Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 1st, 2019

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

We are continuing the meeting.

As well, we have Professor Shields from Ryerson coming to us via video conference.

Welcome.

We're going to begin with Professor Shields, because sometimes we have to deal with technology.

We see you. You hear us and you see us, so let's go with it.

You have seven minutes.

Thank you.

[Professor John Shields, Professor, Department of Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University, and Interim Director, Ryerson Centre for Immigration and Settlement, As an Individual]

Thanks so much for the invitation to appear before you today.

Canada is an international leader in government supported and provided settlement services for its immigrant population. This is part of the widely renowned Canadian model of immigration and settlement that includes the system of managed migration, an official policy of multiculturalism, the timely naturalization of newcomers and a wide range of government supported settlement programs that are delivered by non-profit organizations close to the immigrant communities that they serve.

Such provision of services is an important part in enabling immigrants to more successfully settle and integrate in Canada. Government funding of settlement services not only provides material newcomer support but sends a symbolic welcoming message to immigrants and to Canadian society about the value of immigration to Canada.

Integration is approached as a two-way process for immigrants to adapt to life in Canada and for Canada to welcome and adapt to newcomers. This approach is critical for providing the warmth of welcome to newcomers that is absolutely essential for successful immigration. It is a model that has proven successful and that needs to be preserved and strengthened.

There have been some recent developments in this regard that have been positive and that I think are worthy to note. First is the move to a longer term, in this case, a three-year immigration levels plan, in terms of yearly numbers of permanent residents to be settled in Canada. This enables settlement organizations to better plan services into the future.

Second, with increased immigration levels, federal funding for settlement services have also been increased to match the new immigration numbers, providing a continuity in funding support.

Third is IRCC's move this year to issue funding proposals with five-year time frames based on a performance approach. This, again, offers settlement organizations the ability to plan into the future. Past approaches of one-year competitive funding created considerable financial instability in the settlement service sector, as organizational finances going into the future could not be depended upon. Extreme levels of employment and organizational precarity were often the result for the sector. The five-year funding approach helps to mitigate such precarity.

Fourth, IRCC has begun to move toward an approach to managing funding dollars in a more flexible manner focused more on outputs, that is, performance goals, rather than inputs, a counting widgets approach. This will enable organizations to more effectively use funding dollars for settlement success with fewer dollars caught up in overly restrictive reporting processes. These are more effective funding dollars.

More stable, multi-year funding allows for both long-term planning of services and broader development within the settlement sector. By continuing to improve stability in the settlement sector for both services and staff, resilience is extended to newcomer communities, which are continually strengthened by effective institutions and services. These recent developments by IRCC are positive developments that should strengthen settlement service delivery and effectiveness.

There are, of course, some issues that need further attention. I want to quickly address four of these. First is settlement service eligibility. IRCC should reconsider its stringent eligibility requirements for federally funded settlement services. Those who are most disadvantaged by this policy include refugee claimants and international students, and this is particularly important with respect to express entries.

So many express entry applicants and successful express entry recruits are from international students as well as temporary foreign workers. These are mostly visible minority migrants, often with limited social and human capital, who are already facing great barriers in settlement. Many immigrants and refugees who become Canadian citizens may still need further support in the long term in terms of their settlement. Better funding and facilitating the social inclusion of these groups would greatly decrease their vulnerability.

I think policy-makers should at the very least permit greater flexibility in determining the length of time individuals are eligible for particular settlement services. By allowing those in need to access these programs, the government could foster better settlement outcomes and greater resilience among those most affected by the challenges of establishing a life in Canada.

It's also important to note that refugee claimants and international students usually have work permits. They need help finding employment, but they cannot at present access IRCC-funded services. This, of course, is becoming ever more important in the case of Ontario, for example, because the province has scaled back its funding for these groups. This year in Ontario, settlement agencies lost funding for projects for refugees and other vulnerable newcomers who were formerly financed through the Ontario Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration. That now has been eliminated by the new Conservative government.

A second point is pre-arrival services. Newcomer resilience can often be best fostered before the settlement journey even begins by offering a wider range of pre-arrival services. Pre-arrival settlement services not only orient and prepare newcomers for settlement in Canada; they also help connect them with services and support upon arrival. The IRCC has embraced pre-arrival services for prospective economic-class immigrants and are funding non-profit providers that target programming geared to such occupations and areas of specialization as engineering, entrepreneurship, finance, supply chains and the like. The Canadian Council for Refugees also notes that these services are particularly important for refugees coming to Canada, and emphasizes that some of those services should also be delivered in a refugee's first language.

The ability for agencies to provide a continuum of services from pre-arrival to employment, however, is limited, because pre-arrival and post-arrival services are funded through two separate pots of money. Pre-arrival services originally prepared clients only to enter post-arrival employment services upon arrival; really it was more of a referral model. Some sector-specific pre-arrival programs are preparing clients for employment before they arrive, and some clients are job-placed before they come. The majority, however, when they arrive in Canada need to make use of other services, particularly employment services.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'll need you to come to a conclusion fairly soon.

[Prof. John Shields]

Okay.

Hence, program funding that connects pre- and post-arrival services would enhance the continuity of services and result in services that are more effective.

I'll briefly mention two others. I won't go into any of the details. I think another area is targeted services for newcomers facing particular barriers of social inclusion. I think these are also needed. My last point is about the need for more family-centred programming. We often approach programming based upon the idea of the individual immigrant, but immigrants mostly come with their families. I think we need programming that recognizes and uses that family lens in terms of designing the programming.

Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you. If you want to flesh those out by sending documentation to the committee, that would be helpful, if you choose to do so.

[Prof. John Shields]

Yes.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you.

Ms. Buuck.

[Christine Buuck]

Good afternoon, and thank you for giving me the opportunity to meet with you today.

My name is Christine Buuck and I'm the associate vice-president of academic administration and international education at Conestoga College. We are located in Kitchener-Waterloo. Conestoga is one of 24 publicly funded colleges in Ontario and one of 13 polytechnics across Canada.

To serve our workforce needs, we offer more than 200 career-focused programs. Our programs incorporate experiential and work-integrated learning with input from over a thousand industry and community leaders.

Conestoga has a long history in offering specialized programming and services to support newcomers. I have had the privilege of being part of that for the past 30 years. It occurred to me as I was flying here today that I began my career in 1989 in a program for newcomers that included a language program with a workplace component. I can tell you we've come a long way.

Programs that are now offered at Conestoga include language instruction for newcomers to Canada, LINC, which is provided to over a thousand newcomers each year. We offer occupation specific language training, self-employment for newcomers, building excellence in entrepreneurship, language interpreter programs, and a TESL program. Our graduates are teaching in the ESL and LINC programs in our community and beyond, including IELTS testing.

Today, as we discuss settlement services for newcomers, I would like to focus on the importance of community collaboration, which has already been talked about, but I'd like to give some concrete examples. You asked about what success looks like. It includes integration of services, innovation and pathways to employment.

With regard to collaboration and integration of services, community partnerships that focus on this are key to providing successful programming for newcomers. Let me give you some examples.

No longer do we offer a language program in isolation. Our partner, in our case, CKW YMCA settlement services, ensures that language assessment upfront is done.

We also offer settlement advising by settlement workers. This is beyond what Conestoga does. Our partner provides that for us. We ensure there are orientation and information sessions to help integrate newcomers, again, beyond language programming.

We have often talked about barriers, barriers of transportation, barriers because there is no child care. To overcome this, we have partnered with the local YWCAs who provide child care for us.

We are recognizing an increase of newcomers with various needs. We have partnered with the CNIB to assist us in providing programming for individuals with visual impairments.

Our language interpreter program is offered in partnership with the multicultural centre, and it goes on.

With regard to innovation, encouraging, supporting and sharing innovative initiatives are essential for continuous improvement of programming for newcomers. Where are those innovations? We know they're out there. For example, our faculty team saw there was a need to develop language assessment tools, something that was concrete, the ability to assess language skills within a real world task-based context with clearly described outcomes that could be measured.

Our faculty also felt strongly that the assessment tools should be shared, that faculty teachers across the country shouldn't be doing this in isolation but should share what they are doing.

Our faculty posted over 160 assessments on Tutela, IRCC's national platform, a great initiative by the way. The response has been more than 6,500 views and 2,000 downloads in this past year alone.

We know there are many more innovations out there. We think these should be readily available for all.

Finally, on pathways to employment, newcomers are eager to begin their lives in Canada. Employment-related programming needs to begin as soon as possible. Our feedback from our newcomers is that they're stressed when they arrive about work, about entering the workforce.

Here are some examples of things that have been working. Incorporate LINC to work with language modules that focus on workplace English in Canadian workplace culture integrated throughout the LINC program, beginning with literacy level 1. It can be done. With employment advising, LINC participants receive one-on-one advice to develop individualized learning and career plans. LINC in the workplace offers language programming in the workplace. Conestoga has piloted this model and is working with employers to expand it so that language training is not separated and is right in the workplace.

I'd like to talk about occupation-specific language training, OSLT. IRCC funded 13 colleges in Ontario, including Conestoga, to deliver occupation-specific language training. It prepares newcomers to find and retain work within their professional fields. OSLT covers six sectors and 35 occupations, sectors such as health sciences, business, technology, human service and skilled trades. Many of our graduates of this programming require further training. They focus on the community service sector. They may end up in our ECE program and fast-track. We have folks in business going into accounting and into the workplace.

Another program I'd like to briefly mention is self-employment for newcomers, building excellence in entrepreneurship. This is a 16-week funded program and provides one-on-one support, information, resources, tools and business planning training to newcomers who are focused on starting their own businesses. For your information, I have included some of our success stories.

Finally, we have recommendations.

Collaboration and integrated services are key to what we do. It's no longer stand-alones. It is focused on our newcomers' needs, with newcomer input.

You mentioned the importance of the whole family. Right now for language programming and child programming, parents and children are separate. We are piloting a program, families as authors, newcomers as authors, to share their program beyond our LINC program, but with members in our own community.

Again, a continued focus on programming that provides pathways to employment is key.

I have not spoken much about this, but an enhancement of programming for newcomers with special needs has been mentioned:

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

Thank you very much.

We will begin questioning with Mr. Sarai.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

I will be sharing some of my time with Mr. Tabbara. Ms. Buuck is from Kitchener and I think he wants to ask her a few questions.

Mr. Shields, that was a great presentation. I have a few questions that we get asked.

Settlement services provide a great array of services. We've been hearing that. One of the challenges I find as well in Surrey is that temporary foreign workers, international students and refugees don't get that service because they're not eligible for it. Would international students not be the responsibility of the colleges? They are charging them a lot of money. Should they not provide or fund some services that maybe settlement agencies like the ones you represent do? I think that's a different function, as opposed to an immigrant. They're charging them money. It's for profit. They're coming. They do require settlement services when they come, simple stuff from where to live and how to get a bus pass and how to get their medical card. They should provide that. Do you think that would be a service they should be obliged to fund?

[Prof. John Shields]

I think what we find with universities and colleges is that increasingly they are providing more services for international students. I see it more as a shared responsibility. Increasingly a large proportion of international students are being recruited through express entry. So what we really do need, I think, especially are the job-related aspects of the services for this group. It's going to increase the effectiveness of their integration into Canadian society. I think government and the universities and colleges should work together on this.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

What about for temporary foreign workers? That's a conundrum, where somebody's coming in specifically on the demand of an employer to fill a need the employer has. They come in to work and they're not necessarily on a pathway to permanency.

[Prof. John Shields]

No.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

But they may be. Once they are on the pathway to permanency, obviously, they are the responsibility of the federal government. But in that interim, should employers not be responsible to provide them the basic things required for their settlement?

[Prof. John Shields]

I think that would be ideal. I think in practice that often does not happen. It would be good to have more co-operation on the part of employers in terms of doing more of this. I think there is still some responsibility on the part of the federal government to be a bit more flexible in terms of this. Oftentimes, temporary foreign workers are coming into the immigration stream through provincial nomination programs, for example. This is an increasing source of permanent newcomers to our country. I think we just need more flexibility around the federal formulas, about whom they are going to fund or whom they are not going to fund.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

My understanding is that once they become permanent residents through the PNP, they are eligible for the services.

[Prof. John Shields]

That's right. They would be, but it would be good to get a jump on this.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Sure, absolutely.

For language training, what do you think is the appropriate measure for the effectiveness, when students move to the next level, when they find employment? Can you explain that? I find that particularly in my area that's a stumbling block. People register for language training and some don't move up. They don't leave the spot and others can't come in, and it really causes a problem. What are the effective ways to continue to provide language training for those who are in need, moving them forward and/or prescribing attendance requirements or some sort of measure? How do you measure the effectiveness?

[Prof. John Shields]

Let me confess that I am not an expert on the language dimension of this, but I think the idea of connecting the language training increasingly with employment is a really good idea. I think, rather than just having language classes but making them more practical, more about the integration into the labour market and providing those kinds of links, maybe working with employers with that respect, is something that is going to motivate newcomers to understand and to grasp the language dimension. I think sometimes there are blockages in terms of the language because there isn't a family focus on some of these programs. Sometimes there is a—

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Thank you. I'll pass my time over to Mr. Tabbara.

[Marwan Tabbara, Liberal, Kitchener South—Hespeler, ON]

Ms. Buuck, you were nodding your head when my colleague was mentioning language training. That's what I wanted to ask you. Witnesses here from Reception House in the Kitchener area mentioned that they have onsite language training while they are at the particular job they have been hired for. Could you elaborate on that and what you have seen as the success for that? You mentioned that in your statement. What has been the success for that kind of program?

[Christine Buuck]

Number one, it's key for motivation. It's key for newcomers to secure employment as they come in along the continuum that we have talked about.

We know, though, that employment is not accessible for everyone, so we need willing employers to work with us. We've had success whereby the language training is done during the work day. The employer is willing to have an hour or two of workplace language training. It could be once a week. Of course we want more. Right on site is the most effective. I mean the newcomers will come afterwards, but it's too much.

Also it's interesting to note that more and more employers have asked to come onsite to meet and recruit a workforce. These employers are eager—yes, there is a labour shortage—to have newcomers work for them, so we are working with them to bridge the language gap.

In terms of language assessment, I would like to say that there has been a lot done over the past decade. We have a national framework, Canadian language benchmarks. They are clear assessments of the four skill areas from beginner to higher levels. On the comment about workplace integrated language, yes, we need to do much more.

[The Chair, Liberal, Rob Oliphant]

I'm afraid I need to end it there; sorry.

Mr. Tilson and Mr. Maguire.

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

Ms. Buuck, on an issue you just raised, there is a company in my riding, and their whole operation is through assembly lines. They can't find people to work on the assembly lines. They have indicated that they would be prepared to hire and train newcomers to come—and this is a small community—for language training, for all kinds of things and even to assist in housing.

My question is for you and perhaps the professor from Ryerson.

Is there anything the government could do to encourage employers to get into this? After all, the government can't do everything, but are there things the government could do such as tax credits, for example? Have either of you put your minds to what the government could do to encourage employers to get more involved?

Ms. Buuck, we'll start with you.

[Christine Buuck]

Absolutely. I would say employer incentives, either in the form of tax credits or compensation. However, there are two parts to integration. One is training for the newcomer. The other is providing professional development in the workplace for workers who are receiving newcomers in the workplace.

We've done some of that as well, working with diverse groups, working in a diverse workplace, and making sure that the employer gets something out of it as well.