Kevin Lamoureux

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, the member is wrong on several points. I only wish you would grant me the amount of time that would enable me to provide a complete answer. I would be happy to do that if I had unanimous consent.

In terms of international students, there has been great demand. That demand, in good part, has been fuelled by individuals out there courting and getting students to come into Canada, in a very real and tangible way.

The Conservative Party of Canada, along with others, needs to recognize that provinces also have to play a role. At the end of the day, how many international students does the Conservative Party believe we should have? We know what the NDP believe. They believe there should be no limit.

We believe there has to be a sense of responsibility. We are working with provinces. That is the reason there is a cap. They can distribute the students among the post-secondary facilities and others, so that we can have a reasonable and responsible policy to help the provinces, the territories and, in fact, the international students themselves.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, absolutely. It almost goes without saying that all one needs to do is take a look at the provincial nominee program. At one time the program was somewhere in the neighbourhood of 40,000, and now it is well over 100,000. The demand is there. We know that because there are provinces that want to receive more provincial nominees. The provincial nominees have contributed immensely. That is only one aspect. In the provincial nominee program, for example, if a single person later gets married to someone from their home country, their spouse would be able to come in through the spousal program.

Of course there has to be coordination taking place. That coordination has been taking place for decades, in some jurisdictions more than others, depending on the province or territory, what its agenda is in regard to immigration and how it ultimately complements the national targets and agenda.

All in all, immigration has been a gold mine for Canada and will continue to be well into the future, as Canada needs immigrants more than immigrants need Canada, quite frankly.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I have been following the issue of immigration since the early 1990s. I have been very passionate about and have understood many different aspects of immigration over the years, whether at the provincial level or the national level, both when I was in opposition and now while we are in government. I am very passionate about it because I understand and appreciate the true value of immigration and how Canada is what it is today because of sound immigration policy. It would take quite a bit to fool me on some of the things I have been hearing on the immigration file, and I want to quickly make reference to that.

One of the concerns I had was about a comment made by the member for Calgary Shepard. He was talking about immigration, and I actually wrote down the quote.

Before I continue, I will say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Scarborough Centre.

We were debating immigration target numbers and so forth, and the member for Calgary Shepard said, “They bear responsibility for the chaos on our streets today with crime that is out of control.” I do not like whatsoever that the member opposite was trying to imply in any way that immigrants are a problem when it comes to crime and chaos on our streets. That is surely what could be interpreted, based on the manner in which he presented himself.

I then take a look at my New Democratic friends. I want to be kind, but it is hard when one gets statements saying something like if someone is an international student, they should become a permanent resident, and, at the same time, saying we should have no cap on international students. To me, that is irresponsible public policy. Just so the member is aware, I can guarantee that, virtually overnight with that sort of policy, we would exceed, and I will be conservative with my number, well over a million international students applying every year.

Further, the member from the New Democratic Party said that she would like to see temporary residents in the form of workers also automatically becoming permanent residents. That is the reason I posed the question to the NDP. Does it have any cap whatsoever? If one follows the advice or the comments that were provided, we would probably be taking in at least 1.5 million to 2.5 million residents a year. I do not think that would be a practical number. It is important that we be serious.

I will now move to the Bloc. The Bloc brought forward a motion. I will talk about immigration any day of the week, and I asked whether they have done consultation. I know the importance of consultation on this file; as I said, I have been working on the file since the early 1990s. I understand the role and the impact on the Manitoba economy. That is one of the reasons I was a very strong advocate for Jean Chrétien and the provincial nominee program.

History will show us that no province in Canada did better than the province of Manitoba in taking advantage of the provincial nominee program. Our immigration numbers grew rapidly as a direct result of a progressive program, at that point instituted by and signed off on by Jean Chrétien and, in my home province, Gary Filmon. Manitoba has benefited; the program has been gold to the province of Manitoba.

When one thinks of the provincial nominee program, when one takes a look at the unique nature of immigration into the province of Quebec and when one factors in temporary visas, obviously there is a great deal of discussion that takes place at many different levels, whether it is with ministers, deputy ministers, civil servants and so forth. It takes place all of the time and in different ways.

I posed the question to members of the Bloc, and I am of the opinion that they did not do any consultation with the Province of Quebec, in terms of the resolution they are proposing today.

Many would ultimately argue that there is a bit of a hidden agenda with the Bloc whenever immigration matters are raised, but that is for another day.

When we talk about immigration as a whole, let us take a look at the targets and understand and appreciate the actual numbers. When we think about provinces, they are involved in a direct way. I mentioned the provincial nominee program. Let us take a look at the targets that were provided to the House. In 2024, the targeted number is 110,000; in 2025 it is 120,000, and it is followed again, in 2026, by 120,000. That is a very high percentage that is going toward supporting provinces, and that does not take into consideration the number, which I believe is around 35,000 a year, going into Quebec under the skilled worker type of programming.

Let us look at the numbers and at the freedoms the provinces have in terms of recruitment. There is a wonderful opportunity to deal with things such as health care workers and the trades, whether it is the plumbers, electricians or so forth. That program is designed to support them.

Members opposite point the finger and say that Ottawa is to blame for this or that. They talk about the issue of housing, but do they not believe that provincial jurisdictions have the capability to understand what is happening in their local economies? If they really want to get more electricians, plumbers and so forth approved, they have an excellent window through the provincial nominee program, because they are the ones that issue the certificates.

They should not just try to say that it is immigrants who are to blame, because that is not true. What we find is that through the skilled worker program and the nominee program, it is provinces and territories that are identifying what they believe are the priorities in terms of their economic development.

We can look at other numbers. The federal government actually gets fewer than the combined provinces do in terms of skilled workers, but we do process just over 100,000 a year.

Then we also have the spouses. There is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 75,000 to 85,000 spouses and partners on an annual basis. Are we going to start saying no? That is a really important aspect of our immigration policy, which the federal government has complete jurisdiction over.

We can look at how we have actually managed that file. When I was critic, people were waiting for years and years. We are talking three, four or five years to get a spouse to come over. I used to apply under dual intent, to try to get someone a temporary visa while they were waiting. Do members know how many times I applied and the number that were actually approved when Stephen Harper was the prime minister? It was a big goose egg. Nothing.

Since we have been in government, I have been successful. I have talked with immigration officials; I have talked with ministers of immigration; I have explained the situation to caucus, and we have seen significant movement, not only in terms of processing times but also in terms of providing temporary visas for those who are trying to get a spouse here from abroad.

I could talk about parents and grandparents. When I was critic, Jason Kenney cancelled the program. He said people could not sponsor their mom and dad. The response I get when I pose that question to the Conservative critic is that they came up with the super visa. Yes, the super visa is a good thing, but they also cancelled the program.

They also say, “Well, we wanted to deal with processing times, and we improved processing times.” Sure, they did, because it was so bad under Stephen Harper in terms of sponsoring parents and grandparents that people were dying or actually dead by the time they finally got to them.

We do not need a lecture from the Conservative Party on immigration policy. All we have to do is reflect on just how bad the Conservatives were, and that does not include the many different programs in terms of refugees, whether they were from Afghanistan, Syria or Ukraine, or from what is taking place today in the Middle East.

We understand, appreciate and value the role that immigration plays in public policy, and we will continue to work every day on that particular file.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Madam Speaker, I want to go back to a question I asked one of the member's colleagues. Bloc members talk about the importance of consultation in regard to the immigration file, and they have done so a lot in the last couple of months. When we factor in things like the provincial nominee program, international students, temporary workers in agricultural communities, and so forth, there is no doubt there is a need to have ongoing conversations, which have taken place in a wide spectrum of ways.

Has the Bloc had any official discussion with the Government of Quebec with respect to the motion it is proposing today?

[Privilege, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I see that you were very generous in listening to what the member across the way was saying.

I had the opportunity to witness the exchange. From my perspective, it is very much a dispute over the facts at best. I would suggest that what was being suggested as a point of order or a matter of privilege is just a matter of debate that should have, in all likelihood, stayed inside the committee. I realize that the member might have been embarrassed, but it does not justify bringing it into the chamber.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, when I take a look at the larger picture of immigration, what we have seen over the last 15 or 20 years is a movement towards more provincial participation. To amplify that fact, one only needs to take a look at the provincial nominee program. Over 100,000 people will be coming, targeted, over the next year under that program alone.

I wonder if the member could provide her thoughts in regard to the fact that when we talk about the supports that need to be put into place, provincial jurisdictions also have a role to play, given that they also have an interest in the immigrants who are coming to Canada.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I have a relatively quick question.

Given the nature of the matter we are discussing, could the member give a clear indication of whether she or her party actually consulted with the Government of Quebec with respect to what they are proposing?

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I think that through the expansion, in particular with Jean Chrétien back in 1998 and the provincial nominee program, it sent a very clear message that we do need, from an Ottawa perspective, to continue to work with the provincial jurisdictions. I think Quebec was the model province at the time, and it continues to be in many ways in regard to immigration, but there is a need for people to be working together.

Does the member agree with the NDP position that temporary workers should be given permanent residence status? If not, why not?

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, to get a specific answer, is the member clearly saying that if one comes to Canada to study and one comes to Canada as a foreign worker, one should be granted permanent resident status?

If she is saying that, and that is what I am hearing, then does the NDP have any sort of limits they would put on the numbers that they would allow in every year? A clear answer, I believe, is owed to Canadians on that question.

[Business of Supply, February 8th, 2024]

Mr. Speaker, I have listened closely to the member opposite over the last half hour or so. On the issue of immigration, I am very much interested in knowing the NDP's position on overall numbers that they would like to see come to Canada. She indicated, very clearly, that temporary foreign workers who come to Canada should be granted permanent resident status. She also indicated that an unlimited number of international students should be allowed to come to Canada.

I am wondering if she could share with us two things. Should international students also be provided with assurances that they could become permanent residents. If so, when she factors that into the number of permanent residents through the temporary foreign workers program, what is the target goal, the overall number of immigrants in any given year? Does the NDP have one?