Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 25th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

You have 20 seconds.

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

I pass.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

We'll proceed to Ms. Dzerowicz.

You have five minutes, please.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thanks so much, Mr. Chair.

I want to also thank all the participants for their excellent presentations. I'm going to start with Mr. LeBlanc.

Mr. LeBlanc, you are very sensitive to the plight of the east coast. I hear your couple of messages on the limits of the quota system. I also hear that facilitating retention in the Atlantic provinces is very important and that the retention rates are much higher for family-class immigrants than economic immigrants. We are trying to get to recommendations around this program. What would be your specific recommendations to us that would be beneficial for east coast Canada?

[Alex LeBlanc]

When we looked at the percentage of overall immigrants coming to New Brunswick through the family-class streams, it was roughly 10% in 2014. Contrast that to 25% of overall immigration to Canada. Proportionally, a smaller percentage of our overall immigration in New Brunswick is coming through family class and yet it performs better in overall retention. I'm not sure how to reconcile that from a policy standpoint. I think perhaps we need to look at ensuring there are no limitations on those immigrant families in our province who are looking to bring their extended family or their immediate family to join them in New Brunswick. I think that certainly the quota system does impact those living in our province whose applications may be denied or who are experiencing prolonged delays because of the quotas. Again, 10% of overall immigration to New Brunswick in 2014 was through family class, 25% across the country, and yet retention rates are 25% better through family class than economic streams. I don't know how to reconcile that from a policy standpoint. I think there is some work to do around this Atlantic immigration pilot and how we build in family reunification and support that work for newcomers who are coming through that pilot so we achieve better overall retention and population growth in the Atlantic.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Ghassemi, we've heard this over and over again. You were talking a little about applications for parents and grandparents, within a couple of hours or by the end of the day all the slots are completely full and it's closed for the year. Do you have any recommendations on how we can improve this application process so it would be fair?

[Effat Ghassemi]

When I talked about two hours, that means the slot is filled. It means first-come, first-served. The applications up to here are done; the rest are out. In my opinion, we should really have the resources—in terms of Canadian resources—to look at the application and see what these application requests are. If it's reunification for various reasons, it has to be timely. Then the quota should really be expanded. Of course, 5,000 or 10,000 doesn't really make sense; within two hours it's filled. We should really look not to a magic number, but to the magic families; they need family members to come and join them, to help them. That's what I think in terms of family reunification.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

I think we've heard quite a bit about how long it takes in terms of processing times. What do you think is a fair amount of time? When we're talking about family reunification, our focus today has been very much on parents and grandparents, but we are talking about spouses and children as well. Could you provide a little bit of input there? What's a fair amount of time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

You have thirty seconds, please.

[Effat Ghassemi]

In my opinion, for an express entry or any visa or anything, it shouldn't be more than one year. It should be less than one year.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Okay. Thank you very much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

I'd like to thank the panellists for joining us today and providing their insights.

We'll now suspend for two minutes to allow the next panel to assemble.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

I'd like to welcome the second group of panellists before the committee today.

We have representatives from the Davenport-Perth Neighbourhood and Community Health Centre. Erika Garcia is a settlement worker there. Gishelle Albert is here as an individual.

We'll begin with Ms. Garcia.

The floor is yours. You have seven minutes, please.

[Erika Garcia, Settlement Worker, Davenport-Perth Neighbourhood and Community Health Centre]

Good afternoon, and thank you very much to this committee for inviting me here today.

Reuniting families is a key objective of Canada's immigration system. The family reunification program has very positive aspects about it, but there's always room for improvement. The information I will be providing today is based on my 10-year's work experience, working on the front lines, working one-on-one with clients, working with individuals and families, recent immigrants as well as Canadian citizens, looking to reunite with their families here in Canada.

For the majority of my cases, family reunification has done a fantastic job. It's done a good job according to the response from relatives here in Canada. There are significant benefits to sponsored families that I have noticed over the years. One of them is that the large majority of sponsored families have continued to contribute to the household income, either directly by working part-time or full-time, or indirectly by enabling their sponsors to work longer hours. Keep in mind that most sponsored relatives can acquire a social insurance number and are able to work legally in Canada,

Also, sponsored spouses and partners provide emotional support for their sponsors. In most cases, what I've noticed with people who have come through my doors is that they're usually by themselves, the sponsors. They're on their own just waiting for their relatives to arrive here in Canada.

Although I've seen the benefits of the program, I've also seen some of the challenges through my clients. One of them is the long processing times and delays with the applications here in Canada and abroad. In Canada, it takes about 26 months for partners to be sponsors—the partners themselves, I mean. Abroad, it takes 9 to 15 months for some regions. I have a lot of clients who come from African regions covered by Nairobi visa offices, and this processing time takes 15 to 31 months. That's a very long time for people waiting to reunite with their families.

I have clients who have expressed difficulty communicating with inland offices here in Canada and abroad. Clients need to know what the status of their application is. It's very difficult to acquire that information when it's difficult to get in touch with CIC offices. Sponsors are able to communicate only via mail or email, which can lengthen this process. Clients also face very long waiting periods when accessing the CIC call-in centres, and often have expressed that the telephone systems, the CIC website, and the application forms are very difficult to navigate. They feel they have been overloaded with information, as well as jargon. The language is very difficult for them to understand, especially if English is not their first language.

I have made some recommendations based on my experience with this population, with people using the family reunification program. One of them is that I see the continuing need for the family reunification program to exist and to be made a top priority. At our office, we continue to see significant numbers of applications from Canadian citizens and permanent residents looking to sponsor eligible family members under the family class, mainly spouses, partners, and dependent children. This demonstrates the continuing demand and ongoing relevance of the program.

The other recommendation I have is speedier family reunification. In other words, we need express family reunification. I believe children should be reunited with their parents in six months or less. Canada has a very slow process for family reunification. Many children wait over two years before being able to reunite with their parents. For family members and refugees, overseas processing can take up to 31 months. These children sometimes are exposed to very dangerous situations, similar to the situations their parents fled. Also, it takes an extremely emotional toll on the children to be apart from their parents, and it's necessary for them to be with them.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada has implemented the express entry program for economic immigrants. For immigrants with a valid job offer, CIC will process their applications in six months. My question is, shouldn't children be reunited with their parents at least as quickly as these economic immigrants are processed? I think Canada can do better.

My next recommendation is reinstating the previous age of dependants to 22 from 19. Also, repeal that excluded family member rule to avoid cutting off and leaving behind family members.

Last, improve communications with CIC networks to speed up the process. My idea, at least, is to increase staff and training to meet the demands.

In order for the family reunification program to sustain its greatness, and to make improvements, I believe the federal government must ensure the program is ongoing. Also, CIC must ensure that delivery of the program benefits the sponsored family in Canada. As well, the sponsor must ensure that they meet the responsibility and obligations undertaken in the sponsorship agreement for the well-being of the sponsored family members in Canada.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Ms. Garcia.

Ms. Albert, seven minutes, please.

[Gishelle Albert, As an Individual]

My position is that Canada needs more skilled immigrants and fewer parents and grandparents. The current government's plan is to more than double the intake of foreign nationals who are the parents and grandparents of naturalized Canadians, while concurrently reducing the number of economic immigrants, such as skilled workers, entering the country. Doubling the quota for parents and grandparents moving to Canada coupled with other immigration flaws, such as not requiring these individuals to have basic knowledge of one of the country's two official languages, is not in the best interests of Canadians. I believe this policy-making is irresponsible because it does not take into account the financial burden on taxpayers when these individuals requires services, such as medical attention.

It also does not factor in scenarios when sponsors default on their commitment to support their parents and grandparents, who then rely on social assistance because they are unable to secure employment.

The number one argument for increasing the parents and grandparents quota to as much as six times the current level, or even removing the cap on those coming to live as permanent residents or citizens, is that they help young couples save on child care costs, and in turn that money will make its way into the economy through increased consumer spending.

The benefits to an individual's family do not offset the costs to taxpayers if these individuals require medical attention or social assistance. Parents and grandparents are the least likely of all categories of immigrants to report employment earnings, and family-class immigrants have a disproportionately high rate of reporting social assistance when compared to all immigrants. This can be attributed primarily to parents and grandparents.

Increasing the quota or removing the cap would put an additional burden on our already strained social programs. Canada already has an aging population, and it is facing a shortage of workers to support our aging population. I've included a chart for those of you who received the handout previously.

Since parents and grandparents being sponsored under the family reunification program are not required to meet the minimum education, skills, and training standards set forth by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, the Canadian economy will be negatively affected.

Another aspect of this argument is fairness. Those who are unable to secure employment because they do not have a command of either of the official languages, or because they are too old for employment and have never paid income taxes in Canada, are eligible for the same benefits, such as health care and social assistance, as someone who may have worked his whole life in Canada and who paid into these programs.

I have a number of questions. How is it fair that those who have used up their useful working years paying into and building up another society are able to move here, not pay any income taxes, and yet enjoy the same benefits as those who have paid into the system for a large part of their lives? How is it fair that the younger generation of Canadians, who are now working and paying to support Canada's seniors, now have to support people who have never paid a dime into our highly subsidized education system? How sustainable is this plan, and how does it benefit Canada? Our population is aging, and research has shown that approximately 1% of the population accounts for a third of health care spending. Of that 1%, 80% are seniors.

Health care is a significant expense. Provinces spend about half of their budgets on health care, so for the federal government to add more seniors to the health care roster is unfair to provinces. The Canadian immigration system's primary objective should be to accept people into the country who will work and pay taxes to help build a stronger economy and country. As the Canadian population ages, more people rely on social programs, such as health care and subsidized housing. The people entitled to these benefits should be first and foremost the ones who paid into these programs.

There is no real correlation between the rate at which the Canadian population is aging and the rate at which Canada is taking in economic immigrants to replace the aging workforce. Canada's focus should be more on economic immigrants and less on parents and grandparents.

The economic class is made up of skilled workers and business people. Skilled workers are educated and have knowledge of English or French. They are of employable age, and they are also adaptable. They can move from job to job as the economy shifts. Business immigrants are those able to create jobs for themselves and others, contribute capital to the Canadian economy, and stimulate economic activity. Currently the economic class of immigrants are in the minority, and we need to change that policy.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you, Ms. Albert.

We'll begin with Ms. Dzerowicz.

You have seven minutes, please.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks so much to the two presenters today.

I'm just going to delve right into questions.

Ms. Garcia, I'm going to start off with you. You said you've had 10 years of work experience front line, so I'm going to take advantage of that.

We get a lot of complaints, so all of us are front-line workers as well because we hear all the complaints. We deal with a lot of immigrant issues in our offices as well.

What specifically, in your opinion, takes so long in the processing of an application? Is it health checks or security checks? Is it lost applications? Is it incorrect information? What is it within the whole processing that, in your experience, you're finding is taking so long in the processing of applications?

[Erika Garcia]

That's a very good question.

To be honest, in my experience I've noticed that it's the lack of understanding of how to navigate the process, especially for people who's first language is not English. They have difficulty, like I mentioned, communicating with visa offices. Some of my clients are sometimes not able to give appropriate information. If I'm not there to actually help them navigate through the process, sometimes they do it on their own because they have specific times limits to submit certain information. It's very difficult for them to submit it when it's written in a way that is actually not very easy to understand.

Also in terms of the forms, there's usually a repetition of forms. A lot of CIC offices, especially abroad, often ask for schedule As or family information forms to be resubmitted. It can also take a long time for them to submit this information, given that the information might not be easy to send to the right visa office.

For sure communication is certainly one. Like I said, I'm finding the visa process in Nairobi very difficult. I'm saying that specifically because it is extremely long to get an answer from them and extremely long to get any sort of communication with them. I've seen it a lot with my clients who have children abroad waiting to bring them over. When they're hitting the 22-month mark, it can be very stressful for those parents.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Thank you very much.

You talked a little bit about the constricted annual quota of applications. What do you think is the right number? We've doubled it from 5,000 to 10,000. You heard the earlier conversation here around quota /no quota. Do you have an opinion on that? That's one part of the question. The other part that I'm grappling with a little bit is the super visas. I don't know if you have an opinion on that. Then the third part of the question is, what is the fair ask in terms of support for parents and grandparents? Our other presenter today talked a little bit about it. This is something that you hear is quite common: that you have older people coming in, and if they do get ill, they tend to be a more extraordinary burden on the health care system, and it becomes a little bit unfair. I would love to get your opinion on each of those three, if that's okay.

[Erika Garcia]

Sure.

One of the things I want to mention is that when people come here to Canada and they're sponsored, they go through various testing, especially medical tests. The majority that I have seen.... Many of the people being sponsored are very healthy. If anything, their health deteriorates abroad.

When I think about grandparents and parents, I think about the concept of family. It was mentioned before that the concept of family is very broad. For some cultures, grandparents and parents are a huge part of what the family is. I've also noticed the ability for grandparents and parents to come here and help with the child care of the sponsored families. When parents and grandparents are not able to come here, that decreases their ability to help out their larger family here. That also adds costs for those sponsored families, especially low-income families, as they now have to look for child care.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

For quotas—I don't even like calling it a “quota”—if there was a number for parents and grandparents, what number would you give?

[Erika Garcia]

It's very difficult to say, to be honest, because we are talking about people, 10,000 people. I heard, when it was mentioned previously, that it takes about two hours for that quota to fill, which shows the demand of people wanting to bring their grandparents and parents here.

[Julie Dzerowicz, Liberal, Davenport, ON]

Do you think there should be a quota?

[Erika Garcia]

I don't think that's enough. In two hours, it's already filled up.

You mentioned the super visa. People come to my office waiting to see whether they can bring in their grandparents one way or another, and when I tell them that, unfortunately, they are not able to submit an application to sponsor them because the quota has been met, they have to apply for a super visa. Bringing grandparents in that 10-year gap can be very difficult, in terms of the cost of flying them back and forth, because they are not able to stay here more than two years.

I'm not really sure I have a specific number for you. The only thing I know is that 10,000 is just not enough.