House of Commons photo

Crucial Fact

  • His favourite word was actually.

Last in Parliament October 2015, as Conservative MP for St. Catharines (Ontario)

Lost his last election, in 2015, with 38% of the vote.

Statements in the House

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the member for the assistance he has provided me on occasion, with his background and understanding of some of the work that is being accomplished in the department. I certainly appreciate his efforts to assist me in that work.

I think the member makes an excellent point that everything needs to be done to deal with those ghost consultants and unscrupulous individuals who act in a manner that is unbecoming to the individuals who believe they are being assisted, which can carry forward and hurt individuals and their families' opportunity both for temporary residency and finding employment in our country.

It is in fact a very small minority of individuals who fall in that category. While any number above zero is not acceptable, and we need to work toward that figure, the fact is the department is doing an outstanding job.

Our folks who work across the world, whether they be in our visa offices, foreign credential offices, or embassies, take a very specific and hard look at the work that is necessary to ensure that treatment is fair and just, and that individuals who come here do so with fair expectations, rather than hearing from a consultant who makes all kinds of promises, charges all kinds of fees and puts individuals and, in some cases, families in a position of being distraught and sometimes having to go back to the country from which they came because of the treatment by those consultants.

It is a minority, but I want to tell the House that the minister is focused and dedicated on ensuring that we lower those levels regardless of how small they may be at this point.

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Madam Speaker, the member for Trinity—Spadina does a tremendous job at committee on behalf of her party. It is not too often that she and I see eye to eye on specific issues and recommendations, but through this report we on the government side and, certainly, her party, feel and realize that changes are needed on issues related to this matter. I have mentioned a couple of times that the minister made an announcement on October 9 to begin to get at those issues. I think she understands and knows the minister's feelings on this matter and his government's feelings on this matter. We are continuing, as we did on October 9 when we announced these three measures, to work toward ensuring that fairness and appropriate action are part of this process.

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Madam Speaker, I would implore the member to do two things. First, he should understand that there are different ways and means for an individual who is not a Canadian citizen, but who wants to come to this country, to have the opportunity to do so. Second, he should follow up and read both of those programs, because it sounds as if these are unclear to him and that he has mixed two programs together.

First and foremost, if an individual wants to come to this country and applies for permanent residency, the individual does so through a program that currently exists. In fact, it is a program that was changed in the 2008 budget, part 6 of Bill C-50 at that time, which this government implemented.

We have actually shown improvement in this. We are moving forward in a much quicker way so that those individuals who apply through the points system the member spoke about do not have to wait five, six, or seven years to become permanent residents in the country.

However, we have a separate program for temporary caregivers, which I think is what the member is alluding to. This is not the same system he alluded to for an application for permanent residency. This is an opportunity for those who wish to come to this country as temporary caregivers, who would then have the opportunity to earn a living here and become accustomed or acclimatized to this country. Once they have fulfilled their obligations, they will certainly have the opportunity to become permanent residents of this country.

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this report. It is the eighth report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration and it regards migrant workers and ghost consultants.

I want to speak to some of the recommendations in the report, recommendations in which the government played a significant role in ensuring that at committee it would be there for the minister and ministry to have the opportunity to review and consider. I will go into some detail of a couple of those recommendations.

With regard to the member for Brampton—Springdale, the citizenship and immigration committee recommended a federal and provincial investigation into the allegations of abuse. Recommendation 7 states:

The Committee recommends that the authorized bodies in the provincial and federal governments investigate the allegations of the former live-in caregivers in the Dhalla residence and take measures as appropriate. Further, the Committee requests that these government bodies, upon completion of their investigations, send the result to the Committee.

We took this report, the issues that we face and every recommendation in the report very seriously. It is with that I would like to continue in outline some of the important factors that led to the report and led to some of the details in the recommendations that are very specific to the assistance it would provide both from a federal perspective and from a provincial perspective.

Our country has relied on immigration for more than two-thirds of its population growth in the last five years. We have one of the highest per capita levels of immigration among western nations. Our values, democracy, freedom and the rule of law make Canada a top destination choice for newcomers.

Our government is working to protect our immigration system and those who wish to come to Canada from immigration fraud. We are committed to cracking down on immigration scams and dishonesty, false promises and unethical, incompetent practices.

It is important to recognize that thousands of new Canadians and prospective immigrants to Canada have been defrauded by the so-called ghost consultants, third party intermediaries, including non-authorized representatives, recruiters and student agents who refuse to reveal themselves and their role in advising applicants. This fraud is deliberate and it is taking shameful advantage of the dreams and the aspirations of prospective newcomers to Canada.

The Ministry of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism has already begun by raising this important issue with the Punjabi government during the minister's visit to India in January. We are taking other vigorous measures to prevent and warn against the risks of this kind of immigration-related fraud. We have warnings in 17 languages on our website and in all relative local languages at our missions and visa application centres abroad. Information pamphlets about the rights of workers, provincial labour laws and advocacy groups in Canada are also available to vulnerable individuals, who find themselves in an abusive situation. In addition, the anti-fraud warning video is now available in English, French and eight other languages.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada is distributing the video to various ethnic media in Canada and in missions abroad. It is also available on a departmental website and on YouTube.

The government has indicated on many occasions that the health, safety and well-being of all temporary foreign workers in Canada is of primary importance. As my colleagues well know, immigration is a shared responsibility between the federal, provincial and territorial governments. They also know that provincial and territorial labour laws establish employment standards such as minimum wage, overtime payments and vacation pay. I can assure them that our government is working with all the provinces and territories to ensure that all workers receive the full protection to which they are entitled under applicable laws. Employers and recruiters acting on the employer's behalf would have to prove that they have complied in the past with federal and provincial laws that regulate employment or the recruitment of employees.

British Columbia, Alberta, Manitoba and Saskatchewan already have legislation that prohibits employment agencies from charging a fee for recruitment from the person seeking employment. Ontario, while not at that point yet, has announced that it will table similar legislation by the end of 2009. Alberta has announced that its legislation will be amended to include live-in caregivers.

As I said, our government supports this report in principle. We have certain reservations about some aspects of the report, such as the proposal to grant automatic permanent residency to live-in caregivers upon their arrival to our country, which could lead to very few caregivers actually working as caregivers. We would also disagree with the requirement that anyone who gives advice, be it a friend, family member or church group, be considered an authorized representative under the law.

As the member for Vaughan pointed out, there are a number of recommendations in this report. Maybe it was because of time or maybe it was because of design that he did not list out all of the recommendations that are in the report. I want to pay specific attention to recommendations 4 and 5.

The Liberal members of the committee and the Liberal Party did submit a minority report and said that, while they supported the report in its entirety, they did not support recommendation 7. I am not sure how one can do both at the same time, but that is what two of the members have stated this morning in the House.

Having said that, I read recommendation 7 with respect to the investigation in Brampton—Springdale. However, it is important to read recommendations 4 and 5. Those two recommendations stem from what we heard at committee and what the witnesses presented in terms of what they had gone through. Furthermore, those were backed up by additional witnesses. Professionals who have worked in this industry for years indicated in a very specific manner some of the things we should do to improve.

Recommendation 4 states:

The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada ensure that orientation sessions for caregivers address the following subjects:

The requirement that the employer provide a statement of earnings with each pay cheque;

The need for the caregiver to have access to complete statements of earnings and deductions in order to meet the conditions for becoming a permanent resident; and

The procedure for opening a bank account.

Furthermore, in these orientation sessions, it should be made clear that the following behaviors are unacceptable, and in many cases subject to sanction. It should also be explained to which bodies each of these inappropriate behaviours should be reported:

Confiscating passports;

Failing to comply with the Canada Revenue Agency rules regarding pay and record of employment;

Failing to make required deductions;

Employing a caregiver without a work permit to work in their homes;

Paying less than the minimum required by provincial legislation;

Requiring caregivers to work longer than reasonable work hours; and

Assigning caregivers tasks entirely unrelated to their prescribed role.

One Liberal member of the committee indicated that specifics were not important when dealing with these issues. They are indeed important when it comes to trying to deal with this issue.

Recommendation 5 states:

The Committee recommends that the Government of Canada require employers to attend a briefing on the live-in caregiver program and the rights and responsibilities of all concerned, before a caregiver can start work.

Furthermore, in this briefing, it should be made clear that the following behaviors are unacceptable and in many cases subject to sanction:

Confiscating passports;

Failing to comply with the Canada Revenue Agency rules regarding pay and record of employment;

Failing to make required deductions;

Employing a caregiver without a work permit to work in their homes;

Paying less than the minimum required by provincial legislation;

Requiring caregivers to work longer than reasonable work hours; and

Assigning caregivers tasks entirely unrelated to their prescribed role.

The opposition party often stands and says that there is not enough attention paid to detail. In this report the only party that submitted a contrary or minority report to this study was the Liberal Party of Canada, a party that had 13 years to work, to address, to improve, to change and to co-operate with provinces and territories on the direction that this program should take. When the Liberals had the opportunity to stand up and be counted at committee, they determined that this was not the report they wanted to support. That says something very drastic about the comments we heard from the party opposite this morning and also the position it took with respect to this report.

Upon receiving the report, the ministry and the minister did in fact take significant action to strengthen the protection of temporary workers. As the minister said:

Temporary foreign workers play an important role in the Canadian economy. We have a duty to them, employers and all Canadians, to ensure that the program is fair and equitable.

On October 9, the minister announced three very specific action items: first, that a more rigorous assessment of genuineness of the job offer would take place; second, limits to the length of a worker's stay in Canada before returning home; and third, a two-year prohibition from hiring a temporary foreign worker for employers found to have provided significantly different wages, working conditions or occupations than they were promised.

The opposition is quick to criticize the government when it comes to putting pen to paper and action to reports. I read out very specific recommendations that the committee submitted to the minister and the ministry. In response, the minister took action. I will not say immediately because one wanted to have a chance to read the report, but within weeks the minister stood and announced three very specific requirements that would be changed and penalties that would be applied. Based on the hard work of this committee, those were actually put forward.

I repeat, that did not come with unanimity from the four parties on the committee. It missed one party, and that was the Liberal Party of Canada.

The minister has indicated on many occasions that the health, safety and well-being of all temporary foreign workers in Canada is of primary importance. In particular, the live-in caregiver program fulfills an important function by helping Canadians meet their caregiving needs while, at the same time, allowing foreign caregivers access to an avenue for permanent residency, the opportunity to stay here and become a Canadian.

Our government is committed to ensuring that this program remains fair and equitable to both workers and employers. As immigration is a shared responsibility between the federal and the provincial and territorial governments, our government is working with the provinces and territories to ensure that all workers receive the full protection to which they are entitled under applicable laws.

When the committee did its study and heard its witnesses, we heard from workers. We did not ignore them. We did not just bring in consultants or people who had views on this issues, some who were experts and some who gave some compelling testimony. We actually brought in caregivers to ensure we heard from them on the changes and improvements we should make. In fact, if we look at the action the minister and ministry took, this is in fact the case.

We are working to protect our immigration system and those who wish to come to Canada from immigration fraud. We are committed to cracking down on immigration scams, dishonesty, false promises and unethical and incompetent practices. The trouble is most of this questionable activity is taking place outside of our country, which is an interesting thing to learn. While our consulates, our visa officers, our credential offices work as hard as they possibly can to ensure correctness and to ensure we do the proper due diligence, we are limited in our ability to enforce Canadian law.

However, we can make proper regulating and policing of immigration consultants in other countries a priority in our relationships with those countries. The Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism has already made a significant beginning. He raised this important issue when he met with the Punjab government during his visit to India at the beginning of this year.

Although our government, and I did state this, supports the report in principle, we do have a couple of reservations. One is that we are concerned about the proposal to grant automatic residency to live-in caregivers upon their arrival to our country. It could lead to very few caregivers actually working as caregivers. The concern is if we granted permanent residency, if we did it that way, it would be the quickest of anywhere in the world.

It would allow the individuals not to live up to their commitments and take on the responsibilities of being temporary caregivers and assisting their employers in any way the individuals had contracted to do. That is something we have to work on, because it will not work. It would leave those who have taken the time and energy to go through the temporary caregiver process, as families or as seniors, and who receive in their homes the individuals who come here to do the work they have agreed to do, without recourse, as the caregivers could in fact just walk away from that responsibility. That is unfair. We have to make sure that the implementation does not allow that to happen.

We also disagree with the requirement that anyone, be it a friend, family member or church group, who gives advice be considered an authorized representative under the law. This point with respect to the consultants was a source of consternation that the previous government did not address.

We are moving forward. As members heard from the October 9 announcement by the minister, we are moving in the direction of ensuring that penalties will be applied, including a two year prohibition from hiring a temporary foreign worker for employers found to have provided significantly different wages, working conditions or occupations than promised.

We are taking action. We are moving this forward. It is a program that is important to this country and to those who wish to come to this country in a manner in which they can earn their living and the opportunity to become, at some point in time, permanent residents of our country, eventually leading to Canadian citizenship.

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the member's speech. I want to commend both members from the Liberal Party who have spoken in terms of their work on the committee. As far as working together, we certainly have tried to do that. I appreciate their efforts, but let us face it. There are times when we have disagreements. If the member is suggesting that she supported recommendation No. 7 in the report, then I would ask her to rise in her place today and say that.

She has indicated, as the member for Vaughan did, that they supported all of the recommendations in the report. I would like to hear the member say that she did or she did not support recommendation No. 7.

She indicated at the beginning of her speech that she supports the content of the report.

I do not want to hear about your minority report. You indicated that this should not be partisan. Answer me on recommendation No. 7, please.

Committees of the House November 19th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, I listened with a great deal of interest to the Liberal critic's response to the motion.

The member for Vaughan certainly started to list a number of recommendations that are in the report. I find it interesting that he repeated on several occasions during his speech that he in fact moved this report, that he in fact called for this report, that his party in fact demanded this report. If that is true, there is a question that I need to have answered.

Recommendation No. 7, which he did not get to, which I will read now and may read in my remarks again, states:

The Committee recommends that the authorized bodies in the provincial and federal governments investigate the allegations of the former live-in caregivers in the Dhalla residence and take measures as appropriate. Further, the Committee requests that these government bodies, upon completion of their investigations, send the result to the Committee.

If the member states, as he did on at least four occasions, that the Liberals called for this report, why did they then in fact vote against the report? Why did they unanimously, as a party, vote against that report?

Liberal Party of Canada November 18th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, the Liberal leader shows just how disconnected he is from the priorities of Canadians with each passing day.

While we are focused on the economy and helping Canadians, he continues his pursuit of forcing an unnecessary and unwanted election that will harm our economic recovery.

Yesterday his party stood alone in the House in voting against Canada's economic recovery, for an early election again.

The Liberals voted against the popular and recession-fighting home renovation tax credit, assistance for first-time home buyers and Canadian businesses, tax benefits for low-income workers and help for farmers in drought and flood regions.

It is the same old game with the Liberal leader, which highlights a key difference between our government and his party.

Canadians want us to fight the recession; the Liberals want to fight the recovery. Canadians want us to govern; the Liberals want an unnecessary election.

It is yet further proof that the Liberal Party members are not in it for Canadians. They are in it for themselves.

Charity Hockey Games November 17th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, our Conservative team works hard in the House for all Canadians, and we also work hard on the ice to help raise money for our local communities.

Last night I was able to lace up my skates with some of my Conservative colleagues, former NHL players and community leaders to help raise money for the United Way of Leeds—Grenville.

Our Conservative MPs have been part of numerous charity hockey games, spanning the ridings of Edmonton—Leduc and Wild Rose, Alberta to Barrie and Peterborough in Ontario. These games have raised money for local United Ways, the Royal Victoria Hospital, boys and girls clubs and victim assistance funds.

These games have been part of my colleagues' efforts to raise more than half a million dollars for various charities.

This is not going to stop. On this side of the House, we have found another great way to show real leadership and assistance for the very communities we represent.

We lace them up, and in Conservative ridings we are getting it done for local charities.

The Economy November 6th, 2009

Mr. Speaker, our government continues to implement Canada's economic action plan to help combat the effects of this global recession. Infrastructure projects across the country are up and running and they are creating jobs.

We have reduced taxes on families and businesses. We have created the home renovation and first-time homebuyers' tax credits. However, while our Conservative government is fighting the recession, just this week the Liberal leader directed his party to oppose extending employment insurance benefits to long-tenured workers to help them while they search for new employment.

Canadians know they can count on us to ensure that we get through the global economic recession stronger than ever and, with Canada's economic action plan, this Prime Minister and this government are leading the way.

Points of Order November 3rd, 2009

Mr. Speaker, it is very clear. A number of members on this side of the House heard exactly what the member said. He used the word “liar” directly at the minister while he responded. I am simply asking him to acknowledge it.

Mr. Speaker, you have said on many occasions that the decorum in the House needs to improve. The leader of the Bloc has an opportunity to stand in his place today to show that the decorum must change and withdraw the remarks that he made. They were unparliamentary.