Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 26th, 2021

[Christine Normandin, Bloc, Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Lehal, workers are sometimes held hostage by employers. These workers can't easily find another job because the work permits are closed.

If workers were allowed to work at another location for a certain period of time without penalty, say for 30 days, would that be a good way to limit this hostage-taking and provide more security for workers?

[Kamaljit Lehal]

Well, we already have the open work permit for vulnerable workers option available, but it takes time.

I hear what you're saying. If there were some immediate measure or step that someone could take to get out because the processing in the other vulnerable worker route takes time, it would be helpful—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Sorry for interrupting, Ms. Lehal. The time is up for Madame Normandin.

We will now proceed to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you will have six minutes for your round of questioning. You can proceed, please.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses for their presentations.

I will go Vilma, please.

Before I get you to finish up what you have to say, I'd like to ask you this first question.

With respect to the announcement the government made about two weeks ago on the PR process for caregivers, I wonder what your thoughts are, especially with respect to the question around the cap.

[Vilma Pagaduan]

The cap for caregivers is 2,750 for home child care providers. Recently, on April 8, they made an announcement that the cap is almost reached and the IRCC is encouraging caregivers to apply for the new public policy.

Unfortunately, this new public policy is very disproportionately distributed. As you can see, 40,000 goes to international students. For the 20,000 cap, there are 40 different occupations fighting for this stream. For the 30,000, 95 different occupations are also fighting for the stream. If the international student is working as a cashier under NOC 6611 in stream A and she's also working as a retail salesperson under stream B, NOC 6421, in reality these programs qualify the international student, whereas caregivers cannot qualify for all these streams. This is disproportionately distributed, especially for vulnerable migrant workers.

I was talking to the advocates in P.E.I. For farm workers in P.E.I., their employment is located too far away from language testing. The employment for caregivers in Nunavut is also far from language testing. They have to fly from their place of employment to the testing centre.

Nowadays, because of the pandemic, the libraries are closed. The community centres are closed. These migrant workers are living or working in the middle of nowhere. They don't have access to a computer or to the Internet and they are fighting to get into this program. They are competing with doctors, pharmacists and highly skilled and tech-savvy people. We're talking about international students who are young professionals working nowadays in organizations or corporations, with the Internet and a computer.

Also, the first-in and first-out rule really excludes migrant workers in this program, because whoever is in the city with all these technologies can actually apply right away. When it opens on May 6, I'm sure the system will crash. When the announcement was made on April 14, the following day the websites of IELTS and CELPIP crashed. When they opened it and restored the website, the next available schedule for IELTS was September and the next available for CELPIP was December.

How can these migrant workers compete with doctors and pharmacists and highly skilled people? Obviously, this program is not for migrant workers.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

Would you propose, then, that the government actually bring in a separate immigration stream for caregivers?

[Vilma Pagaduan]

Yes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

On that, I know the communities have called for landed status on arrival for some time now. I wonder if you want to comment on what the permanent program for landed status on arrival for caregivers should look like.

[Vilma Pagaduan]

We've been advocating that all those applying from outside and overseas should be given permanent residency upon arrival. Nowadays, when applicants from outside are applying for this program, they have to wait for one year. It should not be the case.

Most of the time, these applicants from outside.... We never heard of anybody coming into Canada because of the restrictions of the language and education and those criteria. Also, they have to spend more money outside for the educational credentials. They're paying dollars and they're working and earning pesos. More caregivers are being refused outside, and we don't see anyone coming into Canada compared to years ago, when the LCP was introduced.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

With respect to a permanent program, first, the government should provide a permanent residence on arrival program for caregivers, with a specific allocation of spots and no requirements for language and all those things that the government has put in place that have now become a barrier.

With respect to the caregivers who are already here, because now it would perhaps be difficult for those individuals to compete for the spots that are available with the announcement, what should the government do?

[Vilma Pagaduan]

They should open different pathways for them, exclusively for caregivers, because they have been here for such a long time and they're still waiting for their permanent residency. The pathways should be exclusive to caregivers, with no cap, and accessible. The English language test should be removed, because this is clearly a barrier for them—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Ms. Pagaduan, I'm sorry for interrupting. Your time is up.

We will now proceed to Mr. Hallan. You have four minutes for your round of questioning.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the witnesses.

Ms. Pagaduan, this caregivers program is something that in my experience, through my own office, has seemed so delayed, even until this recent announcement. A lot of people are suffering.

Can you speak a little more to this 12-month wait period? It seems a really long time and it's not very specific.

Suppose someone doesn't have all their documents and didn't put in the application or something is missing. It doesn't specify where the 12 months start from, or where the 12 months end.

Can you please give a little more information on how you see that and what requirements it should have in it?

[Vilma Pagaduan]

Actually, that's the same question we asked the former IRCC minister, Ahmed Hussen, because during the announcement of the introduction of the interim pathway and the new program, he said there was going to be one year of processing for these PR applications.

When the interim pathway opened in February 2019, and in the fall, he said the processing time was one year. However, the caregivers received their first AOR, or acknowledgement of receipt, only this mid-March, from March 2019.

Where does the 12 months of processing start? We don't know, because until now, they're still waiting. They applied in February 2019 and only received the AOR in March of this year.

The government really has to give attention to the caregivers and the migrant workers because of the long separation of the family. The family reunification is not there. Canada's promise of family reunification is not being addressed. Many caregivers' families are passing because of COVID, and they have to deal with that issue.

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Vilma, thank you so much for sharing with us.

Ms. Lehal, you mentioned that these announcements have been causing a lot of uncertainty and a bunch of panic for a lot of people. People are given English tests. They're overwhelmed right now because of these announcements that come out of nowhere.

We've seen this over and over again, where they throw a bunch of a money, millions and billions of dollars, into a program, but it doesn't really solve the actual issue.

You brought up an issue of these consultants. They give cash, and these consultants can go around even after being caught. How do you see this loophole being fixed? What do you see that would help the most vulnerable people who come here?

[Kamaljit Lehal]

Fixing that is the golden question. We've been trying that for years.

As I said, it would be some sort of front-end approach. What we're trying to do right now is put a lot of money and resources into investigating individuals who we suspect are abusing the system and taking advantage of workers. That's a lot of back-end stuff now happening after the fact.

There's definitely good work, but it's a lot of time and resources into investigations, and then we'll have trials in the court.

What I'm suggesting is something more at the front end, along the lines of some type of matching system. I've mentioned a suggestion from one of the community organizations. I don't know if it's doable, but it's a thought, and let's get the thoughts out there. They suggest something where the ESDC takes control over, perhaps, workers who are already in Canada looking for employment, and matches them up with employers.

We've heard from the agriculture industry that they're desperate. They're looking for people, and we have workers who are looking for employers. Is there a possibility of creating a system where we can match the two?

[Jasraj Singh Hallan, Conservative, Calgary Forest Lawn, AB]

Thank you very much for that. Continuing on, Ms. Lehal, when we see all these announcements—these 27,000 new ones—at the same time, we're still dealing in all of our offices with these great backlogs that—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Sorry for interrupting, Mr. Hallan. Your time is up.

We will now proceed to Mr. Regan.

Mr. Regan, you will have four minutes for your round of questioning. You can please proceed.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Mr. Couturier, I think you are in St. John's, Newfoundland. I am in Nova Scotia right now, but I expect you're probably very familiar with the Atlantic immigration pilot. I know you folks are talking about the importance of an integrated, permanent solution to the issues of the workforce in agriculture, and I appreciate that. That may well make it into the committee's report.

However, let me ask you about the Atlantic immigration pilot, the rural and northern immigration pilot and the other pilots that have been put in place. For instance, for the Atlantic immigration pilot, a labour market impact assessment is not required. Do you feel that that kind of idea should be expanded more broadly? If so, with which partners? Of course, the pilot here in Atlantic Canada is with the provincial governments. What's your view on that?

[Cyr Couturier]

The pilot seems to be working, so if you want to expand it to other partners and other provinces, then that would be a good thing, rather than just restricting it to agri-food or agriculture.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

My question is this: It's with the provinces, right, but should it be with sectors instead, or with certain other kinds of organizations in some fashion?

[Cyr Couturier]

I guess it could be with ESDC or with CAHRC, for example, which represents a sector, or another sort of group that represents a sector, if that's the will of the government. CAHRC, for example, has great credibility in the sector with governments all across the country, so for agriculture and agri-food it would make more sense. We are supported by ESDC in our research in particular.

I think that's a good idea, Mr. Regan, that it be some other group that takes that on.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Does that current model there work, or should there be, for example, sector-specific LMIAs?

Second, of all the various pilot programs, if you were to choose one of them, which one would you like to see become permanent?

[Cyr Couturier]

I'm going to be biased and say that the agriculture and agri-food one should become permanent. That's the sector I work in—and so does Mr. Chambers—and that's what CAHRC serves across the country, so I would say that would be a good idea.

Ms. Lehal mentioned that ESDC could help. I just want to mention in that context that ESDC could have a sort of job-matching program in different sectors as well. CAHRC already has a job-matching program for a number of new Canadians and people who are eligible to work, so we could get more involved in that.

It's different from the Atlantic immigration pilot, but I'm just saying there are ways of doing this outside of government, I guess, and working with governments.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thanks very much.

I'd ask more, but I have about 10 seconds left, so it's back to you, Madam Chair.