Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 4th, 2016

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Caregivers of disabled children are often actually rejected even though they have met their two years. Because their child has some sort of disability, then they're rejected.

I wonder whether or not the minister can comment on that, and whether there will be action to address this issue.

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

Can you tell us the rules on that?

[Robert Orr]

That may be the case, but I think more broadly the department signalled that it would be undertaking a fundamental review of the excessive demand requirements of the act. So that is under way at the moment, and that may address some of these situations.

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

We do have a meeting this month. I have a meeting with all the provincial and territorial immigration ministers. The money for health is their money, and we are discussing that issue with my fellow ministers.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. McCallum.

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

On a question of privilege, Mr. Chair, the proceedings of an in camera meeting are deemed to be confidential and certainly the review component of Bill C-6 was conducted in camera.

The minister has just divulged the proceedings of an in camera meeting. I don't believe the minister was in attendance at that meeting, so there seems to be a breach of information and confidentiality that is now in a televised meeting. So I do raise a question of privilege and a breach of confidentiality of an in camera meeting.

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

What did I do?

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

He also divulged your ruling on that as well, I believe, so that's an additional component. Not only was it a breach of privilege on an amendment that was put in a televised meeting, but also your ruling.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Ms. Rempel, thank you for pointing this out. It is a very serious matter that you raise.

I will be reviewing the blues very carefully to be sure of the details of the matter you have raised and I will, at that point, come back to the committee once I've had that opportunity. Thank you.

We will now continue.

Mr. Ehsassi, you have seven minutes, please.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome back, Minister. It's always very helpful when you do appear before the committee.

Of course today we're talking about family sponsorships. There is no doubt that it does actually enhance the sense of belonging of newcomers when they have the opportunity to bring relatives here.

In your opening remarks you referred to the fact that sponsored spouses, insofar as the issue of income and earning is concerned, do as well as other groups. Does the department actually have studies that bear this out? How do we know this?

[David Cashaback, Acting Director General, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

We do it in two ways. One way is that we're actually able to link our administrative immigration data with tax filing information, so it gives us a nice longitudinal picture of outcomes, mainly economic but also incidence of employment among all of these different categories, which allows us to compare, then, family class immigrants versus other classes of immigrants.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

That's great. I'm just very happy to hear this because others are of the view that on occasion families who are sponsored to come here are a burden on our system.

As you know, in 2011 the government introduced the idea of super visas. I'm just wondering what your personal view of super visas is and whether we will be continuing with super visas.

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

I think super visas are good. There is a sort of myth out there that the Liberals don't like super visas. That's never been my view.

I think we have two options for parents and grandparents. Either they can become permanent residents as a parent or a grandparent, or they can use the super visa, which gives them a lot of flexibility to spend extended periods of time in Canada, or they can just have a regular visa.

To some extent the super visa and the permanent residence are alternatives or substitutes, or they may do one on the way to getting the other. Also, given that not every parent and grandparent will succeed in becoming a permanent resident, because the spaces are limited, the super visa is a safety valve or an alternative, and some may even prefer it or some may choose to do it because the other isn't available.

I do think it broadens the range of choice. We want to have both, and to the extent possible, we want both to be available. I do think both are useful.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

Just out of curiosity, does the department have records on the uptake for super visas, or do they actually retain information that will tell us what the source countries are for super visa users?

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

I'm sure they do.

[Robert Orr]

Since December 2011, over 70,000 super visas have been issued. The approval rate is at about 80% on those applications. A number, of course, have gone for extensions as well.

India is a high user of the super visa and China is the highest user of the super visa. That's followed by the Philippines, Pakistan, and Bangladesh.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you for that.

You have already explained your thoughts on various issues before this committee. You did note, in your opening remarks, that of course our immigration system has to compete with the Australian, the British, and the American systems. Are there any aspects of those systems that you find preferable to ours, and what would those things be?

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

Their websites are better than our website.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Okay. All of them?

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

Maybe that's not a very scientific statement, but I think the department has done some focus testing, and my staff compared them. It seems that Australia's and New Zealand's websites are easier to navigate.

One of the things we have to do—I'm not really blaming my department, but you asked me, and I think those countries do have better websites—is to improve our level of service on the website. In many ways, the website is the future. It's not the whole future, but it's a big part of it. We are in competition with those countries. We want to do just as well as them, or better, in every dimension that's important, and one of those is the website. Another is processing time.

Sometimes it's difficult to compare. Sometimes you're comparing apples with oranges. Most of the things we do are not purely guided by comparing with other countries, but it's often useful to benchmark. We're wanting to get quicker servicing, more welcoming servicing, and a better website. All of these things we are aiming to achieve.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you for that.

Previously we had a category for fiancés. It was eliminated a few years back. I'm wondering whether the department is currently considering the possibility of bringing that category back.

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

To be honest, I didn't even know about that. Perhaps Mr. Orr could comment.

[Robert Orr]

The fiancé category goes back some years. I think it was subject to considerable abuse, which was one of the reasons we moved away from it. There was also the matter of just the choices within the levels space that we have. If we open up more categories, it probably means something else has to give. There were a number of issues around that.

So no, there is no consideration of opening that category again at present.

[Ali Ehsassi, Liberal, Willowdale, ON]

Thank you.

That's it for me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Mr. Ehsassi.

Mr. Tilson, five minutes.