Now that we've fixed the problem that the NDP mentioned, I agree that the the motion is very clear.
Why are we here? The ministers have been making multiple policy announcements and pronouncements in the media, either blaming international students for their decisions over the last eight years or pointing the finger at newcomers and immigrants, and they've said that the housing crisis is their fault.
I have a bunch of articles, and I'm going to point out why we say in every single part of this motion what other people have said, which is why these ministers have to come in to explain themselves. It's because they've contradicted each other and they have blamed newcomers and they have blamed immigrants. I'm glad that the committee is now going to pronounce itself on the housing crisis by calling the two ministers in and asking whose fault it is, which is eight years of Liberal government decision-making.
This is the Prime Minister's fault. It's not the immigrants' fault; it's the Prime Minister's fault. He made the decision, and it's his government, so he's the one who needs to be held accountable. The cabinet ministers are the ones following his lead and doing what he has asked them to do. They have mandate letters; they're making those decisions.
I have five articles I'm going to mention, because they have key quotes from these different ministers who are responsible for both the immigration file and the housing file. Let's start with the first one.
Global News reported on January 15 that “Tying immigration to homes [was] a 'good' idea” according to the housing minister, formerly the senior immigration minister. It quotes him, and this is a direct quote: “'Is the idea of tying the number of people who come to Canada to the number of homes available a good one? Yes. In fact, it’s one of the factors we have considered over the past number of years,' said Fraser during a housing announcement in Halifax on Monday.”
I'd like to know how he considered it. How was that taken into consideration?
There's a briefing note that's been talked about. Journalists have referred to it—they've asked me about it—that says that housing was part of the formula to set the targets. I've never seen this briefing note. I don't know where it comes from. I don't know the date it was issued. I don't know its content or the advice given in it, so I want the minister to explain to me what was going on.
On immigration specifically, again this is Sean Fraser. I'm going to call him the senior immigration minister, the supposed housing minister: “Fraser says temporary immigration programs are putting pressure on the housing system and creating a 'serious issue we need to address'.”
Obviously, that relates back to newcomers. He's pinning the blame directly on them.
The next article is from the National Post. This is a direct quote from the immigration minister, the current one, Marc Miller. “'Out of control': Immigration minister says he wants to reduce international student arrivals”. In the article, the journalist goes on say, “The increase is considered one of many factors leading to housing shortages and rent hikes across the country.”
On CTV Question Period on Sunday, January 15—these are direct quotes from the minister—he said, “'That volume is disconcerting. It really is a system that has gotten out of control.'” This is, again, the minister saying this, not us Conservatives. These are the minister's own words. He's saying that after eight years, the system is out of control.
He goes on to say, “'The federal government is the only actor here not making money off of this”. That's the minister's quote, as if making money off international students is somehow a consideration in whether the program should be operating or not. I don't know why that is, but the minister chose to say that on CTV's Question Period on Sunday.
National Newswatch from The Canadian Press said, “Federal government announces two-year cap on international student admissions”. It goes on to say here.... Again, these are the minister's quotes, but I have to say which one, the junior or the senior minister for immigration. This one is the junior one. “'It’s a bit of a mess,' he said of the student visa system. 'It’s time to rein it in.'” He goes on, “'It is not the intention of this program to have sham commerce degrees or business degrees that are sitting on top of a massage parlour that someone doesn’t even go to and then they come into the province and drive an Uber.'”
That was a direct quote. Here's another direct quote: “If you need a dedicated channel for Uber drivers in Canada, I can design that, but that isn’t the intention of international student programs.”
He kind of implies that there are sham commerce degrees or business degrees for which the federal government—IRCC, the Liberal government—has been issuing visas, visas for sham commerce degrees, sham business degrees. Obviously these persons, when they come into Canada, need a place to live and need services.
I've shown already that this is the responsibility of the Prime Minister and the Liberal government. They bear responsibility for all of these decisions, which is why this motion must pass.
Another quote from is Bloomberg, because we've captured international media attention with the bumbling: “Canada to Cap Foreign Student Visas Amid Housing Shortage”. Again, it goes on to quote numbers and figures. It does mention that there are now over one million international study permit holders in Canada. That was based on an Order Paper question by one of our colleagues.
The minister says he blames the provinces, which is why he's putting a cap on the provinces. In this particular article, it says that “Miller has already pledged a designated-institution framework that will prioritize visas for post-secondary schools that provide higher quality education and adequate supports, including housing”.
He says, “including housing”. I'd like to know, then, why housing is so important to the international students' stream. A briefing note has been circulated. There's a deep connection being made by the minister between newcomers—international students—and housing. Some Conservatives were making the connection. It's the Liberal government ministers who are making this connection. We just want to hold them accountable. We want to find out information.
That's why this motion needs to pass. The fix proposed by the Bloc member has addressed all of the concerns that the New Democrats had and mentioned. This motion doesn't blame newcomers. It doesn't blame immigrants like me. It basically says that the ministers have been making these comments. They've been alleging it and they've been connecting the two together, and they've been doing it since August. However, they've really ramped up the rhetoric in the last 45 days.
The last one is from the National Post, from journalist Jamie Sarkonak. She says, “Crackdown on student visas is a welcome change, but will it be enough?”
Then the article goes on to relate the numbers. It talks about “exploitation of international students” going on in the greater Toronto area, and mentions two specific studies. It mentions how common it is for extortion, exploitation, sexploitation. It mentions that a specific “international education industry magazine echoed [these findings], reporting that a number of Toronto massage parlors were advertising Indian students for sex.” When did the ministers know about stuff like this? And it goes on and on in this format.
This motion is very specific. It refers to what ministers have said repeatedly. It now has a very good amendment from the Bloc MP, whose suggestion is exactly our point, which is that this is not the fault of newcomers and international students. They have been the targets of exploitation in some cases. Some of these plaza colleges do not provide legitimate education. The post-graduate work permit system has been abused in some cases. The ministers have been pointing fingers at each other, and at international students and newcomers, blaming them for the housing crisis.
We need to pass this motion. The two ministers must appear. They have to explain themselves on why this is the situation and how they made decisions and why they made these types of comments in the media.
Thank you, Chair.