Public Accounts Committee on April 13th, 2010

[Neil Yeates]

We are very much taken with the importance of making sure that we effectively align the intake with job market needs. As you say—we would agree—that needs to be done in a timely way. So that is the system we're trying to get to. We have a significant backlog to deal with in the meantime, so we have to balance these two things.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you, Mr. Yeates.

Now, Madam Faille, seven minutes, please.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you for being here with the committee today. As you are no doubt aware, in a previous session, I sat on the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. I was always concerned about the department's statistics and the information given to your partners.

Until quite recently—and even last week—the available information that your partners use dated back a number of months. I file an access to information request and received a response. That response tells me that your outside clients, that is to say the partners you consult—as it says here that you conducted a broad consultation—work on the basis of information that dates back one year. They never have the most recent figures.

Can you explain to us why your partners are treated this way? You talk about an alignment between the needs expressed by your partners, and yet the information they receive from the department is always one year old?

[Neil Yeates]

Mr. Chairman, I can start to answer that.

We've started in CIC a process of releasing data quarterly to make it public. The first quarter for this year will be going out I believe next week. We're putting all of that information onto our website every three months. That's something we've just started. We agree that information needs to be available on a timely basis.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

That doesn't seem to be the criticism made. I'm talking here about a memo signed by Elizabeth Ruddick. It was sent to all departmental officials including yourself. At the very end, the memo states that, for all exceptions, that is to say distribution, posting of a portion of the 2008 figures, the minister's approval must be obtained before the figures are distributed.

Why don't you give your partners, the provinces, the most recent information?

The provinces can't work with what's on your website. You're asking your partners to consult the website and work with figures that are not up to date.

[Les Linklater, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I'll answer.

We have agreements with the provinces and territories for the exchange of information between them and CIC. Every three months, we exchange data with the provinces and territories.

With regard to the distribution of overall statistics on our website, as the deputy minister just mentioned, we recently received the minister's approval to develop a new system through which, every three months, we'll be posting up-to-date preliminary statistics for the previous three months.

So in this way we hope to be able to be more forthcoming in terms of having recent information on the website that will date for the most recent quarter. I believe the Privacy Commissioner is aware of this, and the Information Commissioner, and feel that this is an appropriate move.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

In the past, it has helped the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to know where the department was headed in terms of program management and analysis. In advance, we obtained a document, a follow-up table, in which we found the targets and backlogs by overseas office.

Would it be possible for you to provide us with that information? That would give us an overview of how the program is being applied at the various overseas offices and of the resources allocated to them. It would be a good idea to have an overview. The document exists—I was one of the analysts who developed it. I would like to get a copy of it. Is that fine with you? Yes?

[Neil Yeates]

I'm told that yes is the short answer to that.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

It's because if you nod your head, it doesn't appear in the blues. Thank you.

Immigration candidates are entitled to know how long it will take before their applications are processed. At our offices, we often receive complaints to the effect that they don't know how much time it will take. People are referred to your site.

We know the processing times for applications filed before February 2008 and those for applications filed after 2008. What alternative solutions do you propose for the applications processed before February 2008? If I look at your statistics, it will take nearly five years to process 80% of the cases submitted before February 27. Have you assessed the possibility of refunding the money that applicants have submitted and, if so, when?

[Neil Yeates]

Actually, we would like to make our way through the backlog as quickly as possible. We are sensitive to the time people are spending waiting. We are concerned about that.

At various times we have asked if people wanted to maintain their application or simply to receive a refund. Interestingly, most people do want to maintain their application, so we have to continue with the processing—but we do make that offer to them.

We have made good progress in the past 12 months. As I mentioned in my opening remarks, that backlog has been reduced by nearly 40%. So we'll see.

In the future it really will depend on getting out a new set of ministerial instructions and then how we balance these two things, the new applications versus the ones in the backlog. That's what we're working on now and what we're talking about to provinces, territories, and stakeholders.

[Meili Faille, Bloc, Vaudreuil—Soulanges, QC]

You seem to know where your backlogs stand, so can you give the committee those statistics as well? What is your strategy for the applications received before 2008? We know that those filed since 2008 are being processed quickly.

I have one final question. You state in your action plan that implementation of the computerized management system will stop during the year. Can you give us some details on that?

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

A brief response, please.

[Neil Yeates]

Yes, I can start off, Chair.

We are implementing a new case management system this spring. It's a system that's long been in gestation, so we're very pleased that it is finally moving forward. It's called the global case management system.

We have great expectations that it's going to allow us to manage much better our caseload around the world because it will allow cases to be processed from any office using this single system. So it's going to provide a platform for us, as I say, for workload sharing and more rapid processing. Offices and missions around the world deal with seasonal peaks and valleys in their work. In a paper-based system, it's not that easy to shift work around, but this new system will allow that to be done online, which is a huge step forward for us.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you.

Now to Mr. Christopherson, please, for seven minutes.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Thank you very much, Chair, and thank you all for your attendance today.

And, Mr. Flageole, congratulations on reaching the finish line. You certainly have been a prime example of the professionalism that comes out of the Auditor General's office. I'm getting worried. We haven't even got to the AG yet and we're losing all these great people. I hope there's a lot of concentrated effort to scouring the planet, trying to find somebody who can replace you and everyone else who's leaving this crucial department. I wish you the best of luck, Richard, and thank you for your contribution to our work and to the betterment of making this a better place to live. Thank you so much.

I want to move now to Mr. Yeates' opening comments. If I can, on page one, you said “It”--meaning the backlog--“now stands at less than 400,000 persons, a reduction of almost 40 percent from its peak of 641,000.” I would point out this still leaves you about where we were ten years ago; it was over 300,000; we're around that now, so it's good we're getting there, but your big achievement is we're now only ten years behind. To continue the quote:

Including the applications we received since the changes took effect, the number of applicants awaiting a decision is down 18 percent. Of the final decisions rendered since the Instructions took effect in November 2008, 80 percent have been completed in an average of seven months. This is compared to wait times of up to six years before the changes.

So one would be led to believe that once the instructions came along, things got significantly better. However, the Auditor General, in her statement this morning said:

In December 2008, more than 620,000 people had been waiting an average of 63 months for a decision on whether they would be granted permanent residency or not. Measures introduced through ministerial instructions in 2008 to limit the number of new applications--for example, processing only those that meet new or narrowly defined criteria--were not based on sufficient analysis of their potential effects.

These are the wonderful instructions that you're bragging about.

While it was too early to assess the full impact of these measures, trends in the number of new applications received between January and June 2009 indicated that the measures might not have the desired effect.

First of all, Auditor General, would you again explain, in other words, what your concern is about this? And then obviously, Deputy, I'm going to ask you to respond.

[Sheila Fraser]

Thank you, Chair.

Obviously, the department put in these ministerial instructions to try to limit the numbers of categories and so reduce the number of applications to be able to process them more quickly. The initial indications we saw were that there was not as significant a reduction in the number of applications as might have been expected, so there was a possibility that.... We talk about the backlog being pre-ministerial, but there is a possibility there will be a second backlog, because when you start with a new system, you can process the first application in a week. If we're already at seven months--and it would seem from the deputy's statement that a backlog is starting in the new system as well--the committee might want to ask how many applications have been received and how many have been processed and what the backlog is in the new system. I think that is what we were trying to get at; we didn't have a lot of time to show that, but that was our worry.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Okay, Mr. Yeates, consider yourself having been asked those three questions.

[Neil Yeates]

Thank you very much, Chair.

It was evident, and I think the Auditor General agrees with this, that we needed some mechanism to limit the intake of applications. Canada is a very popular destination for immigrants. Members may have seen the Gallup poll in the fall that indicated that, given the choice, some 45 million people around the world would like to move to Canada. It was the second most popular destination after the U.S. We don't have a shortage of people who want to come here. Our issue is how we manage that flow, and we need a system to do that.

I think we feel this first attempt at ministerial instruction, trying to limit the number of occupations we would accept, was a start, arguably imperfect, often as these first attempts are, but we definitely feel this is the right way to go. From here we've got two challenges, I think: further refining these instructions to give us a more targeted set of occupations than we had in the first 38. Our experience to date, that some of the particular occupations that were identified have proven to be very popular and likely more than we need to take in, in terms of the labour market assessment--

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

I don't want to be rude, sir, but could you get to the specific questions, please?

[Neil Yeates]

Yes. So what that leads us to is then refining a second set of instructions and at the same time tackling the backlog. For the inventory we have of new applications, we are processing those, about 80% of them in seven months. Our target had been six to 12 months, so we think we basically are on track there. We are ahead of schedule in terms of what we had thought we would be able to do in terms of dealing with the pre-instruction, the backlog.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Can you give us those numbers, though? That's what we're looking for, those numbers.

[Neil Yeates]

Yes. Rough numbers: we had about 641,000 applications in the pre-instruction backlog. We're down to 400,000 now. That's quite a bit more than we had thought.

Then in terms of the new intake, we're at about, as of the end of December last year, 129,000 new applications.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

Auditor General, what are your thoughts on the implications of those numbers, now that we've heard them?

[Sheila Fraser]

I think there's an issue about the processing time for the new applications, because as there are more and more applications, the length of time is going to expand. When you start from zero, your processing time can be quite quick.

I think the issue is how narrowly to define. There probably has to be additional refinement—which is what I think the deputy minister is referring to—in those job categories, to limit them even further. We would hope that this time there would be more analysis to support that narrowing.

[David Christopherson, NDP, Hamilton Centre, ON]

So we need more analysis, and it needs to be timely. We cannot wait too long.