Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 3rd, 2026

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

You recommended that a solution would be temporary status at first, but with temporary status, how is somebody going to dedicate the amount of capital...? Who's going to invest in a company that comes to Canada that only has temporary status? If I'm an investor in the start-up ecosystem, the last place I would put my money is in a company that doesn't have status.

[Laurent Carbonneau]

It's a fair question. If the choice is between having a program that's non-functional and a program where there are some trade-offs, I'd rather have the trade-offs. If you create a window that's workable, these are solvable problems, but what we saw in the first iteration of this program wasn't really functional.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

I'm not so sure that the iteration was dysfunctional, as it became problematic for organizations that were doing due diligence outside of IRCC. IRCC didn't have any role other than approving designated organizations, angel funds or incubators. The program itself is fine. It's just that a massive number of companies were coming to Canada.

The bigger issue now is that we have a 10-year backlog. If you go to the IRCC website now, it says there's a 10-year wait for a start-up visa. Who's even going to consider coming to Canada when they know right up front that it's a 10-year wait?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

I completely agree with you. I think that's totally unworkable. Frankly, you should have done the start-up at that point if you were going to be waiting 10 years anyway.

I completely hear you. That's exactly the concern we're worried about as well.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

One of the other comments you made was about retaining talent in Canada, and I agree with you completely. One of the biggest problems we have is the exodus of our brightest and best. People go where capital is. Our biggest problem in Canada, in my view, is that we have failed to provide adequate access to capital to commercialize start-ups and innovative companies. Would you agree with that?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

I would completely agree with that. I mentioned earlier that Canada is really good at attracting researchers and really bright people in the commercial space and in the research post-secondary space—all true—but we really struggle to grow these companies. That's a huge problem for our ecosystem.

In Canada, we like to tell ourselves the myth that we punch above our weight. I think in lots of real ways we punch below our weight. We have so many smart people, and what we can accomplish with those smart people is a lot less than it should be. Our access to capital problem is a huge part of that.

[Fred Davies, Conservative, Niagara South, ON]

Do you have a suggested solution to that? I know I don't have a lot of time, but capital is the biggest pain point here in Canada. What would you recommend we do as a government, as a society or as investors?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

You have 15 seconds.

[Laurent Carbonneau]

Oh boy.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Laurent Carbonneau]

We had a really great report out last year, “A Mandate to Innovate”, that addressed the big four issues that we talk about. I would refer you to that. I would be happy to come back and talk about it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

Feel free to follow up with a letter with suggestions to Mr. Davies' question. I think it's an excellent one.

[Laurent Carbonneau]

We can certainly do that as well.

Thank you, Mr. Davies.

[The Chair, Liberal, Julie Dzerowicz]

It will help us get to some of the answers we're looking for.

Ms. Lapointe, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

It's a great pleasure to be with you today. I am happy to replace my colleague.

Good afternoon to all the witnesses.

Mr. Carbonneau, when you referred to temporary foreign workers, you mentioned the figure of 2.6%.

Did I understand correctly?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

Yes.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Can you explain to me a little more what that figure represents?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

Yes, absolutely. That was the percentage of total labour market impact assessments, out of the whole TFW program, that the global talent stream represents.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Okay. Thank you.

What do you think this program means for the Canadian economy as a whole?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

If we're bringing in people to work for a short time, these are probably the best people in the world to do those jobs in the sense that they are helping Canadian companies scale, grow, launch their operations, export abroad, do research, hire more Canadians here, ultimately, and create more long-term economic growth.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Thank you.

Earlier, you surprised me a bit when you compared Canada's situation with that of the United States, specifically when it comes to very specialized workers, who are highly skilled. You said that they were, in a way, more attracted to the United States than to Canada. Knowing what's happening south of the border, I can say that's not what I've heard.

Explain to me what we should be changing. We've all heard comments about what's happening south of the border.

You talked about the situation, but can you explain to me a little more why it's like that?

What should we be doing to retain that talent?

[Laurent Carbonneau]

Sure.

I grew up in the United States. My parents are still there. In fact, one of them is returning to Canada this year. It's kind of for the reasons you mentioned.

Their economy is the biggest in the world. It's the richest consumer market in the world. It has the best universities and the deepest capital markets. I could go on.

[Linda Lapointe, Liberal, Rivière-des-Mille-Îles, QC]

Yes, but we have McGill University, the Université de Montréal and others.

[Laurent Carbonneau]

We have great universities—don't get me wrong—but density matters.

When we talk about talent, we're not taking seriously the reality that there is a very rich country right next to us that takes this very seriously. If the United States of America could be said to have had an industrial policy for the last 50 or 60 years, it's this: They've very wisely said, “If we take the world's best and brightest and give them the opportunity to build what they want, the rest will solve itself.” Do they still have problems? Yes, they do. However, we have to take very seriously the notion that we are competing with a country that sees attracting the world's best and brightest as a very high priority.

We're very quick to congratulate ourselves sometimes on how nice it is to be Canadian and to live in Canada. I love it here. I live here, but when people have the pick of the litter, when they're the best minds and can write a ticket to anywhere they want, are they going to pick Canada every time? Many people do.

We talk to our companies all the time, and we ask them, “Why are you building in Canada?” People ask them this all the time—it's not just us—because it would be easier to go elsewhere. They say, “It's important for me to do it here because my family is here. I care about my community. I care about my ecosystem.” That's great. That's a laudable sentiment and I'm really glad they do it, but I want the answer to be, “This is the best place on earth for me to grow my business and to grow it into what I want it to be, which is a global enterprise that employs thousands of people and creates tons of jobs.” That, to me, is what we're not quite getting in the conversation.