Olivia Chow

[December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the government seems set on following the sorry lead of the Liberals. It seems set on leaving people in limbo and in an unprotected status, leaving children vulnerable and driving immigrants underground. It seems set on ignoring their plight, allowing them to continue to live in fear, being exploited and living in a state of uncertainty.

The needs of up to 200,000 people, fellow workers, neighbours, classmates, taxpayers, are being ignored. I want to remind the member that the needs of some of the children born in Canada are also being ignored. These are people who want nothing more than to live in peace in Canada and make a positive contribution to this country. They are already paying taxes.

What kind of cynical approach is the government taking? Canadians expect and deserve better.

[December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as an immigrant who has worked hard to make a contribution to Canada, I am extremely disappointed with the state of our immigration system. It is failing our country.

Thirteen years of Liberal neglect have been followed by nine months of Conservative neglect. As a result, families are torn apart while they wait many years to be reunited. Well-qualified professionals are not able to work in their professions. The skilled labourers we need cannot get enough points to immigrate. Refugees and people under appeal are vulnerable to federally appointed officials who may abuse their positions and tragically, hard-working, taxpaying people live in fear of deportation.

Thousands of hard-working undocumented workers live in my riding in Toronto and tens of thousands more live across this country. Many were encouraged to stay over the years by the countless Liberal promises to regularize their status, but the Liberals turned a blind eye to undocumented workers. They never changed the law to help give some protection to these workers and their families, including children born and raised in Canada.

A former Liberal immigration minister running for the Liberal leadership gave a stirring speech at the convention in Montreal a couple of Fridays ago, yet he neglected the immigration system. He was guilty of letting it slide. He was guilty of promising new programs to regularize undocumented workers. He was guilty of breaking promises and failing to deliver. He left a lot of these people in limbo.

The Conservative government and its Minister of Citizenship and Immigration have been in place for nine months and the minister is following the same pattern as the Liberals. He says no regularization, just deportation of undocumented workers, but he knows that 200,000 people and families are undocumented. He knows that they are essential to many sectors, particularly the construction trade. He cannot possibly contemplate deporting every one of them. He knows the scope of this problem. He knows that with the threat of deportation, people are going underground. He knows it is a threat to their health and a threat to the health of their families, of their children. Some of them might be kept away from school for fear of discovery. He knows that people are vulnerable and may be exploited by employers, neighbours and even government officials.

He knows all that, yet he has not done anything. He has had nine months, yet there has been no attempt to deal with this issue. It is just like the Liberals.

The current programs are not working. The announcement last Friday in Ontario to improve the foreign workers program will not work. Why? Because none of the jobs that the undocumented workers are doing now are listed as an occupation that qualifies for the foreign workers program so it is not going to work. They do not work because too many workers are being refused, even with a job offer the skilled workers category does not work as it does not recognize the skills of the workers and does not give them the points they need.

The government should agree to waive the six month penalty for working illegally and instruct officers to issue work permits. Otherwise the situation will continue to get worse.

Every Canadian should be disappointed by the government's inaction and its callous approach. Every Canadian should be outraged by the harm that has been done to our immigration system. We--

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, swiftly is not the word I would use. I would say very slowly.

The government is now talking. The Conservatives promised $18 million to set up a central agency. At most $2 million has been spent right now for consultations, for talking, while we have taxi drivers with many degrees. We could have invested some of that money to bridge programs, create a mentorship program and actually set up a portal, a website and a one stop shop. We could do all of that.

Instead, $16 million is sitting in the budget for next year. Hardly anything is being done, other than talk and hot air. I would not call that dealing swiftly with a foreign credential program.

I come back to the issue in front of us. Many folks stuck in the Philippines have no hope. They cannot find any way for any of their credentials to be recognized. When their kids go to school, guess what, their degrees, or never mind degrees, any kind of a certificate is not being recognized by the Philippine government, the Vietnamese government or the Canadian government, even though they have been in school for some time. These people have absolutely no sense of hope in the Philippines. That is why we need to bring them to Canada.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I mentioned earlier that Canada has a declining birth rate. There have been fewer children born in the last 10 years. I believe it dropped from 4 million kids under 10 to 3.6 million. We need more families, children, immigrants and refugees. That is a decline of 14%. As a country we absolutely need more people. We are talking about 400,000 kids.

We need more immigrants because we know that every immigrant coming into the country creates at least 1.2 jobs in Canada. Certainly, in my riding of Trinity—Spadina I see that the Vietnamese people have done tremendously well. They are in every type of business. They are not just merchants. They own a lot of different types of companies and are very good business folks. They work very hard and their children excel in school. They are contributing tremendously.

I have no doubt the 152 Vietnamese who are still in the Philippines would be able to contribute tremendously to Canada if we allowed them to come here. If the member for Winnipeg Centre is willing to take some Vietnamese refugees in Winnipeg, I am sure the city of Toronto could take a share and probably Burnaby would too.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in my riding of Trinity--Spadina we are home to thousands of immigrants and refugees, people who have come from around the world to contribute to Canada and make this country a better place. Among the refugees, now citizens of Canada, are some of the original Vietnamese boat people who began coming here 25 years ago when Canada opened its doors.

In fact, I have a long history with them. I was a fine arts student and did not really know much about going to rallies, petitioning or anything. In 1979 there was a member of Parliament, Dan Heap, who with a group of people organized a big demonstration in a park in Toronto's Chinatown. It was pouring rain. It was my first political demonstration to ask the Canadian government to accept these Vietnamese boat people.

I certainly had my start in political life by working with Vietnamese boat people. After I graduated I became a counsellor assisting some of these refugees to settle in Canada. It was not a hard job at all because they settled very easily.

I was extremely proud at that time. Canada's first foreign minister, who happened to be a woman at that time, was Flora MacDonald, a great Canadian humanitarian. Joe Clark was the prime minister of a minority government. We as Canadians had the courage to accept a large number of Vietnamese refugees.

How ashamed Joe Clark must be today of the Conservative minority government that abandoned the progressive name and the progressive principles that Flora MacDonald stood for. How ashamed they must be of the current Conservative foreign minister who was the last leader of the Progressive Conservative Party. I believe that it is a betrayal of a proud Canadian legacy.

Many years ago Canada proudly accepted Vietnamese boat people, or a great number of them, and it was a great act of humanitarianism. Those boat people have been grateful to Canada. In downtown Trinity-Spadina many businesses have been created by them. It is a vibrant community because of these immigrants. After Joe Clark's minority government, Liberal majorities and then Conservative majorities started to betray these principles. Instead of aspiring to greatness, we became gradually small minded. Instead of throwing open our doors to the world, we began to close them and we began narrow selections of smaller numbers of immigrants.

Under all of these successive Liberal governments our immigration and refugee system was neglected and it started failing Canada. It is failing us on economic grounds and it is failing us on humanitarian grounds.

However, we now have a chance to live up to our obligation to the last remaining boat people, to make good on that promise in which Canadians rejoiced in over 25 years ago. We had the support of all parties in the House, but the former Liberal government did not manage to take in the 500 people. It only took in a small number. Now the Conservative government seems to be hiding behind technicalities. It is defining refugees narrowly and indicating that because people put their lives on hold for close to a generation that they no longer qualify.

These people are stateless and have no rights. They had the expectation that Canada was serious when we opened our doors. They are now disappointed and over the last 16 years some of them have married Filipino spouses. The official argument was that these people would be able to apply for legal status in the Philippines. Thus, they would not be considered stateless, but under the Filipino law, the refugees came to the Philippines illegally and therefore would not be eligible for legal residents.

Therefore, these unfortunate people are caught between the laws of two countries. Some ask, why did these Vietnamese not return to their country of origin once they discovered it was so difficult to settle anywhere else?

Some would argue that refugees from other parts of the world also suffer and ask what makes these Vietnamese refugees so special. My question is, when did we start taking our shared sense of humanity so low? Instead of offering a helping hand, we start questioning which set of refugees suffer more than others and pondering why they did not return to where they came from. These people obviously left their country, leaving their belongings and families behind. They risked their lives and everything they had when they left their own country and some people say they were not really refugees.

It is easy for us, who live comfortably in Canada, to debate about the fate of these refugees and whether they are refugees or not. It is their lives we are talking about. It could be the lives of our forefathers and foremothers. They have survived all this time and still remain hopeful that somehow someone will hear their cries.

I believe that we absolutely have to take action. We have to find a way to bring these people to our country. Where is the national pride in denying the remaining boat people a home here? Where is the national pride in this pettiness of the definition? Surely it is time for Canada to show leadership as a great and good country, or is the current government more intent on spending money on military missions that may end up creating a whole new generation of refugees?

Let us keep our priorities straight. Let us hope that the House is unanimous in supporting this motion allowing the government to act positively.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, Canada is a very big country and if we were to accept 1% of immigrants and refugees into our country, it could be as many as 330,000 people. This year the Conservative government set a target of only 260,000. In the mind the hon. member, I want to know whether, in a country so large, he sees any problem accepting 125 Vietnamese refugees who have been stateless for over 16 years.

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, in 1979 when Flora MacDonald was Canada's foreign affairs minister and Joe Clark was prime minister, it was one of Canada's proudest moments. Under a lot of urging from the NDP, from the community, and from churches and synagogues, Canada started the Vietnamese boat people program. It was a proud moment of leadership. I think those Progressive Conservatives would be embarrassed today to listen to what I just heard.

We are talking about 125 refugees. Their lives have been in limbo. They have been forgotten by the world and the Conservative member was just talking about technicalities. How can we become so small that we cannot even accept them as refugees? We have to find a way to accept them. We are talking about 125 refugees. How could we pit one group of refugees living in a refugee camp to another group of refugees? How could we possibly get to that kind of level in this House?

We have lost our way in both the Liberal and Conservative governments. I recall that this House, under the former Liberal government with the support of the NDP and the Conservatives at the time, agreed to accept these few boat people, but instead of accepting 500, we have accepted 23. The Liberals did not do anything at that time and the Conservatives now are not doing anything. Why are we failing our international obligations? Why are we abdicating our leadership and why are we letting these legitimate refugees flounder?

[Committees of the House, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, 2,000 Vietnamese refugees in the Philippines are unable to buy homes. They cannot own businesses, travel freely or work legally. They have to subsist through sales in the black market and other creative means to make their living.

I was also told that if children go to school, even if they graduate with whatever certificate, degree or diploma, they would not be accepted anywhere. For 16 years, they have drifted in uncertainty, not having a place to call home. Yet they have not given up hope.

What action can be taken to assist the refugees who are stuck in the Philippines if the House of Commons accepts the motion for concurrence by the immigration committee.

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, No. 2, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, there are fewer children in Canada. The annual number of births in Canada decreased by 14% between 1994 and 2003. Back then there were 4 million kids. Now it has dropped to 3.4 million kids under 10. There is severe shortage of regulated child care spaces in Canada. Over 2.2 million kids are placed in unregulated care each day.

Because of the way Canada is treating its kids, many families are living below the poverty line, which is $15,000 per year. In fact, there are 1.2 million kids living in poverty. No wonder. Canada devotes over 5% of GDP to social programs and our child poverty rate is almost 15%. Therefore, we know that there are missed opportunities for children and there are missed opportunities for our young people as well in this budget.

Researchers studying youth between the ages of 10 and 18 over an eight year period found that those who live in smoggy communities were nearly five times more likely to have clinically low lung function compared to teens living in low pollution areas. What would the NDP do for children and youth?

[Budget Implementation Act, 2006, No. 2, December 11th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I do not quite understand how the Bloc would accept the budget, given the cut in 2007 of all funding that would create child care programs. My understanding is that Quebec is in line to receive, supposedly, over $800 million for children. In Quebec many kids and families have been waiting for child care. Yes, there is a very good program there, however, the funding for child care is not enough. As a result of that, there is a very long waiting list. That is one area in the budget that I am sure parents and children in Quebec would not want the Bloc to support.

Also, there is no plan in the budget for municipal infrastructure debt. My understanding is there are billions dollars of infrastructure deficit in Quebec and outside Quebec as well. Many municipalities across the country are saying that their bridges, their water infrastructure, such as sewage, and their public transit are in desperate shape and they need a lot more funding from the federal government.

On the issue of student debt, students are graduating with over $20,000 debt.

All these areas are important for children, for families, for young people and for municipalities and the budget does nothing for them. I do not quite understand how the Bloc could support it.