Evidence of meeting #148 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was program.
A video is available from Parliament.
March 18th, 2019 / 4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Mr. Chair, the popularity of the program and the people who actually want to get their near and dear ones into Canada.... This is a very popular program, and certainly we expected a lot of people would be coming in and trying to apply for that.
To make it very clear, we posted all the information on January 11. While we opened this on January 28, everything was available and it was expected that it would fill up very quickly.
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We cannot control the kind of input that comes in, and as I mentioned earlier, there were more than 100,000 applicants last year who were intending to sponsor. There's a huge interest in getting the parents and grandparents here, and it was on a first-come, first-served basis. As soon as the 27,000 limit was achieved, the system shut it down.
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We will have to look into it to make sure we have the requisite number so that we can get to the 20,000, which is the expected PGP level for 2018. If there is a gap—if we need more—then we will...but right now, it looks as if we've calculated it in such a way that we will stick with this particular number.
4:25 p.m.
Victoria, NDP
Is there no opening, no second window, being planned at this time?
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
No, not at this time.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
Thank you very much.
Maybe I can continue, Dr. Kochhar, on that line. The levels plan each year for the next three years anticipates a certain amount of family reunification. One would expect that it would be 20,000 the following year, 20,000 in 2020, 20,000 in 2021. Are there any additional costs or expenses expected under the estimates that we should expect with a 2019 round or a 2020 round, or is it likely going to be operated in the same fashion?
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I'll ask my colleague Mr. Mills to answer the financial question. The 2019 level is 20,000, while we're increasing in 2020 to 21,000, as in 2021 also. There's a 1,000-person increase in there. We understand that this is a very popular program and we want to make sure more people come in.
4:25 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
I'm not as interested now in the financial answer, because this is more interesting.
Say, for instance, from duplicates that are still being reviewed, you find that only 18,000 applications are in the pipe. When you run the 2019 round and open it up, will the computer software program allow us to open it up for those additional 2,000 people who were missed in the 2019 levels plan—plus the extra 1,000 people who will be in the 2019 levels plan—to get you to 23,000 openings in the next round?
4:25 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
I'll answer it in this way. Just to make sure we had 20,000, we actually accepted 27,000 this year. We have the delta calculator, and we have all the other things in place—duplication is one, but also botched and incomplete applications would be kicked out in the very beginning. We expect that we will have 20,000 or a little more, and we would be able to.... Should we not have that number, then we will have a discussion and make sure we are actually able to have another round if need be.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
The levels plan target gives you a sweet spot at 20,000, but there was a sort of low- and high-end target. How will that, then, affect the next round of applications? Maybe you could just confirm that we expect this year's round of applications will happen in the same fashion.
4:30 p.m.
Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
For the parents and grandparents, I would say this is a little bit of a story where we have had a big backlog, which we reduced to very minimal—fewer than 30,000 this year. Plus, we have reduced the wait time that was over 72 months to now 39 months. Going forward, if you apply today, it's 20 to 24 months. That's an approximate time.
If you reverse-engineer it, the applications we receive this time will be landing here in 2020.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
Thank you.
I'm back to you again, Ms. Morgan. With respect to the estimates process and the safe third country agreement, I'm assuming that if there's any renegotiation of some aspect of the safe third country agreement that's going to cause additional cost, that would be budgeted and brought back to committee at that time.
For instance, if there's going to be a program of transporting people and housing them on their way to a regular point of entry from an irregular point of entry or handing them back, those costs and the budget associated with that type of program wouldn't appear anywhere in these estimates—it's hypothetical—but would be costed at some future date and come back to us in the estimates process in the next round.
4:30 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Yes, it's a reasonable expectation that, should costs be associated with any renegotiated agreement, they would go through the normal budget process with either main estimates or supplementary estimates, etc.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
In the estimates, I expected to see some type of indication on a project basis about this new rural and northern immigration pilot and costs associated with that. Also, now there's been a renewal of the Atlantic immigration pilot for an additional two years.
Maybe this is a question for Mr. Mills; it's on the financial side. I'm wondering if you could explain to us why there's no specific explanation of the additional costs associated with trying to administer this pilot because it's announced ostensibly in the context of supplementary estimates (B).
4:30 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
The Atlantic immigration pilot and its extension is an initiative we've been operating within departmental resources, using the resources we have and also other federal agencies. For example, ACOA has been of great assistance to us in administering that program. Also, provincial governments have put a significant amount of their resources into administering it. To make that pilot project work has been a partnership effort.
At the moment, we have not asked for additional funding for the rural and northern pilot project in supplementary estimates (B). It's at the front end at this point. It was recently announced. We have had our call-out for proposals and we have received quite a few applications for that project.
4:30 p.m.
Liberal
Nick Whalen Liberal St. John's East, NL
Some other government departments, notably Transport, do project-based estimates on some of their programs so parliamentarians can have insight on a project-by-project basis.
Is there any move within IRCC to do project-based estimates and appropriations so we can have more visibility into that, or are you not in the pipeline for that initiative?
4:30 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We would normally use project-based management for major IT projects or that sort of thing. For example, a couple of years ago when we implemented the electronic travel authorization, that was managed as a project, funded as a project, etc. A lot of what we do tends to be an expansion of existing lines of business and therefore we don't necessarily report on it to Parliament from a project perspective, if you understand what I mean. It's more volume-driven in some....
4:35 p.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
With respect to the $114 million that is being proposed to assist all the provinces as a result of the illegal border crossers, it appears from the provincial point of view that this isn't nearly enough. Some time ago the Province of Ontario asked for $200 million. There was a story, I think it was in The Globe and Mail this morning, that the Attorney General of Ontario wants $45 million for legal aid; she has pointed out that people aren't getting proper legal aid, particularly in front of the IRB. The City of Toronto has repeatedly raised a concern about housing. I think they're short about $45 million, and this is just Ontario.
In my view, at least if I accept the position of the provinces and they're not making it up, the $114 million is wholly inadequate. Has the government directed you to consider increasing this $114 million to adequately assist the provinces and the municipalities to properly secure our border?
4:35 p.m.
Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration
We do recognize that the increase in irregular border crossers has placed extraordinary pressure on some provinces and some municipalities. We are committed to working with provinces to reach cost-sharing agreements, and we have provided funding already, as I noted, to the City of Toronto, and $100 million has been allocated for that purpose in supplementary estimates (B).
We recognize that provinces and municipalities have made the case publicly that their pressures are greater than that. At this point in supplementary estimates (B), we're asking for $100 million to help assist provinces and municipalities with those costs, and we continue to have discussions with them regarding what the appropriate level of funding would be and how that should be operationalized.
