Mr. Speaker, I would like to make a few comments on the immigration levels that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration has just tabled before the House under the Immigration Act.
The minister has announced to us that Canada will take in next year a total of 195,000 to 220,000 immigrants and refugees, that is, between 171,000 and 187,000 immigrants and between 24,000 and 32,000 refugees.
He has just mentioned the efforts that Canada is making in favour of refugees. I have taken note of the fact that we have made some efforts regarding nationals from the former Yugoslavia. I would also like the minister to make additional efforts in the case of other countries and other continents, particularly in assisting women and children in distress. I think that we should put an emphasis on women and children in distress, who represent the majority of refugees in the world. Quebec will accept 27,000 immigrants and refugees next year, a quota that was established by the province in accordance with the Canada-Quebec agreement.
We generally agree with the number determined by the minister and his government. In fact, it is almost the same plan as the one he submitted to us last year, except for slight changes. The first change is a small increase of 5,000 new immigrants; the second one is that 3,500 immigrants who are subject to a removal order that is not yet in effect will be admitted for humanitarian reasons; the third change is that a new category has been established, that is, candidates sponsored by a province or a territory. A thousand new immigrants are expected in this category.
The minister has just shown his willingness to work in partnership with the provinces and the territories, but he only foresees 1,000 immigrants for the nine provinces and the two territories. That is not much. That is not a serious effort of decentralization and co-operation with the provinces. We know that the provinces, except Quebec, which already has very definite powers in that field, are also asking for powers concerning immigration. Manitoba and Saskatchewan come to mind, in this regard.
The Minister's 1994 figures indicated Canada would receive between 190,000 and 215,000 immigrants in 1995. In fact, for the first eight months of this year, Canada has had only 132,000 new immigrants. I estimate that the total will not exceed 200,000 by the end of this year.
It must be pointed out that potential immigrants are less attracted to Canada, particularly those from many Asian countries. Many naturally prefer to go to the U.S. or Australia, or other countries with a high rate of economic growth. This is the case despite the considerable Canadian government investments in advertising, promotion and the recruiting of new immigrants in many countries.
The greatest obstacle, however, without a doubt for new immigrants is the $975 entry tax on top of the $500 up front processing fee. This tax represents an enormous barrier to people from poor countries.
In addition to setting immigration quotas, the minister ought to have announced measures to reduce delays in processing immigration files. Despite some efforts by the minister, which I am prepared to acknowledge, an application for permanent residence in Canada sometimes takes 18 months or more. So refugees who have been here a year or two awaiting refugee status have to wait another year or more to gain resident status, when they can bring in their spouse and children. It is inhumane to keep families apart for such long periods of time. The minister will have to take the appropriate steps on this.
I would also like to denounce the abusive use of DNA testing to prove parent-child relationships. Many members of the Haitian community in my riding of Bourassa, in Montreal North and in all of Montreal complain that departmental employees, particularly in the Canadian embassy in Port-au-Prince, require tests which they feel are discriminatory.
I should add that a DNA test costs $1,000 and, naturally, they often cannot afford it. It should be enough to present a birth certificate to prove kinship.
I would like the minister to tell us what justification there can be for this to be made a practice of in the case of Haitians. Why are European immigrants not subject to the same requirement, except in rare instances? These measures often work against the family reunification program just mentioned by the minister as being a priority for this government.
I would like to talk about the immigration tax in particular. Since its implementation in the last federal budget, the Bloc Quebecois has repeatedly expressed its opposition to this tax, and has opposed this $975 fee immigrants and refugees have to pay to become landed immigrants.
Numerous organizations in Quebec and in Canada have condemned this discriminatory measure and have campaigned against it. Last October 28, which was the national day against the head tax, the Montreal refugee services organisations round table reiterated its opposition to the settlement fees for refugees, immigrants and their families. This very respectable organization said this tax imposed an intolerable and discriminatory burden on these people.
Canada is the only country in the world which has decided to impose such fees on refugees recognized as such under the Geneva Convention. It should be pointed out that the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees has voiced very serious concerns about this dangerous precedent.
Bob White, the president of the Canadian Labour Congress, said that the head tax is basically contrary to Canadian values of equity, equality and progress.
He added that rich immigrants are able to pay this tax, but that most African, Asian or Latin-American people who want to immigrate to Canada or come as refugees cannot afford to do so. I seize this opportunity to ask the Minister why the number of immigrants and refugees from Latin America keeps on getting smaller year after year. For a number of years now, it has been almost impossible to come to Canada from Latin America.
The loans system established to help those who have to pay this tax did not work. A moment ago, an official told us they have no way to assess the impact of this tax abroad. A lot of loan requests are rejected because the candidate will not have the money to repay the loan.
Once again, I ask the minister to put an end to this tax, at least for refugees. I remind him that even some of his Liberal colleagues made such a request regarding refugees. My wife, my two children and I came from Chile in 1974. If we had had over $4,000 to pay in landing fees in order to have our application examined by immigration authorities, we would never have been able to come.
Worse still, all the money collected, estimated at $146 million for 1995, goes into general revenue instead of being used for settlement services for immigrants. Of course, despite the immigration tax which, as I just said, will bring in $146 million in 1995, the transfer of responsibilities to NGOs for immigration and integration of new arrivals will mean a drastic reduction in funds and services.
Already, hundreds of civil servants have lost their jobs with the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. In 1996 alone, the government will cut the number of civil servants by 20 per cent at headquarters and in the regions. Once again, I denounce these massive cuts of civil servants.
In short, I am asking the minister to pay more attention to the reports issued by the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. It has issued several reports which were tabled in this House, but we never had any feedback from the minister. Although many witnesses have come before the committee and much effort was spent on this, the minister has not bothered to respond to these reports.
I will conclude by saying that the minister should take additional measures to launch an education and awareness campaign, directed at the Canadian people, on the contributions and other positive influence of immigrants in our society.