Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 19th, 2022

[Philip Somogyvari]

Yes, absolutely. The amendments contain provisions, for instance, to ensure transparency in the application of the proposed new authority. These include ensuring that the economic goal upon which the minister seeks to conduct an attribute-based round be contained in the ministerial instruction itself, which is posted publicly on the departmental website. Furthermore, to continue with the purpose, not only the goal sought but how many individuals were invited through the use of these new authorities must be included in the annual report to Parliament on immigration.

In terms of interaction with clients, each client will set up a profile within express entry; therefore, the system will already be aware of the attributes that these clients possess. As is the case currently with the express entry system, these candidates are waiting to be invited to apply for permanent residence, so the same mechanism by which candidates in the pool are informed that they've been invited and asked to submit their application for permanent residence will be used in the system under these proposed amendments.

[Marie-France Lalonde, Liberal, Orléans, ON]

I have very little time, so I'm going to ask, because it's very sensitive to me and you did make remarks about it, whether this change to express entry contributes to the government's official languages commitment. If so, how?

[Philip Somogyvari]

Yes, it can.

If I may explain, to date the express entry system has in fact been amended to increase the number of points provided to candidates who are French speakers or bilingual within the system. To date, the means by which the department is able to recognize and contribute to this goal is through the addition of extra points. Having said that, there are still those—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, but the time is up for Mrs. Lalonde. We will proceed to Mr. Trudel for six minutes.

Mr. Trudel, you can please begin.

[Denis Trudel, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, BQ]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for being with us today. Immigration is just as important as it is interesting.

Let's talk about Quebec, where permanent residents are selected on the basis of selection certificates issued under the 1991 Canada–Québec Accord relating to Immigration and Temporary Admission of Aliens.

Will the amendments proposed in Bill C-19 affect the agreement or Quebec in any way?

[Philip Somogyvari]

I can confirm that the proposed amendments have no impact on the selection authority that was granted to Quebec via the Canada-Québec Accord.

[Denis Trudel]

Thank you.

As we speak, 40,000 permanent residence applications for Quebec are pending. Since the amendments proposed in Bill C‑19 do not affect Quebec, they will not help reduce the IRCC backlog of applications for Quebec. Isn't that something Bill C‑19 should have addressed?

[Philip Somogyvari]

In this case, I can speak to the application management within the express entry system. Here there is the ability to pause the intake of applications, which has been done for federal programs since September 2021. This not only allows the department to catch up on the inventories of federal economic applications, but, in doing so, also allows the department to focus more broadly on the treatment of economic class applications writ large.

[Denis Trudel]

Let's turn to the express entry system then. It has often been touted by the federal government as a way to achieve the target of processing francophone immigration applications within six months. What conditions does the 2022‑23 budget set out to ensure the government meets francophone immigration targets?

[Philip Somogyvari]

The department is quite aware and is concerned with the service standards within the express entry program. That's why intake was paused in September of 2021 and is expected to resume in July of 2022. In so doing, there's a recognition....

These amendments themselves, I should add, do not impact treatment of applications or existing or future processing times. However, it's the intent that once application intake within express entry is resumed in July, we will be able to once again strive to attain the service standards of express entry.

[Denis Trudel]

On the same topic, I would like to know how francophone immigration is going to change in practical terms. It's a fact that the numbers for 2022 are still below the targets set by the government.

How will Bill C-19 change things?

[Philip Somogyvari]

Express entry already plays a large role in helping to increase francophone immigration to official language minority communities outside of Quebec. For example, the changes themselves would permit the minister to focus on all French-speaking candidates within the express entry pool. Currently, while French-speaking candidates are provided with bonus points, which will increase their ranking score, it may not invite all French-speaking candidates within the pool. Theoretically, with the proposed authorities in use, if the minister chose to do so, the department would be able to conduct an invitation round that would virtually invite all of the identified French-speaking candidates within the express entry pool.

[Denis Trudel]

With the funding allocated to the express entry system, does the department expect to finally be able to meet the six-month processing standard?

[Philip Somogyvari]

Of course, resource-wise, funding for the express entry program is provided through the multi-year immigration levels plan.

With respect to returning to service standards, yes, the intent for those who apply, following the resumption of the invitation rounds, is to be able to have their application, once a full application is received, treated within service standards for issuance of a permanent residence visa. Furthermore, it speaks to why the government chose to pause the intake of new applications in September 2021, which was to catch up on the applications that had accumulated during the pandemic.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you. We will now proceed to Ms. Kwan.

Ms. Kwan, you have six minutes. Please begin.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the officials for coming to our committee today.

I have questions in both areas, so let me first go to the piece around the fees. Just to be clear, under our current rules, the Service Fees Act for immigration requires the government to reimburse portions of fees when service standards are not met. Then there are certain exemptions to areas where service standards are not met such that the government does not have to reimburse. They're exempt.

Bill C-19 is now asking for further categories to be exempt in terms of the government having to reimburse fees if they don't meet service standards. Is that correct?

[Julie Chassé]

Yes, Madam Chair.

Thank you for that question. I can answer it.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I just need a short answer.

[Julie Chassé]

As it stands right now, these four fees fall under the temporary resident category, and all other fees under the temporary resident category are currently not subject to the Service Fees Act. We still provide service standards and we still have service standards in place for all these fees, and we publish them on our website; however, we are not subject to the Service Fees Act, so we do not remit fees when the service standards are not met. These four fees would be added to this specific list of fees that are currently exempt.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

That is to say, if an applicant's processing time exceeds service standards, then they will not get reimbursed if this passes, right? That's the nub of it.

[Julie Chassé]

That's correct.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

This is calling for it to be retroactive back to 2017, so that is to say, one could only assume that the government.... There are a lot of people's applications that have not been processed within service standards. If this is not passed, then the government owes people a lot of money, and you don't want that to happen. Isn't that the gist of this situation?

[Julie Chassé]

In terms of these four types of applications, they have a relatively low volume compared to our other types of applications, especially in the temporary resident stream, so it's really a question of establishing the processing times and being fair across all our clientele. Some clients would not be entitled to a refund if the service standards are not met, for example, for a temporary resident visa. For these four application types, when it's a case of inadmissibility, clients would be entitled to a refund if the service standards were not met. This is a question of consistency and transparency.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm troubled by this, because one would think that the government should meet its service standards. If they do not meet the service standards, then the applicant should be reimbursed part of the fee. This is to say that no, they don't need to be reimbursed, and therefore they should be exempt from the requirement of having to reimburse. That troubles me, and this goes retroactively back to 2017. I just want to put that on the record here.

The second area I have questions about is with respect to the express entry categories. The bill does not stipulate what categories these are or what sorts of job categories we are talking about. It just gives broad authority to the minister to make that determination. The bill does not provide for parliamentary oversight as to what these groups will be, and there's no process as to whether or not these groups will be fair. How will they be fairly chosen and how will they be selected?

Why didn't the officials put in a requirement so that the groups that the government is thinking about would have to make that list? Exactly who are we thinking about with this provision?

[Philip Somogyvari]

First, the economic goal upon which the invitation is conducted will be in the instruction itself.

With respect to process, this is something that is currently being developed. Having said that, just for example, features such as consultation with employer groups and other stakeholders with awareness of labour market information would be a likely reference, as well as the objectives within the immigration act itself. There could be consultation with colleagues at Employment and Social Development Canada who have knowledge of labour market information, and then finally consultation with provinces and territories. These could be some of the areas in preparing advice as to the things that category-based rounds could be conducted upon. These could be examples.