Official Languages Committee on Oct. 24th, 2006

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Minister, Mr. Godin, thank you both.

Mr. Sweet.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Mr. Solberg, thank you for your presentation.

On the public record, I want to thank you also for your and the department's hard work. We've interacted a lot.

My riding, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, is part of the amalgamated greater city of Hamilton. I'm not certain why, maybe because we have two universities and one of the largest colleges in the country, but we get a large population of immigrants and refugees. So I want to thank you for your work.

We also have an organization, whose executive director will be happy that I'm sitting in on this meeting today, called CESO, which is a settlement organization in Hamilton. It is quite a sophisticated organization, with a large staff and a large volunteer component as well. They're very frugal, do very good work. I had a meeting with them almost directly after the election and saw the great operation they have, everything from helping immigrants do résumés, to helping find other services so that they cannot only settle in the community but can be contributing citizens in the community as well.

They've had a number of concerns. One of them was the fact that their funding was frozen. Now we've made some promises, but there's some concern as to whether that reserve will continue to be there, the history of which I don't know because I was only elected on January 23. Therefore, I have something of a multi-faceted question for you.

Number one, why was that funding frozen and when? As to the resources that are flowing now, can I give them some assurance that it's going to continue? I think that funding has been alluded to already, but for the record, will that $307 million that you mentioned also get into the francophone communities?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Well, thank you for the question.

First of all, I've met with CESO a couple of times. Let me say about settlement agencies in general, I'm always impressed. The people who work in settlement agencies work there because they want to make a difference. They don't work there to make much money, because they don't. Many of them, of course, volunteer, and they do an outstanding job. I always feel that when we give them a dollar, we get $3 or $4 worth of value in return. They're great organizations.

The settlement funding was frozen when the previous government was dealing with the deficit issue. It was never really substantially raised after that. The result has been that there have been long line-ups for language training, long line-ups for career training and those kinds of things, and we've seen outcomes for newcomers drop dramatically. In 1980, the average newcomer, one year after arriving here, had an income 25% higher than the Canadian average. Today, they have an income 32% lower than the Canadian average. So we have to do more in terms of ensuring that they get the skills they need, the training they need, and that's what those settlement dollars will do.

There will be announcements very soon regarding how that money will be allocated, but it will mean dramatic increases for all provinces. I'm excited about that. I think this is a sector where people have toiled for a long time, again with scarce resources, trying to do the best they can, and now they'll have some money to really do what is their life's work and help people get the skills they need so they're not isolated, so they can integrate and get the jobs. That's exciting to me. So you can pass that message along.

Of course, in a province like Ontario, where we have a very substantial francophone community, francophone settlement agencies and groups will see a big increase in the funding they get. Actually, in Ontario, CIC has a very direct say in how funding is allocated, but we take input from settlement agencies and obviously from the Province of Ontario.

Yes, there will be substantial increases in funding for all settlement agencies.

[David Sweet, Conservative, Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Westdale, ON]

Good. Thank you, Mr. Minister.

If I have any time left, I'll be glad to share it with my colleagues.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Two minutes left.

[Pierre Lemieux, Conservative, Glengarry—Prescott—Russell, ON]

Okay, I'll ask a question.

Minister, I'm interested in the provincial nominee program. I don't know much about it. I wonder if you can explain it to me, what the aim of it is, how it's being applied by the provinces, by us.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

The provincial nominee program is a program whereby the provinces can set the criteria for bringing people to their province to ultimately become permanent residents. The federal government still maintains a role. We still have a role to make sure that people meet the standards with regard to criminality, security, and health, but beyond that, the provinces really get to set the criteria.

The most successful province so far in employing the provincial nominee program is Manitoba. Manitoba last year brought in 4,600 people under their provincial nominee program, versus my province of Alberta at 611, and I think B.C. had 800. So Manitoba is very aggressive, and they do a number of things with it. They use it to target a couple of specific groups that are already established in Manitoba, in particular the Filipino community. They have a population in Winnipeg, in particular, so they reach out to the Philippines and say, “Come here. We'll find you a job. We have a welcoming community you can step right into.”

Also, there's a large Mennonite community, of course, in Manitoba, so they use that to reach out to Germany, particularly, and bring people very often into rural communities in Manitoba--Steinbach, and places like this.

They have different streams. They have a family stream, a community stream, and a business stream. If you have family members you want to bring in, or a particular community needs someone--maybe it's a doctor, for instance--or there are business people looking for employees of a type, then they can nominate these people, and then once they are approved by the province, they come in and away they go.

It's been extraordinarily successful, and we're hoping that other provinces use it more aggressively.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

We will have a second round starting with Mr. Rodriguez.

You have five minutes.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Given that there are only two rounds, I will share my time with my colleague, Mr. Dhaliwal.

Good morning, and welcome to you all.

I would like to understand your overall approach. Can you tell me whether you, personally as Minister, believe that linguistic duality is an asset for Canada? Is it essential to the national identity of this country?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Well, it is such an important part of what the country is, and the value of our linguistic duality can't be overstated. I tried to make that point in my opening remarks. Canada is a great country, in part, because of its tremendous past and the fact that we were founded by these two great peoples, and now we want to perpetuate that. I think it's a great strength of our country, no question.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

In drafting your strategic plan, did you consult immigrant groups who have had real experience?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

The groups we consulted and that are part of the steering committee are the francophone minority communities themselves. They include obviously many immigrants as well.

Yes, in fact, these groups really drive the strategy. They're the ones we rely on to come up with ideas to bring people to francophone minority communities, and then once they're there, to retain them, because the concern is that they'll drift away, particularly to large cities.

[Pablo Rodriguez, Liberal, Honoré-Mercier, QC]

You say that you want to support the host communities in their reception services for immigrants. They must be given the tools to develop themselves. On page 9 of your plan, you state:

the Strategic Plan recommends supporting the communities at risk to support French-speaking refugees in the following ways:

Then you talk about immediate reception and emergency settlement services. Then you specifically mention—it is a separate point—legal support. I am wondering if the plan suggests that legal support will be given.

How do you reconcile that with the elimination of the Court Challenges Program?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I would say, in answer to that, we're talking about two different types of legal assistance. That said, on the court challenges program, our approach is to make sure that the laws we introduce are actually constitutional.

I think the more important point I would make is that very often the court challenges program was used to fight for services in francophone communities. We're spending $307 million in the next two years to provide those services. So I would argue that the $5 million that is being reduced for the court challenges program will be more than overcome by the $307 million we're putting into settlement services to actually provide the very services the court challenges program was used to fight for. So I think we're going way beyond what would be available through fighting through the courts with the court challenges program.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much.

Mr. Dhaliwal, your colleague was not very gracious in welcoming you here. He leaves you with one minute.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Welcome, Minister, and thank you for sharing your views with us.

I will carry on with Mr. Godin's question. Credential recognition is a big problem. We can't solve this in one minute here, of course, but particularly you've mentioned that Quebec is bringing in something about the doctors. It is not only the immigrants; in fact, I see Canadian-born students are going abroad to acquire qualifications and then they come back.

The biggest problem we have is the residency spots; it's not the training. I have travelled across Europe, where my daughter is taking a degree in medicine as well.

How would you particularly work to create those residency spots?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I think you're right. First of all, it is very complicated. There are no simple answers, but part of it is to make sure that this does not become an issue where we're pitting the federal government against the provinces and against the professional bodies. It is in all of our interests to fix this problem. As Mr. Godin pointed out, we have, on the one hand, people who have tremendous skills--medical skills, for instance--who are driving cabs, and on the other hand, a shortage of doctors in the country. The only thing that prevents them from practising are some artificial barriers. In some cases, they are barriers that were set up perhaps in the past to protect some of these professions. That's not a good enough reason to bar people from entry into these fields.

In other cases, they may be well-meaning barriers that are designed to ensure that people meet a certain standard, but if that's the case, then we all have an obligation, at every level of government and in the professional bodies, to find a way to help people who already have tremendous skills and lots of training to overcome those barriers.

That's what has happened to some degree in Quebec, and I think my job, in part, along with Minister Finley, who is taking the lead on credentials recognition, is to work with the provinces and the professional bodies and convince them that this has to become a very high priority.

Health care, as you know, when you talk to people, is one of the biggest priorities people have. I think we're getting close to the point where the public is starting to really understand what's going on here, which is that we have doctors who aren't practising and we have people who go without doctors. It's a good opportunity, frankly, for federal and provincial politicians to finally say we have the public behind us to tackle this big problem. So I'm hoping that's what we can do in the days and weeks ahead, with the help of my colleagues on all sides of the House.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Thank you very much, Mr. Minister.

Ms. Boucher, you have the floor.

[Sylvie Boucher, Conservative, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Solberg. Your appearance here this morning has answered some of my questions. We know that you work in co-operation with several entities, such as the provinces, the territories and communities.

Can you tell us how the strategic plan was received by the communities, the provinces and the territories? Are these people ready to work with us?

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Actually the plan was received very well. I think again of Manitoba. When we launched the plan in Manitoba, it might have been somewhat counterintuitive given that we have an NDP government in Manitoba and a Conservative government in Ottawa, but we get along extraordinarily well. I think the reason for that is that there really is a genuine desire on all sides to make this work, and both sides can see that already this strategic plan is making a difference and there are some very positive initiatives coming out of the plan. Now, with the new settlement funding, they see that we're prepared to put some substantial resources behind it to really make it work. That has been my experience wherever we go.

We have a new government now in New Brunswick, and I'm looking forward to meeting with my counterpart there. But I think New Brunswick is ideally placed to take advantage of the strategic plan, especially, again, with the new resources that go with it. This is a wonderful opportunity to take the strategic plan, where we were promoting francophone minority communities outside of Quebec, and now to say, not only is this a good place to come to because French is spoken in these communities, but we also have the resources now to welcome people and to provide them with the training they need to integrate into this new Canadian culture.

So it has been extraordinarily well received, and even in B.C., where I met with the francophone federation, it's going over extraordinarily well.

[The Chair, Conservative, Guy Lauzon]

Ms. Brunelle, you may ask the next question.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Solberg.

I appreciate your presentation, particularly since you face a considerable challenge, as far as I can see. You said that you must attract immigrants, and obviously keep them, help them fit in and encourage them. I think that sums things up quite well.

At the end of your presentation, you said: "Everything we do to make Canada more attractive to immigrants will also make Canada more attractive to francophone immigrants."

That is true, but it seems a little short to me. I think that you wanted to summarize things for us. Having worked a great deal on the preservation of French in Quebec, I am wondering if you should not plan for some kind of coordination. In fact, we know that in order to keep people in communities, so that they can speak French in communities outside Quebec, it takes more than just a critical mass. To preserve the language, first there is the issue of the language of work, then education in French, health care and perhaps a family reunification program.

Do you not think that in order to achieve your goal of 4.4 per cent, you will have to try and coordinate things? Perhaps you are already doing so. Talk to me a little about this, please.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

It is important to forge alliances with communities within Quebec. Of course, even today, to some degree, that happens naturally. When people immigrate to Quebec, just like in every province and every community, a number of people don't stay in Quebec. They will come there initially and then they will go to other provinces. This is something that occurs quite naturally in every province. To some degree, that happens already, where someone will come and become established for a year or two in Montreal or Quebec, and then move to wherever, to Moncton or to St. Boniface, or perhaps to somewhere outside of a francophone community.

There's no doubt we need to take advantage of the expertise we have in Quebec, and of course, also just the sheer numbers.... Although that is to some degree beyond my area of expertise, it's clearly a part of what has to happen to make sure those communities remain strong.

Again, by ensuring that we have settlement funding in all these communities, that we provide resources for training and all these other things that are so important, it's my view that this can only help ensure we retain people in these communities and that these communities do get that critical mass. As I point out, even in my little community of Brooks, where there was really no francophone presence...except for me, of course, in my ability to speak French so well...before we had a large number of immigrants there was nothing, and now we do have the Association francophone de Brooks, and that's great. Hopefully we can see more of that because of both labour situations that attract people and also because we provide the resources.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

I believe that you are quite right when you talk about critical mass, but I am worried. When I think about critical mass, I also think about ghettos.

We saw the integration difficulties they had in France. Because of its geographical position, France had to integrate a very large number of immigrants, and this created pockets of tension. I do not have a question on this subject, but I would like to make a comment. I think that a critical mass may be necessary, but you have to be careful. In order for this to work well, there has to be a will to integrate large groups of francophones outside Quebec.

[Monte Solberg, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

I think one of the most important differences between Canada and so much of Europe in general is that when people come to Canada as immigrants, we make it clear that we want them to ultimately be citizens. Over 85% of people who come to Canada ultimately become citizens.

When we make it clear, I think we state both implicitly and explicitly that we expect people to accept core Canadian values. Yes, we are a country of many cultures and many languages. But it will always work as long as we accept some core values beneath that, which it rests on, such as mutual respect for other religions, other beliefs, and other languages. If people buy into that, we can then have a very pluralistic society, and it will all work, as citizens.

I think a big key difference between us and Europe is that we have the expectation of becoming citizens, and in many places they don't have that expectation. In fact, being a citizen is very difficult in many European countries, and in some cases it is almost impossible for people to attain.