I have two questions. I understand the philosophy of why there have been problems with solving the visa issue with these two countries, but there have been two issues raised. One is that there have been suggestions by Bulgaria and Romania that, unless we solve this visa problem, they won't sign CETA. That is the first question. I realize that means we would get into complicated discussions about CETA, but the fact is that representatives from Romania and Bulgaria have personally made those statements to me.

The European Union has said that unless we solve the visa issue, they are going to require visas of Canadians coming to Europe.