Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Dec. 6th, 2016

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

We'll have a recorded vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 5; nays 4)

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Ms. Kwan, you have seven minutes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

And thank you to the minister and his staff.

I'd like to ask the minister actually a couple of questions on different areas.

First, with respect to the immigration levels—and this ties into the live-in caregiver program, although there have been some changes and they're not live-in necessarily anymore—the immigration levels indicate that 18,000 federal caregivers would be able to come into this program at this time. As of June of 2016, there are 31,000 people on the wait-list, waiting for their application to be processed. As the minister knows, on average the wait time for them is four and a half years. Under the economic class, as the minister indicated, express entry, for example, another economic class, the application process is six months, so there is something really wrong with this system, given the way in which caregivers are being treated.

The minister has said on many occasions that his mother relies on caregivers. We value these workers, and we should treat them right, and this is wrong. Given that the number for this kind of immigration is 18,000, how much of a processing delay will there be for the 31,000 people who are on the wait-list at the moment?

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

Look, I certainly would acknowledge that the processing times for caregivers are way too long. I said at the beginning that we were making some progress, sometimes good progress, in some areas. I also said there are areas in which we aren't and clearly caregivers is one of those areas in which we're not.

I think, however, that the inventories have been coming down over the years, so I think there is some light at the end of the tunnel in the sense that the processing times will be coming down. However, they're not coming down as quickly as I would like. I would ask one of the officials who can deal more specifically with it, perhaps—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Minister, before you go to the officials—and I appreciate that—let me just put this to you.

If the immigration number is 18,000 and as of June, 31,000 are waiting, if you put all 18,000 toward the people who've been waiting, that's still obviously deficient to get rid of this waitlist. That's assuming that you don't admit one new case, which of course, is not the case.

As far as the efforts you're making go, I would just say this, Mr. Minister. They're not good enough. It's not good enough for these workers to wait. So my question, then, to you is this. Will you be prepared to have a special measure so that we can actually get these cases processed that have been waiting for years, for families to be united with their loved ones while they are here taking care of our loved ones?

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

Okay. I've already acknowledged that it is not good, but I have also said I think there is progress over time. It's also the case that the processing times for the new version of the caregiver program are good. But I think Mr. Orr knows more about the details of it and perhaps can give you more detail.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Oh, sorry.

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

Perhaps he can just answer the question.

[Robert Orr]

I think the minister has said that those coming in through the new system, the caring for children class and those with high medical needs, are being processed very rapidly. Over the course of 2017, we will see significant reduction in the backlog of cases in this category, but there will still remain cases that we will not be able to deal with over the course of 2017.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

That's correct. I appreciate that the new applications will be processed more quickly, but it doesn't erase the fact that there are scores of people who are still waiting. In order to address this, my belief is that the government needs a special measure, a dedication of action and resources, as well as immigration-level numbers. Otherwise, you will always be playing catch-up no matter what you do, and this is a case in point.

I'm going to leave it there, because there's another issue related to old cases. These are what we call legacy cases, as the minister knows. These legacy cases are a result of a law that's been changed to require that new cases be processed first. As a result, there are at least 5,800 legacy cases currently waiting in the system right now. By the way, the information I'm getting has been provided by the IRB, and it deals with legacy cases that have been waiting. There are situations of people having been scheduled for a legacy-case review, which has then been cancelled. They have no date whatsoever, no rescheduling, for them to get their cases heard, and their lives have been in limbo for years now. Because there are new cases that must meet the legislative requirement of being processed within six months, these legacy cases are not moving forward. Even the IRB writes to the individual to say, “I'm sorry that I cannot be the bearer of better news at this time.” All they can do is simply ask them to wait.

My question, then, to you, Minister, is this: will your budget address this issue? Will there be a special dedication to address these legacy cases? People's lives should not be held in limbo for years on end.

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

Perhaps that was apparent in our citizenship bill. I, and I think we, as a government, don't really like two tiers—two tiers of citizens or two tiers of refugees. We like everybody to be treated the same. This is something we inherited. I'm certainly aware of the legacy refugees, and I can tell you that we are working on that issue. I am aware of it, and I am working as well as I can to find a solution to it. I agree with you that it takes far too long. These people have been in Canada often for many years, and we need to find a quicker solution for them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

Thank you.

Ms. Zahid.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Minister, and thanks for your comments.

In the levels plan for 2017, I see that the target for the economic class is up by 11,900 and the target for the family class is up by 4,000. I would like to talk about the relationship between these two classes of immigration.

Economic immigrants are commonly seen as greater contributors to the economy and to society than are family immigrants, but as our committee heard during our recent study of family reunification, family being reunited is key to the success of any immigrant, and even parents and grandparents can make an important non-economic contribution that allows the traditional economic immigrant to be more productive and successful. Certainly we are not going to attract the best and the brightest economic immigrants if they face a long wait to reunite with their families.

Could you discuss when you set the levels for the family class whether or not you consider the economic class levels. How many of them may want to bring their extended families in the near future?

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

Thank you; that's a good question.

I don't think we made any commitment in the last election platform that was more important to us than the one on reducing processing time for immediate families. As you may have heard, I'm going to be making an announcement on that tomorrow. I can't say what it is, but I can say that it's going to be better, and that we've been working since we came into government to improve the system for family reunification. There's really nothing more important for me, for us, than that, and tomorrow we'll be able to announce the fruits of our labour on that issue. There's nothing in the levels for entry of immediate family that will prevent us from achieving our objectives in that area. The levels for spouses, in both 2017 and 2016, have been far higher.

The numbers for spouses I can give to you. Spouses, partners, and children, if you go back to 2015, numbered 48,000, and then 60,000 and 64,000. It's certainly been an upward trend, which is consistent with our underlying goal of reducing dramatically the processing times for families. Tomorrow I'll be able to explain that in more detail.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Thank you for that and for the levels.

I'm referring to page 6 of your department's 2016 annual report to Parliament on immigration, which shows the 2015 planned admission ranges and the actual numbers admitted. The 2015 range for parents and grandparents was 18,000 to 20,000, but we see that only 15,489 have been admitted. Given the long backlog, could you explain why?

You said that the inventory of parents and grandparents will be brought down to 46,000 by the end of 2016. The number admitted was below the bottom of the target range. Is there any specific—

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

That's a fairly small difference, and it was the last government, so I don't know the answer to that specific question.

Does anybody here know?

It's a fairly small gap between the actual number announced and the target, at a time when we weren't the government, so I can't really explain that.

[Marta Morgan]

By our records, the target range for 2015 was between 18,000 and 20,000 for parents and grandparents, and the actual number admitted was 19,834, so it was right at the high end of the target.

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

It's within the target.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

So it's not 15,489 anymore? There have been more after that.

[Marta Morgan]

No, it's not.

[Salma Zahid, Liberal, Scarborough Centre, ON]

Maybe we can update that, since page 6 refers to that number.

With regard to the supplementary estimates, you mentioned in your remarks that $310,000 is being transferred to the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council to support immigration and refugee resettlement research. I think this is an area very much deserving of independent study.

Could you discuss what the department hopes to accomplish with this research and how you see it potentially informing the decisions you make around the provision of settlement services in the future?

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

I think the department has been committed to supporting research for a long time. Personally, I've been a professor doing research for more years than I've been a politician, so I believe that research is important. In particular, I think if you do something very significant, like our program to admit 25,000 refugees, it's very important that we understand in depth what were the good things, what were the bad things, and how it actually worked in detail, so that could guide us in future operations of this kind.

Therefore, I'm all in favour of academic research to delve into all of the things that we have done that may be of some importance to acquire evidence on the merits or demerits and to guide us in the future.

[The Chair, Liberal, Borys Wrzesnewskyj]

I'd like to point out to the committee that the bells have started.

The meeting is adjourned.