Debates of Feb. 8th, 2024

Opposition Motion—Federal Immigration Targets

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

On a point of order, the hon. member for Vancouver East.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Madam Speaker, the member is categorically wrong to suggest that I did not raise any concerns with the government's immigration policies—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Unfortunately, that is a point of debate.

The hon. member for Calgary Shepard.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, I did say that she bears responsibility with voting on every single confidence motion and every single confidence measure in the House, and so she does bear responsibility for decisions made by this government. She is supporting the spending, she is supporting the employment, she is supporting the number it is hiring and how it is handling the files. That is what I am saying.

The member wants to debate pre-2015 and what our previous Conservative government did. We have nine years of a Liberal government's tenure in office. We have two immigration ministers fighting it out in public, one saying it is out of control and one saying it is a mess. I rarely hear that member in committee side with the Conservatives who are trying to advocate for people and trying to find a solution to some of these problems. So, I am just calling her out here. I am trying to bear out on the public record what I see happening on the immigration committee and what I see happening in the House of Commons.

[An hon. member]

Oh, oh!

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

In the last couple of questions that I have allotted, after members have asked their questions, they seem to want to ask other questions. I would just ask them to wait until the appropriate time to do that as opposed to trying to interrupt the member.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Calgary Shepard for his intervention and for his sensitivity on this issue. I think he made a number of important distinctions.

He mentioned a few times that the government was not facing up to its responsibilities and was shirking its duty. I would like to ask him a straightforward question, and I hope he can offer some clarity.

First, will the Conservative Party support the Bloc Québécois's motion? Second, as a shadow minister in the shadow cabinet of the member for Carleton, will he agree not to abide by McKinsey's goal of reaching a population of 100 million by 2100?

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, concerning the first part of my colleague's question, it depends. I know that this is not the answer he was hoping for. However, it depends. We will see how the debate unfolds.

As for the second part of his question, as the member knows, we Conservatives voted in favour of the Bloc Québécois's motion on the Century Initiative. At the time, we voted with the Bloc Québécois and the other opposition parties in the House.

I think that answers his question.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, I want to focus on the time I was in opposition when we had a Conservative government and on another program where the member says that Conservatives did not have backlogs. I recall the backlog for experienced workers that got so long that Minister Kenney, as opposed to dealing with it, literally hit the delete button, and hundreds of thousands of people who were in the stream were deleted out of the system.

I think Canadians need to be aware that the Conservative common-sense approach is to the detriment of the long-term healthy immigration policy. We have seen a number of areas where processing times are far better than what they were in the Conservative era.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member is wrong. When the Paul Martin government was defeated in 2006 and a new Conservative government took over, it took a few years to realize that, in fact, there was a six million to eight million application backlog created by previous Liberal governments.

At that time, the decision was made to reset the system to zero, because there was no way to fix it. Liberal governments, from the 1990s to the early 2000s, had basically broken the immigration system, like they have broken the immigration system today.

The decision was taken to return people's money and their applications, to restart the system at zero. That was their fault.

Let us talk numbers. I have the numbers for 2015. In 2015, according to IRCC, study permits took 31 days to process. Work permits took 42 days to process. Temporary resident visas took 13 days to process.

In April 2023, study permits took 88 days to process. Work permits took 62 days to process. Temporary resident visas took 72 days to process. Those are bigger numbers than the first ones.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague has outlined some of the failures of the Liberal government in terms of huge backlogs in almost every area.

I think it is important to point out, as well, the types of people who are being allowed in. We are talking about needing to build homes, but the numbers of construction workers are low. Meanwhile, there is an open door at Pearson airport, where people can just show up and claim refugee status.

[Tom Kmiec, Conservative, Calgary Shepard, AB]

Madam Speaker, the member for Sarnia—Lambton is correct. I asked the government to tell me how many construction workers were brought in through all immigration streams under the different NOC codes. The minister claimed that he was not the minister responsible for NOC codes.

It is about 4,500 per year since 2016. We have a shortage of 100,000 residential construction workers just in Ontario. They are not going to meet their targets, because it has not been their focus area.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Madam Speaker, I wish to inform the House that I will be sharing my time with my wonderful colleague from Vancouver East. I also want to note that the representative from the Conservative Party did not answer her very good question whatsoever. The Conservative Party seems to want to hide its intentions when it comes to immigration objectives. Other than fine speeches, the official opposition remains vague and is kind of playing secretive games. I think it is a shame that my colleague from Vancouver East did not get the response she was entitled to when she asked a very simple and very direct question to the representative of the Conservative Party.

Today's debate is an important discussion that sometimes gets people, the media and certain columnists worked up. It is an entirely legitimate question on the type of society we want to build, the type of welcoming nation we want to be, the economic development we want to have and the contribution of people who want to come share their life here, with us, in Quebec or in Canada.

There is a joke I have been making for some time. Obviously, Quebec and Canada are lands of immigration. I myself am a 13th-generation immigrant. The first one came in the late 17th century. His name was Jean, and he was a potter, a “turner” to the king. Incidentally, the name Boulerice was not written that way at the time; initially, it was a Breton name spelled as two words.

I think we need to continue this tradition of integration and of welcoming people that we have had for centuries. However, it has to be done well and in a positive way. It must also be done with a positive eye to the contribution of all those who, for various reasons, want to come and settle here in the hope of a better life, to seek protection or to flee persecution, or to hope for better things for their children and families.

These are people who work extremely hard and contribute to our development and economic activity in extraordinary and wonderful ways. According to recent statistics, 33% of recent immigrants start their own small businesses when they arrive here, and then hire people who have sometimes been here longer. These are entrepreneurs and job creators, people who also contribute to various sectors of our society.

Twenty percent of immigrants are working in the construction industry. We are in the midst of a housing crisis, and these people are coming here to work. Yes, they live in houses and apartments, but they are also going to build houses and apartment buildings. One in five immigrants works in construction. That is a lot, and it is important to point that out.

A total of 1.6 million immigrants across the country are working in our health care system. They are caring for our friends, our parents and our grandparents, for people in Canada who are sick. That is an huge number.

When we talk about immigration levels and immigration capacity, we need to look at it from that perspective. Immigration is not only positive, but it is necessary for our economy.

Most of the chambers of commerce are saying that there is a labour shortage in Quebec and that we need hands and minds to join our workforce. It is not every day that members will hear a New Democrat quoting chambers of commerce, but the NDP agrees that this is what is needed. The need for workers is being felt throughout Montreal and the regions of Quebec. Businesses want to do more and take on more contracts. They want to undertake new projects, but they need workers to be able to do so. We therefore need to be able to welcome immigrants and welcome them properly.

I will say right off the top that I have no idea if Quebec should welcome 50,000, 70,000 or 35,000 economic migrants. I am not an immigration expert, demographer or economist. It all depends on the context, our needs and whether we can properly welcome and integrate them. Once again, the notion of integration capacity is very vague.

Obviously, we are in the middle of the housing crisis right now. Our public services are feeling the pressure. The community groups that work with those immigrants and refugees are feeling the pressure. We need to acknowledge that, but closing the door to immigrants is not necessarily the answer, because that would cause collateral damage to our economic development and to our SMEs and businesses that need those people. We need a tailored response that is smart and, most importantly, based on evidence and reality. We do not need speeches that can sometimes be quite discriminatory or xenophobic towards the people who come here.

This happens on a fairly regular basis with some columnists, and it seems to me a terrible shame that immigrants are being singled out and blamed for things like the housing crisis. It is utterly ridiculous. How dare we blame today's immigrants for our inaction over the past 30 years on building affordable and social housing? How dare we tell immigrants that they stopped us from building social housing over the past 30 years? They came here and they want to participate, start a family and send their children to school and university. This housing crisis is the outcome of inaction by Liberal and Conservative governments in recent years. The housing crisis existed before these immigrants and temporary migrant workers arrived here to work and make a contribution. For some columnists to point fingers and blame them is irresponsible, discriminatory and misguided.

The federal Liberal government stopped investing in social and co-operative housing in 1994, and that is when the problem started. Then the Harper government made it even worse. That is a fact.

The reality on the ground today is that the vacancy rate is 1.5% in Montreal, which gets a lot of newcomers and immigrants, and 0% in Rimouski. The housing shortage is worse in Rimouski than in Montreal, and it is not because Rimouski gets a lot more immigrants per capita than Montreal.

It is important to set the record straight. NDP members think it is important to be able to do that. My colleague, the member for Vancouver East, will share some constructive suggestions later on that will enable us to examine every aspect and every nuance of this issue. Quebec's former immigration minister said that immigrants do not want to integrate, do not want to speak French and do not want to work. Let us stop saying that. It is not true.

I live in Montreal. There are a lot of newcomers who work extremely hard. They all work extremely hard. They want to build a new life here in Quebec. They make an absolutely extraordinary contribution. They want to learn French. The problem is that there are not enough teachers. There are not enough French training services. The wait lists for French classes are endless. Part of the reason is that the Government of Quebec is not using the funding it is given by the federal government to help immigrants learn French. It uses it for other things, but that is another debate. Still, saying that these newcomers, these workers, do not want to integrate, do not want to contribute and do not want to speak French is not only shameful and irresponsible, but it is also completely false when we look at what is actually happening.

Last Friday, I had the opportunity to meet with representatives of an organization in Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie called the Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes. They made the same observation that we need these people. The debate about the number is a bit of a distortion in itself, but the reality is that these groups that help these people settle and manage the administrative tasks with the schools and hospitals are overwhelmed and do not have the resources they need. That is where our governments, here in Ottawa and in Quebec City, must do more to support those people on the ground, who are there to ensure good integration and who are able to do so. Our capacity to welcome immigrants relies heavily on these community groups that do not have enough and are overworked at this time. They themselves are telling us that it is not because there are too many immigrants, it is because they do not have the human and financial resources to do a good job.

We need to build more housing; that is true. We need to build social and affordable housing. However, I think we have to look at the next logical step. Immigrants did not cause the housing crisis. Immigrants should be welcomed by us, whether they are asylum seekers, refugees or economic immigrants, who are selected by the Government of Quebec, by the way, with points for knowledge of French. Let us do better.

I look forward to questions from my colleagues. I will be pleased to provide answers.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague from Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie talked about the community organizations that work very hard to help newcomers integrate.

Granby is a welcoming place, and I am very proud of that. I am in regular contact with Solidarité ethnique régionale de la Yamaska, the organization responsible for integrating these folks. Its staff make an incredible contribution to that community back home. I commend them for their work, but they are definitely overwhelmed.

I would like to come back to another point on which I wish I could agree with him. We in the Bloc Québécois, including myself and my colleague from Lac-Saint-Jean, do not want to start a war of numbers. We merely want to talk about the issue and have a discussion that is calm and as respectful as possible.

What does my colleague think about the issue of international students and the immigration minister's idea to lower these thresholds? On the ground, if there is one thing that people in our communities and in the schools are telling us, it is that these students are part of our community. They are the lifeblood of our post-secondary institutions. Indeed, the immigration minister would be hitting the wrong targets by limiting the number of international students.

I would like to hear my colleague's thoughts on that.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague and I commend the organizations in her riding that work hard to integrate people who arrive there.

That is an excellent question. It is a very complex file. Sometimes there is a tendency to mix apples, oranges and bananas. There are different types of immigrants: economic immigrants, refugees, family members and students. There are also temporary foreign workers. We have not talked about them, but there is a large number of them in Quebec and they are very much needed in many sectors. Of course we think about agriculture, but this can also be in processing, slaughterhouses, and also the health sector. These people are sometimes stuck with closed permits and that creates a host of problems.

There is no doubt that foreign students also make an economic contribution: They spend money here, they work here too. Sometimes, they stay here and share their talents with us. Wanting to reduce their numbers at any cost might hurt our universities. It is a significant source of revenue. If the universities need these foreign students, who pay a lot to come study here, it may be because they are chronically underfunded as a result of the cuts the federal government made for years.

We need to invest in student housing and in our universities. Foreign students must not become scapegoats when they want to benefit from the expertise and knowledge our universities have to offer.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pick up on the exchange that just took place. When we talk about cutting the number of international students, my biggest concern, quite frankly, is the exploitation of international students. That particular program has led to exploitation because provinces and post-secondary education facilities have not stepped up to the plate when they should have.

We are talking about hundreds of thousands of international students every year. The federal government needs to step in more because we have seen neglect at other levels. As a result of the current minister getting more directly involved and putting in a cap, we are going to prevent the exploitation of potential international students. We need to continue with that.

Would my colleague across the way not agree that the federal government needs to continue to work with other jurisdictions and be sensitive to the issue of international students? It is not as simple as saying that we need to cut the numbers.

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, rarely have I been so taken aback.

It is not by preventing them from coming here that we will protect foreign students. We need to prevent their exploitation.

If my Liberal Party colleague is serious about stopping exploitation, he should look at what is happening to temporary foreign workers who truly are being exploited and are not protected by the Liberal government. He should look at closed permits. How is it that his government continues to issue closed permits that mean workers cannot change jobs or employers, and are subjected to pressure, abuse, harassment and assault? These workers have to keep their mouths shut or get shipped home.

The Liberal government offers temporary foreign workers nothing but empty rhetoric.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the logic of Liberal members is to blame the victim. They are subject to exploitation, so they blame them and stop them from coming. That is their logic.

To the point about migrant workers, many migrant workers come to Canada and are subject to exploitation, yet the government will not give them landed status on arrival, which would allow them have full status and protection. Would the member call on the government to stop the exploitation by ensuring migrant workers get full status upon arrival?

[Alexandre Boulerice, NDP, Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie, QC]

Mr. Speaker, my colleague is absolutely right. If we are serious about giving rights to temporary migrant workers who come here and protecting them, we have to be able to change how things are done.

These people have no status and are at risk. In two of the immigration minister's mandate letters, the Liberal government promised a process to regularize the status of undocumented workers. He has done nothing. Meanwhile, people are being exploited before our eyes, in our country, even as we say we respect workers' rights.

It is disgraceful.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to enter into this debate today, and of course we are talking about newcomers. We are talking about the capacity for Quebec, and other provinces and territories, to successfully resettle newcomers. We are talking about the federal government needing to properly consult Quebec, other provinces and territories on Canada's immigration targets. All of that is absolutely valid, and we should be engaging in that discussion.

I want to point out very clearly that we just heard the government's parliamentary secretary blame the victims. The Liberals' approach is to say that we have too many newcomers, and they have decided to first pick on international students and put a cap on the number of international students. They claim that they are doing that because they want to protect them from exploitation. I do not know in what universe it is normal to actually say it is the victims' fault. It reminds me of old debates, back in the day, when women facing domestic violence were being blamed. The women facing violence were being blamed, not the abusers, and that is absolutely shameful.

Now we have Conservative members saying that they have a common-sense approach, and that they are so good and love newcomers. They were specifically asked the clear question of whether they would reduce the immigration target numbers. Did they answer the question? No, they did not. They will not answer questions clearly. They speak in euphemisms and slang. They talk in such a way that they can make a clip out of it, but they do not actually answer the question. They will say that we should not look at their record and that it was so long ago. My goodness, the record of who one is stands for what one believes in and where one's values are.

Let us be clear. For the immigrant community, the refugee community, the Conservatives brought in cessation laws so that refugees facing persecution would not be allowed to return to their country of origin, and if they did, they would lose their Canadian status. This is even in the cases where the threat that caused them to flee their country of origin no longer exists, even if they want to go back to visit a dying loved one. If they were to return, they would be subject to cessation and lose their status in Canada.

This is the Conservatives' record. The current leader of the Conservatives was part of the administration that oversaw all of this, and he agreed with it. As well, on the Conservatives' record on how they treat immigrant communities, they brought in a law that second-generation Canadians born abroad would no longer be allowed to pass on their Canadian citizenship to their children. In Ontario, families brought this to court, and the Ontario court found it to be unconstitutional. This is the result of the Conservatives' record.

Conservatives want to talk about what a great job they did in dealing with backlogs. I still remember back in 2015, when I was first elected, and I came to the House and was the NDP immigration critic, which I continue to be. One of the first issues people brought to my attention was the long delay in the processing of spousal reunification. Family members told stories of how much pain and suffering they had had to endure as a result of the separation because of 10 years of the Harper administration. According to the Conservatives, we are to just forget about that and pretend it did not happen.

Let us just be clear about where Conservatives stand and what their record has been. I could go on for days about that, but I only have 10 minutes for this entire speech, and I want to spend a bit of time talking about the value of newcomers and how they contribute to Canada. Their being here helps to fill the gaps that exist in the labour force. They pay their taxes and support our local economy. Just to be clear on the demographics of things—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I believe we have a point of order from the hon. member for Miramichi—Grand Lake.

[Jake Stewart, Conservative, Miramichi—Grand Lake, NB]

Mr. Speaker, I worry the member speaking forgets it is actually the Liberal government that is in power. For eight years—

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

I appreciate the intervention, but that is debate.

The hon. member for Vancouver East has the floor.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the contributions from newcomers are significant. There are 1.6 million newcomers and immigrants engaged in the health care sector at a time when we have a significant skilled labour shortage in the health care sector. They are doctors, nurses and care aids. They are the people who care for us when we are sick and who care for our families when we need them the most. During COVID, they were there, risking their lives to take care of our loved ones.

Who else are newcomers? They are people who help build houses. Of the immigrant community, 20% are engaged in the construction sector where we need them to build the infrastructure and to build the houses we desperately need. They are people who put food on our tables. They are people who do the farming work where there is a significant skilled labour shortage. I can go on about their contributions, so I will say this: When Canada is faced with a housing crisis, do not blame the immigrant community. Do not blame the migrant workers. They are not at fault.

Who is at fault? It is the successive Liberal and the Conservative governments that failed Canadians by not ensuring that Canada builds the housing that is needed and that is affordable for Canadians. The Conservatives cancelled the co-op housing program, and the Liberals cancelled the national affordable housing program and left the whole thing to the private sector to deal with. When we have, 30 years later, a significant housing crisis, do not blame newcomers for that; blame the governments that failed Canadians in that regard.

I want to add one other thing, in terms of contributions of newcomers. They also create jobs. A third of the businesses in our communities are created by immigrants. They hire Canadians, and they actually create employment as well.

Just so that everybody understands, do not blame immigrants. We need the federal government to also step up to ensure that provinces, Quebec and territories are properly resourced. To that end, for successful resettlement, I am going to move an amendment.

I move:

That the motion be amended by adding the following: “d) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a report on the gap between the resources that are needed to align federal immigration targets in 2024 and the capacity of Quebec, provinces and territories to successfully resettle newcomers; and e) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a plan to ensure adequate resources are provided to Quebec, provinces and territories to support the successful resettlement of newcomers.”

That is what is needed. Do not blame the newcomers. Hold the people to account, and that would be the government that needs to step up and do the job in support of provinces, Quebec and territories.

[The Deputy Speaker, Conservative, Chris d'Entremont]

It is my duty to inform hon. members that an amendment to an opposition motion may be moved only with the consent of the sponsor of the motion. If the sponsor is not present, the House leader, the deputy House leader, the whip, or the deputy whip of the sponsor's party may give or refuse consent on the sponsor's behalf.

Since the sponsor is not present in the chamber, I ask the deputy House leader if she consents to this amendment being moved.