CIMM Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Friday, February 14, 2003

·

1345

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.))

Ms. Kay Nandlall (Director, International Student Advisor/CIDA Coordinator's Office, University of New Brunswick)

·

1350

·

1355

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. Peter Donahue (International Student Advisor, Saint John Campus, University of New Brunswick)

¸

1400

¸

1405

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Ms. Angela Odei (Director, Settlement Services, Saint John Campus, YMCA-YWCA)

¸

1410

¸

1415

¸

1420

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. Ashraf Ghanem (President, Multicultural Association of Fredericton)

¸

1425

¸

1430

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Canadian Alliance)

¸

1435

Ms. Kay Nandlall

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Peter Donahue

¸

1440

¸

1445

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. John Bryden (Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, Lib.)

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. John Bryden

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. John Bryden

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Hon. Andy Scott (Fredericton, Lib.)

¸

1450

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Ms. Angela Odei

¸

1455

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. Ashraf Ghanem

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Ms. Kay Nandlall

¹

1500

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. John Bryden

Mr. Peter Donahue

Mr. John Bryden

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mr. David McMath (As Individual)

¹

1510

¹

1515

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Ms. Aneas MacInnis (Settlement Worker, Multicultural Association of Fredericton)

¹

1520

¹

1525

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. David McMath

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. David McMath

¹

1530

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Ms. Aneas MacInnis

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

¹

1535

Ms. Aneas MacInnis

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

¹

1540

Mr. Andy Scott

¹

1545

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

Ms. Aneas MacInnis

The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard)

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

---

NUMBER 036

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Friday, February 14, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

·  (1345)  

[English]

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.)): Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to call the meeting to order. I very much appreciate you coming forward today.

    I noticed that at least three out of four had some smiles when we talked about increasing some financial support, so I know this is true to the heart of you folks who are working on the ground with people in the community, and we really appreciate your efforts. There's no question that if it weren't for you, our system would certainly be lacking an awful lot more than it is today. We appreciate the efforts you've made to get here. We also appreciate the day-to-day efforts you make through your organizations on the ground to make sure that new Canadians have support more so than they would have otherwise.

    With that in mind, I would go to the four witnesses. Can I start out with Kay at one end and we'll go across? Would that be comfortable with everyone?

    Right now it's 1:45 p.m., and I apologize for being a little late, but we seem to have got behind a bit. We'll try to wrap this up by 3 p.m., so we have about one hour and fifteen minutes.

    Kay.

    Ms. Kay Nandlall (Director, International Student Advisor/CIDA Coordinator's Office, University of New Brunswick): I will keep my presentation very short because my colleagues have quite a few things to say.

    I decided to take up the offer of Andy Scott, our MP, when he called me to speak on this issue. I'm going to be focusing more on some of the problems that international students and the community have been experiencing. What I'll do then is suggest some ways that we can deal with some of these issues.

    I'm a member of the CBIE immigration committee. This is the Canadian Bureau of International Education, and I don't know if many of you have heard of this. This group has a responsibility to balance the needs of students. We look at institutional policies, laws, and the future prosperity and security of Canada.

    My and the committee's ultimate goal, however, is the well-being of international investments across Canada, because higher education institutions have been spending a lot of money recruiting students, programs, and the participants who are involved.

    I find the question that comes up constantly at this committee is how do we balance the long-term prosperity and the well-being and interests of the many constituencies, each with their own priorities and needs. It becomes a competition, and then we lose focus.

    What we've been trying to do is look at the students issue, and this is tied to the New Brunswick program about which Minister Betts has spoken. We've experienced a number of things recently--after September 11--with our students, and I don't need to get into that. The political climate is very charged. There is racial profiling. Innocent students, scholars, and visible minorities, who are citizens of Canada, are facing a number of the backlashes of September 11.

    What concerns me is that people who probably were never inclined that way are being very opportunistic at present, and they're using September the 11, which is affecting students, immigrants, and visible minorities. They just can't tell the difference.

    Something I'm very concerned with are the changes that have been going on with our immigration policies, the quick gut reaction changes. There doesn't seem to be much thought put into the ethical dilemmas we'll be faced with if we just jump and do things that we may think will solve the problems but they don't.

    I've worked with the immigration committee over the years because I'm on the CBIE committee. I'm concerned about us keeping an open-door policy. This is important to Canadian foreign policy, to education, and to economic interest.

    I know September 11 presents new challenges for screening visa applications more carefully to prevent those who may cause us harm from entering Canada. At the same time, I think September 11 also highlights the importance of building good relationships and understanding across the world to better counteract such threats.

    In working with international students, I feel they're part of the solution to what went on during September 11 rather than the problem. I think immigration laws affecting international students must be updated to reflect 21st century reality and to enhance our success at present as well as in the future.

    I've been trying to work with this committee, and there are five of us on the committee. We would like to develop a comprehensive strategy for increasing international students in Canada.

·  (1350)  

    I find we don't work in isolation or in a vacuum. We look at studies across the world and what's been going on. We look at what's happening in Canada. Each province seems to have different issues. Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal seem to be doing well.

    What I can say about New Brunswick is that we've been spending money to recruit students, but not much is put into keeping students there or to make the comfort level a bit more easier for them to stay. It has been posing problems, and there has been a lot of backlash because of that. September 11 seemed to make the situation worse.

    I would like it if the immigration laws and policies would work with provinces and would have an understanding that bringing international students is very much an economic focus...and how we could be more clear in our immigration regulations for the students. I'll deal with that at the end.

    I feel we need to develop a clear process in applying for student visas and permits. We need to coordinate efforts of institutional government needs in developing policies. We need to have more client-friendly universities, especially in certain regions.

    One thing I would really like to focus on is about five years ago we put in a proposal for international students to work off campus. This didn't come out of a vacuum. Australia, New Zealand, the United States, and Britain have been doing this for years. Just before September 11 we had some inkling that it may pass. After September 11 everything was put on hold, and we still haven't developed or come up with any policy.

    I'm a bit concerned with what is going on with our students--this building of prosperity within our country and also building different cultural perspectives. I think the two go hand in hand. I'm not speaking for one or the other.

    I think right now, because of September 11, it's been chaotic with student visas and with the immigration process. It's been unnecessarily long for students. It takes ages for study permits, work permits, co-op permits, and scholar's permits. I think at present now our students are having problems with SIN numbers, social insurance numbers, because there have been changes and different departments don't seem to be talking to each other. DFAIT isn't talking to Immigration about how it will work.

    Those are local problems and they become problems of our office. At UNB right now we have nearly 800-and-some international students and a staff of two. When you think of all these other problems becoming local problems, just think what happens. It's just chaotic and terrible. I think international students are a major asset for higher education institutions. Ultimately in Canada we should remain competitive.

    In conclusion, we need to redouble our efforts and focus on a comprehensive plan with all the partners involved in the immigration process. For example, we need to interface with various departments. When immigration comes up with a different policy, it needs to integrate with other departments to see that it works smoothly. Also, it is very important that we provide access to international students and at the same time maintain security. This is necessary for a policy that will help transfer the complexity of our present system of access from a liability to an asset, because I really believe right now it's a liability rather than an asset.

    I know we don't have much time, and I've been so buried in this issue for years that I can answer more questions rather than go through my brief. I thank the committee, and I'd like to answer any questions you have.

·  (1355)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much, Kay.

    Our next witness is Peter Donahue. He is international student adviser at the university. Peter, would you like to go next?

    Mr. Peter Donahue (International Student Advisor, Saint John Campus, University of New Brunswick): Thank you. I need to clarify that I'm at the Saint John campus of UNB and my colleague next to me, Kay, is in Fredericton. We both serve in similar positions.

    I've also been asked by John Rocca, with Enterprise Saint John, who couldn't be here today, to say a few words about that organization as well, as we're both involved with that organization.

    A big move has been going on at UNB Saint John for the last five years to internationalize the campus. Traditionally a commuter campus that saw about 95% of its students come from the local area, it now has, out of its 2,500 students, about 33% who come from outside the country, which is the largest percentage of any campus in Canada with international students.

    This has created great changes in the Saint John area, the biggest change just being in economic spin-offs into the community, where suddenly international students or students from abroad are now living in the community. A lot of effort has been placed on trying to integrate the students into the community, because traditionally a commuter campus has 70 beds in residence, and 800 international students all live in the community. So much effort has been spent at the university.

    This year an award was granted to the university on sort of internationalizing the community and making people aware of particularly the Chinese culture in the community. So a large effort has been made to integrate them into Saint John.

    What that has meant is that the City of Saint John has now recognized the potential of having a large number of immigrants in its communities. As a result, it has established an immigrant support team, which partners along with the New Brunswick government's nominee programs, to attract immigrants to the local area, and it sees immigrants as skilled workers and investments to population growth that we see in Saint John.

    One of the groups that has been looked at has been the university students, identifying them as trained individuals and youth who now have the skills to work in Canada. A lot of marketing has been done by both federal and provincial governments to keep these students in the local area.

    What has happened is that a lot of information has been given to the students, but there seems to be some difficulty when they try to stay. This is the area I wanted to talk about today. There seems to be a lot of support within the community for keeping the students, but the difficulties are on some of the conditions that nominee programs have put in place, one being the investments people have to make and the other being employment.

    What you get in the Saint John area is a lot of students who are interested in staying but who need to find employment. They have 90 days after they graduate to find employment. The difficulty comes in the definition of a career-related position and how it is interpreted by the Citizenship and Immigration officials who will grant the work permit for the one year.

    What we find is that a career-related position and an entry level position are maybe two different things when it comes to defining these things. So in a community like Saint John, where 3,000 to 4,000 call centre jobs have been created within the last four to five years, a lot of students enter into the workforce through these types of jobs. However, an international student, who would be looking to stay in the country to gain one year of experience, would not be granted a work permit because it would be seen as not being career related, if they have a business degree, for instance.

    The problem seems to be in how this is being interpreted by immigration officials across the country. In some places like Edmonton, Alberta, the same position may be granted, where in Saint John it may not be. So there seems to be a subjective in looking at the positions. Of course, those of us in Saint John are saying you need to look at the local economy. If you want people to stay in your economy, then you have to look at the positions that are in your economy. So that's been a very big issue with the students who want to stay.

¸  (1400)  

    Also, on the nominee programs, from the Enterprise Saint John perspective, where a lot of effort has been put into attracting investors and a lot of marketing has gone on overseas in trying to bring people here, one of the frustrations they've experienced has been that an exploratory visit is required for an investor. What's happening is that some investors are now having to wait six to twelve months before they can get a visa to come and look at the investment potential on an exploratory visit. This seems to be as a result of the embassies basically being overwhelmed and understaffed, and potential investors are having a difficult time coming into the area to look at these exploratory visits.

    There seems to be a need from Enterprise Saint John, and from the university's perspective in many ways, to incorporate into Citizenship and Immigration Canada's role as enforcement...but also as a position to encourage and support people who want to come and invest, or students who want to stay in the country, to look at interpreting immigration laws in a much more open or liberal way. That is, if you're looking at a student who has never worked in Canada because they're not allowed to work part-time and you want to allow them to get some work experience so they can then apply to stay in Canada, then we should be looking at how we interpret what is a career-related job or what is a suitable job for a student to enter into.

    I think we all agree that someone working in a restaurant as a side order cook is not the type of job we want, but if a student can enter into an entry level position in a company, there's the potential for growth. For instance, many people in business enter into sales because that's where you have to learn the product, but the sales position may not require a university position, it may require a high school diploma, so the immigration officer in Saint John won't grant the permit.

    Again, we're looking at people who want to stay in the area and who want to enter into the workforce. They need that period of time so that when they apply to stay in Canada they're showing they have the degree plus they have some work experience.

    As my colleague Kay mentioned, there is a need for students to work off campus part-time, and the efforts that have been presented by organizations like the CBIE would ease that transition as well. We need to allow students to work part-time during their academic year. The proposal made by CBIE was that it be 20 hours a week maximum, that they be in their second year, and that they be good academic students. The universities have agreed to help with the monitoring of that. This would allow the students to gain some work experience. It also would go a long way with integrating international students into the community, because most university students today work part-time.

    From my experience with working with students, it's not necessarily the need to make money, it's the need to get some experience and meeting people in the community.

    So as a result of the international efforts at the university, there's been a very big change, I think, in the profile of Saint John. When you consider Saint John, the things that come to your mind are Canada's loyalist city and the most Irish city. Now there are roughly 500 Chinese students living in that community. Just recently a large Chinese New Year was celebrated, with efforts to make it even a provincial celebration centred in Saint John.

    Enterprise Saint John wants to support these students while they're students, and hopefully they will stay in the community as well. A whole support team has been put together. I passed you the structure in the blue binder that shows there's a support team and an attract team. There's a committee of about 20 people, with about eight or nine different committees. They're really looking at making it more of an international community that will support new students and potentially support immigrants to the community.

    We had a chance to meet with Denis Coderre when he came to Saint John. He was invited by the committee. One of the challenges that our committee put out to him was that he should use Saint John as a pilot project.

¸  (1405)  

    We want to be looked as a place that can support immigrants. If there's the potential for encouraging them to come to Saint John, then we believe we're putting in place a system that will support them, everything from helping them with employment, mentoring, housing, and cultural adjustment. It's a fairly big effort, and I think Saint John strongly wants to become an international city within New Brunswick. Part of that is due to the good relationship between the university and the community in doing this. The community sees that international students contribute a lot in the way of hard cash when they're renting their apartments and living in the community. The city sees these students as being potential citizens and people who will work in the community, and that their families may even bring in investment dollars.

    My message again to the committee is to look at Saint John and hopefully look at some of the issues, particularly around employment, that international students are facing when they're trying to find that one-year work-through.

    Thank you.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much, Peter.

    We do appreciate the presentation. It gives us a better aspect of the problems you're facing in Saint John, obviously, and the difficulties students have in staying. We have had some long discussions in committee at earlier stages about trying to formulate some solutions, and obviously with your presentation we're all looking in the same direction to resolve some of those issues about how we keep our people who've come here, learned and trained in Canada, and how we get them employed in Canada. That is quite critical.

    Our next witness is Angela Odei. Angela is the settlement person in Saint John with the YMCA.

    Ms. Angela Odei (Director, Settlement Services, Saint John Campus, YMCA-YWCA): Thank you.

    I'm Angela Odei and I'm director of settlement services at the YM-YWCA in Saint John. I'm also an immigrant who lives in New Brunswick as a result of a secondary migration. I moved here from Saskatchewan. Also, I'm a member of a racial minority. That is my background.

    I'm going to comment on some of the points you made.

    I will start with the pre-arrival counselling and orientation that is given to potential immigrants coming into Canada. Our immigrants, those we deal with--and we deal with them through all the programs the federal government funds--come with very high and unrealistic expectations. This is not unusual, considering what they are getting away from, that they should have high hopes that they are coming to a place where terms will be better.

    We still think Canada can do a better job of informing them. We also want to know exactly what kind of orientation is given to these potential Canadians. CIC developed a video that is shown at visa offices, high commissions, and embassies. Immigrants tell their stories of how they couldn't find jobs in their own fields and things like that. I'm wondering whether we are still showing that video. We would like to know what is being done with that material so that when they come and tell us they were promised this and that, we can at least talk to them with some knowledge of what has gone on before.

    The federal programs that we have are LINC, ISAP, RAP, and Host. It's our belief that no matter where immigrants go in Canada they are entitled to a minimum standard of settlement services. This is not the case, and we would like to see this happen.

    At the moment we have LINC. We have level one, a pre-LINC, to level three. This time we've got levels four and five. Four and five are very crucial to anybody going through LINC, but it has taken us two years to get levels four and five, and even then we got an abbreviated form of it. We are supposed to serve clients from Saint John to Sussex and also to St. Stephen, but we are unable to do that because we don't have the resources. We don't have the money for our staff to go there, nor do we have money to hire tutors for those who ask for tutoring. At the same time, the students can't come to us. We've had a couple try, but financially they just couldn't manage it. We'd like to see something done about that.

    If somebody approached us and wanted services, not just LINC but French tutoring, we're supposed to be able to do that. Well, initially we had some money, but the money is gone. We don't have it any more. We would like to see it restored to enable us to do something like that.

    Some clients work and they would like to have classes in the evening. We could provide the classes if we had the money to do that, but we don't. This is very important because people come here, they get jobs, and some have good jobs and are able to look after themselves--they don't want to go on income assistance--but they also need to learn English so that they can improve themselves. And we can't do that. The big centres have that so the people go there, even when they want to stay here.

    Most of our staff, particularly Host, are part-time and their wages are low to begin with. It's very difficult to recruit and keep good staff, and we'd like something done in that area.

¸  (1410)  

    The Province of New Brunswick is responsible for immigrant training, but we would like to see the province working more closely with federal programs so that we can work together in the interests of immigrants to find them employment. This is crucial, because when they find jobs they tend to stay, and if the Province of New Brunswick wants to retain these people, that's what we have to do.

    Education is a provincial jurisdiction, but we have a problem with our immigrant children. They have two weeks of extra English language lessons and that's not enough. Language is essential to their development and ability to access the community. When they don't get this basic training, of course it impacts on their social and academic development. We'd like to see something done about that, and of course it takes money.

    There has been a lot of talk about the geographic distribution of immigrants. This would only be a short-term solution because people often move when their time is up. New Brunswick and the small centres have to decide whether we want transients or people who want to become and do become New Brunswickers.

    Why should immigrants lose their freedom to move around? Average Canadians have a right to move to wherever they like, so I don't think they should lose that right. I believe that if we were to target the right people, if we were to have the programs in place and equal access to the workforce, people would stay.

    I would like to comment on recognition of foreign credentials and experience. A lot has been said about this in the media and it's been discussed everywhere. The only thing we'd add to this is that although professional licensing bodies are provincial responsibilities, the two levels of government should get together to find a solution. As more immigrants arrive in Canada, the problem will compound itself, so we cannot escape looking at this particular problem.

    Regarding public education, Canadians, and New Brunswickers in particular, do not want to admit there is a lot of racism out there, but the reality is that there is. I'm going to give you some examples. Looking for a job is more difficult for a non-white person than for a white person.

    We had four engineers. One of them had a basic degree from outside the country. He came here and did a master's program. He needed placement but couldn't find one. The second one did his degree at UNB. He couldn't get a job. Both of them moved to B.C. You know what? They got good jobs in B.C.

    The third one was an entrepreneur who came here with quite a lot of money. He didn't have any English. He came through the program and learned English. He advertised to buy a gas station. He tried to buy twice, but each time he put his application in, everything was fine until somebody called for the interview. All of a sudden, the gas station wasn't available. He was, by training, an engineer. He studied really hard and passed the exams. We've been trying to place him for one year to get that one-year training to be licensed. We haven't been able to. We are not talking about foreign credentials here.

    We had a fourth one who was white. His English was not very good, but we still tried to place him. Lo and behold, he got an apprenticeship. Go figure.

¸  (1415)  

    When white immigrants leave the province to go somewhere, the concern for us is whether or not they are pursuing an opportunity. When visible minorities do that, they are ungrateful, and after all we've done for them. So the next time you say “Oh, it's easy, when you help them so much, they move”.... People are probably not consciously being racist, but it's there. We have to do something about people understanding what is happening so that we can do something about it.

    Both levels of government should mount a campaign to make people aware of the gains from immigration. We need to make people realize the values of all classes and colours of immigrants, because we don't need just the highly qualified; we also need the average Joe. We need people in all areas. We don't need just the university graduates. We have to consider what we need and work at it.

    I would like to mention mental health support. This is very important, especially for refugees. In this region we don't have any help for refugees who have been through really extreme trauma. We do need to establish something like that in this region.

    We would like to come to terms with the transportation allowance for our RAP clients. You all know that government-sponsored refugees, when they come, incur this for their transportation to Canada. When they get here they are required to begin paying off their loan. Usually the money they get under RAP is not sufficient for them to be able to pay the amount required of them. The amount required is rather high. It can be as much as $90 a month for a single person and for a family it could go up as much as $200 a month.

    Usually there is no problem when the settlement worker is called to renegotiate. We negotiate down so that they can pay smaller amounts. Problems arise even when the clients have been paying faithfully the amounts that we renegotiated, and even when they start working and they increase it, but not as rapidly as say the $90 or $200 a month. Problems arise when these same people go to sponsor a family member. Their application is turned down. Why? Because they are deemed to be in arrears.

    This is not fair. These people were supposed to pay $200 or $100 a month. We negotiated and showed all the evidence that they could afford to pay $50. They've been paying that and haven't defaulted. Yet if they want to bring in a family member, you look back and say, “Well, you should have been paying $100 a month. You've been paying $50 a month, so you are in arrears by the difference.” And the application is turned down.

    These family members are trying so hard. Some of them work three or four jobs to be able to make the money to bring their people back. I don't think it's fair, and that should be addressed.

    I could go on forever, but I'll stop here. Thank you very much.

¸  (1420)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Angela, accept my apologies. I didn't mean to not hear all of your presentation, but because of a little emergency I had to get out for a minute and come back. I hope you'll accept my apology for leaving.

    I'm certain John and committee members will make sure I'm fully briefed on everything you've put forward. I apologize again. We'll look forward to questions and bring some of those issues out.

    Ashraf Ghanem is our next witness. He is president of the Multicultural Association of Fredericton.

    Mr. Ashraf Ghanem (President, Multicultural Association of Fredericton): Honourable members of the standing committee, Honourable Andy Scott and guests, my name is Ashraf Ghanem and I'm the president of the Multicultural Association of Fredericton. We are a team of committed staff and volunteers who believe in making Fredericton and New Brunswick a better place to live and a welcoming place for newcomers.

    Our work involves public education in anti-racism through diversity and community outreach programs to the entire community, as well as being contracted by Citizenship and Immigration Canada to provide services to newcomers to Canada, including LINC, RAP, ISAP, and Host programs. We work closely with the federal and provincial governments and our community partners to achieve our goals of facilitating each person in Fredericton in reaching his or her full potential.

    The association feels there is a need for a better and more realistic overseas preparation. We must make sure prospective immigrants are receiving accurate information about such things as the employment situation, accreditation process in their field in Canada, their rights and responsibilities, the settlement process, and programs that will be available to assist in this process.

    The MCAF was told by various newcomers that they were asked by the Canadian officials overseas why they chose New Brunswick as a destination other than the larger centres. If we are to encourage people to move to other areas, then there has to be some direction to embassy staff about not making applicants doubt their decisions about choosing New Brunswick over Montreal or Toronto or Vancouver.

    We recommend that overseas CIC staff be instructed that they should not question or discourage an applicant's decision to move to a smaller or more rural area. We also suggest to make sure overseas staff have up-to-date information about smaller centres.

    With regard to the obstacles of integration and participation that are faced by new immigrants, we have added five in our written brief. At this time I would like to focus on just two of them.

    First, there is a great need to expedite family reunification. Immigrant-serving organizations need additional resources to coordinate the work of many community partners that work to facilitate this process. The sources must be made available to assist newcomers in the family reunification process, and the process itself should be simplified.

    The recognition of foreign experience and accreditation is a significant problem. This is specifically true in a smaller centre due to lack of critical mass of immigrants of each profession. Instead, this work is done on a case-by-case basis with the provincial professional associations.

    We feel it's important that this process be streamlined. We suggest that we need to begin a process for recognition of foreign credentials overseas. The association has addressed the functioning of various federal funding programs and administrative issues. Together the course for organizations like ours is intertwined.

¸  (1425)  

    Dividing federally funded programs into LINC, RAP, ISAP, and Host components, each as separate contribution agreements with separate budgets, proposals, and reporting requirements carries a heavy administrative weight, particularly for the smaller centres. Integrated program funding and multi-year funding for experienced and successful service providers would allow smaller centres to lighten the administrative weight and would ensure the maximum funding went directly to programming.

    We suggest that CIC should focus more on outcomes and less on designing programs. This task belongs to experienced immigrant service agencies.

    The MCAF is fortunate in having the province as our partner in the employment program initiative. Its commitment to the employment program shows its understanding of employment as the key to retention of immigrants in the province.

    The provincial nominee program, as was addressed this morning by Honourable Betts, is a welcome initiative of the province. We concur with the New Brunswick Multicultural Council recommendations for improvement, but overall we support the program and the development of fuller immigration agreements with the federal government. Geographic distribution of immigrants and proposals to encourage newcomers to settle more widely is of particular interest to us.

    We endorse the minister's plan to increase immigration to smaller centres and to increase the level of francophone immigration. However, to retain immigrants in smaller centres and to facilitate integration, it will be necessary for CIC to allocate sufficient funding for smaller centres to provide comparable programming. This is particularly true for LINC funding.

    To increase retention and successful settlement of immigrants in our region, we need a consistently funded level 4/5. For some of you who are not familiar with that, it's a labour market language training class that helps newcomers to access the labour market.

    New Brunswick is a bilingual province and newcomers have the right to study in either of Canada's official languages as their second language. The ability to function in both French and English is an asset for people in the local labour market. In spite of this, New Brunswick is not allocated additional funding to provide French as a second language. In addition to LINC, we recommend that stable funding for FSL training be made available for New Brunswick.

    As with employment and settlement, smaller centres are at a disadvantage when it comes to educational resources. We recommend that funding be allocated for in-school training of teachers, administrators, school bus drivers, and other front-line educational personnel in cross-cultural communication.

    The problems of perception and stereotyping are barriers to rapid integration for many immigrants. Discrimination based on language or the perceived lack of English language skills and discrimination in housing due to the large family size or landlord perception are addressed in detail in our written submission.

    The MAF has created a newcomer health promotion committee consisting of health professionals and MCAF staff who work to develop a partnership in the committee to provide newcomers with an introduction to the Canadian health care system and to facilitate access to health promotion resources. Some of the issues dealt with on a daily basis include lack of health coverage for immigrants and limitation on coverage of government-assisted refugees for the first three months in Canada.

¸  (1430)  

    In the area of information availability, we recommend that there be a central registry, perhaps on-line, of already translated health care, social and other materials, which are available for use by immigrant service agencies, whether free of charge or for a fee. Access to health care information and the resources in the written form in multiple languages is one of the best and most cost-effective ways to disseminate health information. A small centre like Fredericton does not have the resources to print information in several languages.

    All these issues are expanded on in much more detail in our written submission. We thank you for giving us the opportunity to address them. We'd like to thank the standing committee for coming to Fredericton and for allowing the Multicultural Association of Fredericton to have a voice at these important meetings. Thank you very much.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Ashraf, I would like to say we share the sentiment with you and are thankful for the work that you do as well. I think that's kind of mutual. We are working toward the same goal.

    I also would like to welcome my colleague, Andy Scott, who is from New Brunswick. It's nice to have someone from the province here to help us with those concerns here.

    We're going to start the questioning, and we have approximately 25 to 30 minutes left. Diane, would you like to begin?

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Canadian Alliance): Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I too would like to welcome my colleague Mr. Scott. I sat with Mr. Scott on another committee a few years ago and have a high regard for him. You've chosen well here. Since it wasn't a member of my party you chose, you did the second best anyway.

    I want to thank you for your presentations today. I have a question for Ms. Nandlall.

    You spoke about the problems facing students. We have heard from another student group in Halifax, particularly with this need for allowing students to have work off campus. I wonder if you could just help us in understanding why students, at this point, are confined to working on campus, what kinds of jobs are available, if any, on campus, and what kinds of jobs might be available should the policy change to allow off-campus work.

¸  (1435)  

    Ms. Kay Nandlall: We have a few students working on campus. I think each centre is different. New Brunswick is a province where there are not many jobs on campus. Our students work for 10 to 15 hours per week on campus based on need. Only a few can access this.

    I really was very pleased when we put the proposal that students could work off campus. I think what it will do, because of other things I mentioned where problems occur, is when students are off campus they build relationships with people. The community becomes more involved. I'm not saying everybody will get jobs off campus, but some will. I think that will help to build a community.

    I feel strongly about this. I've been living in New Brunswick for over 33 years now. When I was writing this report and when I stepped back and saw the changes over 33 years, it was amazing. New Brunswick is a very different place from what it was when I moved here as a student. I think I was able to build relationships within the community and that helped. Maybe that's why I stayed.

    I find nowadays that students are not given a chance because they can't work off campus, so they stay within the university community. The few who find jobs move on. Even after they graduate they cannot find jobs because they haven't built those relationships.

    We have some other programs, like friendship programs, but that's different. It's students meeting families for dinner and for different activities like that, but this working relationship is not built in. I feel that will help us in eliminating a number of the problems.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: That makes a lot of sense.

    With respect to the program you have at the University of New Brunswick, Mr. Donahue, this is very interesting. It's the first such program that I am aware of, although there probably are others. This was a good presentation. I was particularly interested in the leadership you're taking in building community support services teams. Others, from the point of being settlement providers, have talked about the need to do this, but to have the initiative being taken from the university, from a centre of learning, must be extremely helpful.

    I would really welcome a little bit of an expansion on your welcoming services, on your raising awareness of the benefits of immigration in the community, and also on your list of business and personal mentors, because as Ms. Nandlall said, those kinds of bridges can be very important. Maybe this opportunity for you to give us a little broader idea of what you're doing there would be helpful.

    Mr. Peter Donahue: Thank you. As I mentioned, the nature of UNB Saint John has been that of a sort of a commuter campus, but bringing in these international students, having only 70 beds in residence and over 800 students on campus, required us to make some very quick and strong links with the community.

    The first link started with accommodations for students and a sort of home-stay program, working with landlords and finding quality, affordable housing for these students. We spent a lot of years educating people on how to set up apartments for international students. There are issues around cooking and access to certain bathroom facilities or laundry. Basically what's happened is that the landlords in the community have recognized the economic spinoffs of this.

    The university was forced to look at international students as a source to keep the university going because of demographics in the Saint John area, where 95% of our students were coming from and high school graduates were dropping fast. In many ways, it's brought the university from probably about 1,500 students to about 2,500 students, and it's also allowed it to be stamped as an international institution. Because we've always been dependent upon the community to provide services for our students because they came from there, there were these natural links, but also, we don't have the medical centres so we had to work with doctors in finding places for our students to go to. We don't have much in the way of travel agents. We don't have any of those sorts of banking services on our campus.

    So the first couple of times we brought in international students, the students ran into a lot of barriers. They'd walk into a bank and produce large amounts of American money in cash. The bank would go, “What is this? Where is this coming from?” It became a whole process of educating the local banking people on the fact that you have to take American money out of the country. If you're coming from certain countries, where a lot of our students were coming from, like Pakistan and some African countries, the banking system is not something you can depend on. People don't put money in the banks. There are these sorts of realities.

    We actually put a team together to do these things, a team that would go to the banks that wanted us and do information sessions with their bank tellers, that would go in at staff times and talk to them, mostly about where our students were coming from, and talk to them about the contacts there were at the university for them.

    With Enterprise Saint John, they quickly started to recognize the economic impact as well and came to the university and said there was so much potential in these students coming here. Out of our 800 students, about 600 come from China. The city already has some connections with the Chinese government and the provincial government, the Department of Education, with an institution in Beijing. There are already some natural links. Enterprise Saint John, which is an economic development institute, asked if there was a potential for getting students to stay and for getting their families to invest in Saint John, so we started looking at working at a partnership.

    When we started identifying people to be involved with this committee, we basically identified, from the university perspective, people who were doing things without being asked, like the home-stay hosts, the individuals who were inviting people to their homes and inviting other people to their friends' homes, and people who were involved with our international events on campus but weren't really ever asked to do these things and just came out and volunteered.

    This was a sign of what Saint John is. Sometimes there is a small-town feeling in the Maritimes. Maybe this is what you have in Saint John. International students would continuously come into my office and ask, “Why do people on the street say 'hi' to me all the time?” I told them it was because it's such a small area that you're going to be seen again, and people make these contacts.

¸  (1440)  

    We basically brought together under one committee people who were already doing things and who said, “We could do a lot here to support the students right now, because we know there's more opportunity for them to be further integrated into the community if we provide a little bit of support, and we know businesses in Saint John would like to have these students visiting their establishments, so let's work together.”

    We at the university were able to lead some of the businesses and organizations to focus on the university students, but at the same time we were able to get the support we needed from businesses. We can't provide it. We need students who are going to stay for the four years when they come to Saint John. We need them to stay in the community, and we need that support. So it's a very informal organization that has formed between the community and the university.

¸  (1445)  

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I get the impression, Mr. Chairman, that we have an enthusiast for this program. That was a good explanation.

    I do have questions for Ms. Odei and Mr. Ghanem, but I sense my time is probably up, so maybe I should pass the torch.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): If you quickly ask the question, maybe we could integrate it with some others.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Okay.

    Ms. Odei, you struck one of my favourite themes, as this committee is just beginning to know, and that is sports services for children, specifically with respect to children who have gone through traumatic experiences. Some of the school boards are finding that in addition to needing to educate children and educate children whose first language is not English and educate children who might have socialization problems because they're different--you touched on that--the children also have these real personal and emotional difficulties because of the terrible experiences they've gone through.

    I wonder if you could expand a little bit on any approaches or treatments that you have found helpful in this regard. Does it take trained psychiatrists or psychologists to deal with this, or can school personnel be brought in to assist with this? What is the best way to approach this problem?

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Do you have another one for Ashraf?

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Yes, I do.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): I'll let the question go to Ashraf and then I'll try to get questions to the other members. At most, we have about 15 minutes left, so let's get the questions on the table. Then, each person remembering the question you have, we'll try to give you an opportunity to answer.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Mr. Ghanem, yours was an excellent presentation, running the gamut of issues. We've heard about a lot of these issues, but the one I particularly wanted to ask you about was this whole matter of the ceiling on earnings for refugees, the matter of government-assisted refugees having a very low level of support and being able to retain only a small percentage of their additional earnings. You said 25%.

    I've asked other witnesses this. I wonder if you have any studies or experience that you could bring before the committee that would show the beneficial effects of allowing refugees to retain a higher level of their additional earnings.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): John.

    Mr. John Bryden (Ancaster—Dundas—Flamborough—Aldershot, Lib.): I just have two questions, Mr. Chairman.

    I was impressed by the fact that Madam Nandlall brought up the September 11 issue. Let me take advantage of your presence here and pose a very delicate question. In the context of the security concerns that have arisen post-September 11, this committee, or Parliament, may have to consider at some future time the problem of restricting student visas based on country of origin. Do you have any thoughts on that?

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Can you hold the answer for a moment or two?

    John, what was your other question?

    Mr. John Bryden: The other question is for later, because I think you need time to think about this. I'm going to have to go at 3:30, so I won't be able to be here for the discussion on the national identity card. I know the multicultural association has a presentation, but because it's a surprise question, I'd like you to react and give the committee your feelings about a national identity card. But I want to give you a few minutes to think about it.

    The national identity card that has been proposed by the minister would be a card that possesses biometrics. In other words, it would be a card that would absolutely identify the holder by means of iris identification or fingerprints. This would be encoded in the card. I would like you to give us even just your emotional responses to that, for the first three witnesses, if I may, because, Mr. Ghanem, you're with the association. That is a question for the end of the round. You may answer at the end of the round, but--

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Yes, we have a witness coming in on that at two o'clock.

    Mr. John Bryden: I realize that, but not these witnesses.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you, John.

    Did you have anything to add, Andy?

    Hon. Andy Scott (Fredericton, Lib.): Mr. Andy ScottYes, and welcome to my riding.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you.

    Mr. Andy Scott: I have three things. I think it was Kay who mentioned the labour market agreement and the fact that the evolution of the labour market agreement has changed the level of government, changed the people who are dealing with settlement and employment. Generally speaking, when the duplication in labour market programs was considered, the overwhelming feeling was that the province had most of the supporting activities, whether it was income assistance or education at the community colleges or all of those kinds of things.

    I don't think people thought about the fact that the federal government actually provided some of the programs around new Canadians, aboriginal Canadians, and disabled Canadians, so there have been some unintended consequences of the labour market agreement. I'd like to know how severe they've been in your community, and I'll try to restrict the question to whoever brought it up in the first instance. I think it was Kay.

    My second question has to do with Ms. Odei's reference to the fact that we sometimes think the people who come here are coming here to pass through.

    You said that if the programs existed here, that wouldn't be the case. To what extent and what percentage of those people who pass through could we really keep if we put a real will to it by the provision of programs?

    Finally, on this post-September 11 stuff, we now are awaiting the reports. I'm not a member of this committee, as my constituents know, I think. I'm the chair of the justice and human rights committee, and we're awaiting the report of the Attorney General on the response or the reaction to the anti-terrorism legislation of a year ago, so I'm going to make an invitation to you that has nothing to do with this committee, but I'm here and so are you. I would like not necessarily an answer here, but I would like you to provide me with your reflections on what's happened since September 11 in the context of the things you interact with. Some of them affect this committee and the community in these programs you interact with.

    Personally, I'd like to know. Send it to my office and I'll see to it that it becomes a part of the deliberations of the committee as we look at the reports that the attorneys general, federal and provincial, will make available to us. Thank you.

¸  (1450)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you.

    We don't have a long time, and I know there are pretty extensive questions. I would ask if each of the witnesses would answer as briefly as possible, and try to keep the comments down to three or four minutes, if we can do it.

    Angela.

    Ms. Angela Odei: Ms. Ablonczy wanted to know about the mental health of the children. That's a difficult one, because it involves quite a lot of things. The first is language. Mental health is one of the areas where you really must have the language to be able to tell either the psychologist or the psychiatrist exactly what your problem is. Secondly, different cultures express themselves in different ways, so you really need to have an understanding of what you're dealing with. The third problem is that the children are not getting the language training they need to be able to communicate.

    As well, the psychiatrists and psychologists we have, at least in Saint John, are already overstretched with what they have to deal with in the main population. You need a lot of time with each new patient, so that is something that should have some specific allocation of funds to be able to build this properly. Also, you don't treat a child in isolation; you treat the whole family. So you have to have an understanding of the dynamics of that particular family. You might start with just the child but extend it to family sessions. So you are looking at it in a long-term sense. Mental health is not something where you say, oh, you're suffering from something, you realize you've cut yourself, it's healed, and you go on. It doesn't happen that way.

    At the moment, when some of the children have these problems, the parents also do. It's very difficult sometimes when the children tend to speak English better than their parents do and they interpret for their parents. It can present a really awkward situation. Sometimes what the parent is saying is really private to the parent, yet the child has to translate for their parent. We've had situations like that and it hasn't been very pleasant. In short, what I'm really saying is that this is an area that has to be considered an essential and separate area, and we should put in money and resources to be able to accomplish this, because let's face it, these children are going to be the future Canadians who are going to carry whatever it is on.

    Fortunately for us, a lot of our children are very high achievers, because most parents see only the education of their children as a validation for their having left wherever it was, their own countries. It's not just in New Brunswick or Saint John that we have this problem, I think. It's the whole region

¸  (1455)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much.

    Ashraf.

    Mr. Ashraf Ghanem: With regard to the question about the government-assisted refugee program and the clawback, we feel there is a need for some changes that would allow the recipient of these funds some incentive. If they can earn more than 25%, that's a way of introducing them to the labour market, and it's a step in the right direction as far as being able to integrate into society.

    I can talk from experience, from dealing with our clients. Most of our government-assisted refugees who come to Fredericton are off the program before the year is up, they are so eager to get out to the labour market and find jobs. They are not hoping that this program will go for another year or so. No, up to six or seven months after they get acclimatized to the labour market, are able to have a proper resume, and know what jobs are available out there, they go out and apply and are able to get off the program. They are not here to stay on a social program and just live for free on the system. We see that every day in our association.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Kay.

    Ms. Kay Nandlall: Regarding September 11 and the thought of restricting visas to certain countries, I'm very concerned about that. I think it would be short-sighted. I think we should develop a proper screening process to bring in the proper students or immigrants. I think there's enough knowledge there to develop a proper screening process rather than just say that we're bringing in people from only one country or two countries that are whatever. I feel very strongly about that. As well, I think we need people from various countries, more than ever, to create more understanding, especially in the institutions of higher education. That is so important at present.

    Regarding the national identity card, it's great to go high tech, as it makes things easy, but does it solve the problem? Will it help if there is a problem? I don't think it will. I think we need to train our immigration officers. It's interesting. I think because of cultural bias we don't look at people in a certain way to understand them or to really know what's going on. I think that for those things there needs to be more training. The human element should be there. I'm very concerned about that. High tech is okay if it's widgets and things we're dealing with, but when it's people, I think the human element needs to be there. It's not only that this gives us good immigrants and citizens, but if they also further the cause of Canada, Canada is at peace. I came here because I read about Canada, and I met Mr. Trudeau when I was very young and the past president of UNB, who was the high commissioner in my country, and that's why I came to Canada. They told me I should emigrate and come to Canada.

    I came here, but I had this big ideal about this. I still haven't lost it, and I'd like to see it continue, but we have such a narrow frame of reference when we deal with issues, when human issues are concerned. It's not taught in schools. We sort of go only where the money is, but the social side of things is very important. And maybe we need to do more of that, especially for immigration officers and embassies abroad, for people who are working in these various posts, because I think there are good people no matter where we go. Thank you.

¹  (1500)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you.

    Mr. John Bryden: Mr. Donahue might have a remark on that.

    Mr. Peter Donahue: Yes, on the national identity cards, the one question that comes to my mind is what happens when people lose those cards? When they're stolen, when people don't have them, what's the penalty associated with it? I don't have a real big problem with an identity card, because when we're dealing with international students in particular, they have identity documents, but what happens when people lose them, when they don't present them as required?

    Mr. John Bryden: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much.

    May I say to all of you, thank you very much for helping us to understand your viewpoints and the directions. You also bring a different aspect to it. We're very fortunate that we can come to New Brunswick and get a view from people who see many of these problems in very different ways. Oftentimes the larger centres, the voices of those with the masses, get heard a lot more often. It's great to be here and to hear from those who are struggling with the same problems, only from a totally different viewpoint because of the challenges you have in this society. It's very helpful for us and we very much appreciate it. You folks have a good day.

¹  (1502)  

---

¹  (1507)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Order. Welcome back. We have a plane to catch and we don't have a lot of time to lose.

    We appreciate your help with the identity card this afternoon.

    Ms. MacInnis, thank you very much for coming here to give us your viewpoints as well. We do have a relatively short time period. What we want to do is get to the details of your presentation, so I'm going to open the floor to each of you, and then we'll have a few questions. We're going to try to be out by four, if we can, so that gives us almost an hour.

    David, would you like to start? Thank you.

    Mr. David McMath (As Individual): Again, thank you for the opportunity to speak to the committee on these issues. I'm not sure of the extent, but I heard at the end of the last presentation some mention of identity cards. I didn't catch all of the discussion, so I'm not sure how much of that was discussed already.

    I've handed out just a brief outline of some of the concerns I have. As I speak to people, there seem to be some common concerns that others have.

    One question might be, what would be the purpose of a national identity card? I think that has to be clearly thought through as to why exactly we would need this. Is it solely identification to say that, yes, you are the person you purport to be? Or would it be identification plus something else? Would there be other reasons why this might be necessary?

    This tends to get into the privacy issues, but is there any record or data kept of instances where a person has presented the card for any particular reason, transaction, travel, whatever? Is there a data bank to be kept of the person's activities? I understand that in the commercial world there's already a sizeable data bank, the ATM machines, your telephone calls, your cell phone calls, and all the rest of it. Do we need to add to that?

    It's understandable that there are federal government programs or other government programs that we need an entitlement card for or some identification for that purpose. If it's a travel issue, international travel seems to be an increasing issue these days. I have border security also under another point here as the motivation for bringing this in.

    I notice the U.S. Patriots Act has sections authorizing expenditures and development in the area of integrated entry and exit data systems for airports, seaports, land border ports of entry, and also the direction to look at biometric technology and tamper-resistant documents readable at ports of entry. That's from section 414 of the Patriots Act. I'm wondering, is it pressure from abroad that would cause us to want to make some changes here, and is that appropriate?

    We have passports already. We have a travel document. I think in the past there perhaps have been problems with forged or stolen passports. Again, we have the fraud/identity theft issue that comes up. Can passports be tightened up as an instrument of identification or authorizing travel and facilitating moving through international borders?

    The one issue that comes up in my mind is, would this be a voluntary card? Is it going to be mandatory that you have to have a national ID card?

    Many countries, as I'm sure you're aware, have them. Not all of them by any means are police states. Some of the countries that have these have been what we might call “totalitarian”, or words like that, where you're very restricted. If you don't have this card--perhaps it can be removed from you--you might lose privileges to live in a certain place or to work in a certain job. There can be a lot of these frights that people have if they don't have their cards. I'm not suggesting that Canada is there or moving in that direction, but it's a concern.

    Could it be made a voluntary card? If people want to have the ease of travel to the U.S. and have this card with a biometric identifier as part of it, then that should be a choice that individuals would make on an individual basis.

    The other concern relates to the whole area of privacy. I think I read somewhere that the Privacy Commissioner made a comment about having a right to privacy and a right to anonymity in this country. I think a lot of people would say, yes you should have certain freedoms to live your life without having to prove who you are to authorities or those who might ask.

    In our culture and experience, it's typically lawbreakers who are being asked to identify themselves. If you drive too fast, you have to show your licence. If you commit a crime, then you get fingerprinted. Then there's a record of those kinds of things. It typically hasn't been law-abiding citizens who have had to have a card.

¹  (1510)  

    We have to look at the limitations of any system that is set up. We're going to have human error. We're going to have technology failures or glitches, and systems do go down. There are inherent risks in placing faith in any thing, and there's also the possibility of hackers and others who might breach the security system and have access to this data, if in fact data is kept.

    One issue that has come up a few times too, as I've talked to people about this, is cost. If we look at the firearms registry as an example, I think the Auditor General's report indicated that it was initially to cost $119 million, recovering $117 million in user fees, so the net cost they thought would be $2 million. Now I think the estimates are that it's going to be $1 billion, recovering $140 million in the year 2004-05. There tends to be a ballooning of cost.

    I'm not suggesting that this department might necessarily have the same what we might call abysmal record as the Department of Justice faced in this instance, and there are different issues and problems perhaps, but I think the increasing size of government and the things that government gets involved in places a tremendous burden on the taxpayer. We'd have to look very seriously at the cost of implementing some kind of national system. The record thus far hasn't been rosy if we look at that example.

    Costs could be perhaps in terms of loss of freedom, as I've mentioned, not just the financial cost, if there is a requirement to have this card. That moves us away from the kind of truly free society we've had and enjoyed.

    As I understand it, the permanent resident card is just being implemented. Perhaps it should be allowed to run its course, be tested, if you will, before launching into any other card for all Canadians. I suggest as well that the biometric technology that's part of this is also in its infancy. It's perhaps been around for a few years, but it hasn't really been used extensively.

    Again, I want to sound a note of caution in a number of areas. They may have all been canvassed before you, and if they have been, I'd just like to reiterate them.

    Thank you.

¹  (1515)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much, David. We certainly appreciate it.

    One point you bring forward, which many people have brought forward, is that there are many questions. At this point in time we're debating speculation, I guess, in many respects, and discussing things. All that detail is not there. When we talk about the national identity card, there is all kinds of detail that needs to be done.

    One of the parts of this exercise is to listen to the public and glean from those discussions the feeling.... Possibly a lot of those blanks need to be filled in by the department and the minister in a lot more detail so that we do understand. This discussion is pretty open at this point in time.

    Ms. MacInnis.

    Ms. Aneas MacInnis (Settlement Worker, Multicultural Association of Fredericton): First I'd like to thank the standing committee for being here and for providing us with this forum to express our views on these important topics.

    My name is Aneas MacInnis and I work with the Multicultural Association of Fredericton, or MCAF. My work primarily involves the settlement of government-assisted refugees through the resettlement assistance program we refer to as RAP.

    As you have already heard, the association is an immigrant-serving agency that is contracted by Citizenship and Immigration to provide settlement services to newcomers to Canada, including LINC, RAP, ISAP, and Host programs. We're also funded by the Department of Canadian Heritage, the Province of New Brunswick, and other funders to provide a wide range of public education, anti-racism, pro-diversity, and community outreach programs to the entire community.

    In response to learning about these hearings several weeks ago, the Association of Social Policy and Advocacy Committee, the MCAF staff, and some of our colleagues from the New Brunswick Multicultural Council came together to form a committee to consider the contents of the act itself and several relevant documents in order that we could document a response to the points that affected our work in the multicultural community we serve.

    The Multicultural Association of Fredericton recognizes that there are significant aspects of the national identity card debate that are the realm of security experts. However, as a community service organization and an immigrant-serving agency concerned with citizenship and human rights, we recognize that there is a role for our organization, as for all of us, in the discussion of the document that will have a great impact on our society.

    What we're able to do is to look at our experience with a similar piece of identification, which Mr. McMath referred to, a permanent resident card, which recently came into effect. This card, as you no doubt are aware, was introduced in the past year. Every permanent resident of Canada who has emigrated from another country must obtain and carry one. In this way it plays the role of an identity card for newcomers to Canada in much the same way a national identity card would for all Canadians.

    We believe that by looking at our experience with the permanent resident cards we can predict some of the practical issues that may crop up in the creation and distribution of a national identity card.

    The problems we've encountered with the permanent resident card relate mostly to the manner in which it is obtained and the length of time it takes to actually get the card.

    Currently these cards are being sent to immigrants by regular mail, but only after they have obtained a permanent address. Depending on the circumstances, this could take several days or several weeks, given that the vacancy rate in Fredericton is less than 1% and other compounding factors involved as well.

    Other documents that may be held by the immigrant are not recognized by banks, the telephone company, the power company, and others. This lack of a recognized document creates a frustrating catch-22. An immigrant must have a permanent address before he can be mailed this permanent resident card. Yet without the card he cannot get electricity or heat connected, a phone hooked up, or even a bank account opened so he can cash his cheque, get his money, or write a cheque for a damage deposit on an apartment or to pay the first month's rent.

    In essence you can't get a permanent resident card without a permanent address, and you almost can't get a permanent address without having a permanent resident card.

    Even once the apartment is secured and the card is on its way, the immigrant, while waiting, cannot obtain a social insurance number, and this means that even if qualified to work in Canada, he or she cannot access employment or employment services, courses and whatnot, or university, nor can he or she access the medicare system.

    First, should newcomers move during this interim period, the address listed on the card is out of date before the card even arrives. Second, the newcomer must hope that his mail is correctly forwarded by Canada Post or that the new tenants in his old apartment will ensure that he gets his card.

    Finally, we respectfully suggest that the current fee for the permanent resident cards be revoked. A $50 fee plus fees for changes in status that must be reflected on the card, plus fees for a five-year renewal, place a real burden on families who may be struggling to improve their financial status after coming as refugees or taking on the enormous expense of moving to a new country.

¹  (1520)  

    With respect to a national identity card, one area of concern is the question of whether such a card should be mandatory for all Canadians. The Honourable Mr. Coderre suggested that we should consider discussing the national identity card for purposes of cross-border travel, particularly to the United States. If this is the card's main purpose, we feel it is unfair to ask all Canadians to carry highly personal information on a card that may be lost or stolen, in order to facilitate the cross-border travel of those who choose to or must travel to the U.S. or other countries.

    A national identity card could also be vulnerable to the problems we've encountered with the permanent resident card and its implementation. A delay in acquiring a card or replacing a lost, stolen or destroyed card could wreak havoc in the lives of the citizens affected, especially if the card becomes installed in Canadian culture and law as the only official piece of identification.

    Of primary concern is the capacity such a card would create to gather information about people should this single document card become the standard document used to identify ourselves in all areas of our lives. The resulting database would entail having too much personal information in one place, everything from the books we read, to our travel history, and no complete guarantee of confidentiality.

    On balance, after lengthy consideration, the Multicultural Association feels that the value such a card would have as a security measure would not outweigh the invasion of privacy it would entail. As an organization that has worked with those who have been persecuted and who have had their human rights infringed upon, we strongly value the rights of people to live as they wish, within the law, without fearing government monitoring or confidentiality compromise. As a result, the MCAF cannot endorse the creation of a national identity card.

    We thank you for permitting us to address this issue.

¹  (1525)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much for your presentation.

    Diane, would you like to start off the questioning?

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: We do thank you for your presentations. As you may know, the minister has asked us to obtain some input into this idea of a national identity card. It's an idea only and has not even been, as I understand it, discussed in cabinet as yet. There's no legislation in place that might bring it forward, but we have been asked to get some thoughts on it.

    I have the following question for Mr. McMath. Ms. MacInnis brought this up too. One of the purposes that is foreseen for this card is to facilitate travel between Canada and the United States. I haven't heard any reason why our passports aren't sufficient for this purpose, but suppose it would allow, as some have suggested, sort of a fast-pass system for people. In other words, if I were travelling on business between Canada and the United States on a regular basis, I could then have this identity card, which would have an eye scan, a thumbprint, or something, which would allow me to present myself at a particular fast-pass wicket. A quick scan would be done electronically. I would then be identified as the person who has been precleared and I would be allowed to go through without a lot of searching, a lot of questioning, and a lot of delay.

    However, it seems to me that is quite a different thing from having a piece of identification that is an omnibus identification. In other words, it kind of replaces your birth certificate, your driver's licence, your SIN number, your health card, and everything else. So, as Ms. MacInnis pointed out, instead of just having a piece of ID for an identified purpose, such as for driving, for obtaining health services, or whatever, it would include all the information about all the areas of activity in your life, which is quite a different thing.

    I guess, for Mr. McMath, in a civil rights or privacy respect, would you be inclined to support the first kind of ID, which would allow you a sort of fast pass for travel between Canada and the U.S.? Do you see that as something separate and different from an omnibus piece of ID, as I described it in the second instance? Would you have a different attitude toward that?

    Mr. David McMath: I do see them as very different documents. The purpose, as the first item on my list, I think would be quite different. One has a very specific purpose. The intention is known beforehand and the recipient of that information is known. It's going to be the country you're entering into or returning from. The omnibus type of card you've described would have information on all different aspects of one's life, business, or history. One entity might be entitled to information about your age, say, which would be evident from your birth information--

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: That's scary in itself for some of us.

    Mr. David McMath: --and another might not be entitled to that information. So there are cross purposes, or access to information that one agency should not have that it might have access to if it has that multi-purpose card.

    I see this just as an efficiency issue for travellers to the U.S. who want to avoid a long lineup at the border or the airport. That's fine. Again, it would be a voluntary type of thing and I think quite different from the omnibus type of card.

¹  (1530)  

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: It was especially helpful to the committee, Ms. MacInnis, the brief that you and your organization put together to make some parallels, I guess, between this proposed national identity card and the permanent resident card.

    I know we all feel very grateful to your organization. You've actually given us three briefs today, which is no mean feat, because, like us, you just found out about this exercise a week or two ago at the most. I'm very impressed with the level of talent in your organization and really thank you for all the work you've done. The parallels you draw are very helpful to us and help identify some of the pitfalls, in a practical sense, that may come about.

    The question I have for you concerns biometrics. When the permanent resident card was first announced there was talk of having biometrics included, but that feature was dropped from the card. You mentioned in your brief, as did Mr. McMath, your concern about counterfeiting, the fraudulent establishment of cards, and that even though there are biometrics, just because it's a card that says this person has this thumbprint, that doesn't necessarily give us a clearer idea of who this person really is, where they came from or what they might be up to. The card itself is based on documents that can be counterfeited, like birth certificates or SIN numbers, of which there are five million more floating around Canada than there are people eligible to carry them.

    My question to you is the following. Did you talk about this concern about counterfeiting cards and the concern about the security of this document, which will be seen to be sort of a super card, but may be subject to security breaches, just like any other document in this technological age?

    Ms. Aneas MacInnis: I think the committee must agree on the fact that the card is perhaps under the guise of being, as you say, the super card when in fact it could be obtained through fraudulent documents. If someone were to somehow get their hands on another person's social insurance number, birth certificate, driver's licence, or whatever, they could then obtain a card using their own photo, their own fingerprint, or their own retina scan, and then have in fact a fraudulent document, which internationally would be recognized as the super card, which everyone would accept as not being fraudulent, I guess.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Just to follow up on that thought, it seems to me that the only way you could guard against that to a greater extent would be to have this huge database, which would then be available to anybody checking your card, which would match your biometrics and your personal background. That of course is what the Privacy Commissioner is concerned about, that not only would that give a huge amount of personal information to almost anybody who came forward with the need to use your card, even a bank, or, as you've mentioned, an electricity company to give you electricity, but also it could be used for a fishing expedition. This was a concern the Privacy Commissioner brought forward. If you've got this huge data bank, it could be used in a less benign setting by a less benign government than the very good government we have today to make a massive invasion and check-up on citizens.

    You probably remember, and I've mentioned this before, that the HRDC department was keeping what was called a Big Brother data bank, bringing in information from people's tax returns and their access of government programs and other personal information. When that came out the government very quickly disbanded it, because in a free and democratic society it was seen to be completely unacceptable.

    However, it seems to me that this card would necessarily, in order to work, lead to the same kind of database that we all rejected, in embarrassment, even just a couple of years ago.

    I would like your comments on that and whether you, as a citizen and as someone who represents people who would be using these cards, would share the kinds of concerns I've raised.

¹  (1535)  

    Ms. Aneas MacInnis: Absolutely. Our stance is that if the biometric indicators are used simply as a comparison between yourself and the card, then that would be acceptable. However, if they're going to be on a central database, then we feel it's too much information, as you stated, in one place. It was for that reason that we felt we couldn't endorse it.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): I think one of the areas of clarification that is extremely important, as I understand it, is that the minister has not exactly clarified all the parameters of this. He has said that it may be, I guess, in the interest of safety and in the interest of personal identification to have a national identity card. However, he has not spelled out what David pointed out and what Ms. MacInnis is pointing out, which is the concern that a huge database associated with a card and the ability to use that card is in question. Certainly I think that's very speculative, to say the least, and that is problematic.

    One of the issues that I thought was very helpful for us was your testimony about the problems people were having with the new immigration cards and the mailing, the safety aspects of it, the one creating a problem to achieve the other goal, and vice versa. You can't get a card without having a proper address. You can't have a proper address without the card. Those are aspects that are quite important to consider. I certainly understand that that is an issue we have to deal with, and deal with very carefully, in putting all those concerns down.

    Quite frankly, the level of discussion we're having right now, from my understanding, is because the minister asked about a national identity card that would identify a person. I really have heard nothing, outside of speculation, about large data banks and other things related to the card.

    So these are great bits of testimony to bring forward and say that in those circumstances that would not be acceptable. I can see why there would be concern there.

    On the other hand, as was pointed out a few moments ago, if it were basically to identify a passenger getting on an airplane and that so-and-so had an airline ticket, that would seem okay--quick transportation between two countries.

    The issue I pointed out clearly was the Nexus program that has been implemented in Canada, where we need to have pre-approved companies that are sending goods, pre-approved transportation companies and pre-approved drivers. A quick card identifying that driver and that he's okay to go ahead would certainly be of benefit. As a matter of fact, under a program like that a driver may only be stopped and asked questions one in ten times, or there will be spot checks, but it would facilitate a tremendous amount of improved flow in those cases where congestion and problems have been creating a lot of concern for Canada, particularly in my area where $1 billion in trade goes between Ontario and the U.S. every day. Those things have to be looked at and worked at to the best of our ability.

    The minister has not said that he would go with a national identity card. He's left this out for discussion, and I really think we are working on the areas of concern, and you brought those forward very well--what are the benefits, and I think there are several benefits that could be achieved with the card. So this discussion is helping to frame some of the future discussions.

    As was pointed out by Diane a little earlier, there is no legislation on the table. There has not been a lot of clarification on exactly what this will be. It's more of an open discussion at this point of time.

    Andy, I'll go to you.

¹  (1540)  

    Mr. Andy Scott: Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

    Diane complimented the government, but more importantly, she complimented the Fredericton Multicultural Association for the three briefs they presented today. I think she would be even more impressed if she knew the modest support that the Fredericton Multicultural Association receives in order to produce this kind of stuff and the wonderful work they do in this community.

    Kay mentioned how different Fredericton is than when she came here. I tend to see Fredericton through the eyes of my two teenage sons and try to compare it to what Fredericton looked like when I was a teenager. We had cars and stuff.

    I went to the southern Asian dinner a couple of weeks ago at the university and couldn't help but think just how different Fredericton is in a very short time, and much of it the result of the effort that's extended beyond what should be expected, frankly, of the Multicultural Association.

    I feel quite strongly about this. I think there's an element in the debate about the card, which perhaps was mentioned in other places but I haven't heard so far, and that is that regardless of the intention of the minister as to what the limitation on the card might be, just the very fact that it's being discussed as a possible super card already tells you the interest in other places to have access to the information that would be gathered.

    That's the problem that arose in HRDC. It wasn't that there was a problem, necessarily, although there was, but it wasn't just HRDC; it was the fact that it became an attraction, a magnet for all the other people who wanted information to try to gather around that instrument.

    I sat on the HRDC committee with Diane when we talked about the possibility of the SIN number becoming a super card for other things. You hear about it in the context of health information records. You hear it in a lot of places. So even though you may not intend to proceed in that fashion, that may be the ultimate outcome.

    In this very room in 1996 or 1997 the human rights and the status of persons with disabilities committee held privacy hearings. I was the vice-chair at the time. We wrote a report, which I would commend to the committee, on the question of privacy, which very specifically spoke to the question of a smart card, which was the language of the day. We rejected that categorically because we didn't have the capacity to restrict its use. We saw the benefits, but we also realized that at that point we still didn't have the capacity to do with that card only that which we wanted to do. I'm not convinced that we're anywhere close to it yet.

    I've been through the privacy report. I spent a year and a half, most of it fun, as Solicitor General. I went through all the law enforcement arguments and was exposed to a lot of debate about how helpful it would be there. I spent six or seven months dealing with the anti-terrorism legislation and heard a lot of arguments about the need to do things like that then.

    I have to say for the record that I would concur with the Multicultural Association. I am not convinced yet that the benefits that would accrue as a result of this exercise in any way balance off against the weakness, the vulnerability, not that it's intended, not that anybody would set out to do it on purpose, but that it just couldn't be stopped.

    I think it's important not just to look at it in the context of what it is you set out to do, but what might happen that you didn't intend. I wanted to make that point because I hadn't heard it yet.

    I welcomed everybody, the witnesses and so on, but I would also like to take the opportunity to welcome the support of people who are here. I only get a chance to do this outside of Ottawa. We work with these people every day and they do an incredible job. She's having a hard time translating this, I can tell. However, I don't think these people, when they're on the road like this, get enough attention. So as someone who spends a great deal of time, most of my life, in committees, thank you, and welcome.

    Thank you, Mr. Chair.

¹  (1545)  

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Would you like to make any further comments at this point in time to the committee folks?

    Ms. Aneas MacInnis: I would like to briefly elaborate on a question that Diane had earlier about the two different ways this card could be used.

    The first is as a fast track for cross-border travel. Just briefly, we wish to concur in what you mentioned about what's wrong with the passport.

    Second is the idea of having an omnibus card. One of the problems we had with the permanent resident card was when the card was implemented there was training for staff, for example, who worked with social insurance numbers, who worked for medicare and bank employees. They've all been briefed on permanent resident cards and have all upped their security as a result of post-September 11, as has Immigration with these cards.

    The problem is there's always an exception. There's always someone who doesn't have a card for one reason or another or who doesn't have proper documentation, particularly refugees. Most refugees do not have a valid passport from any country.

    I had a big problem trying to get any kind of documents for the refugees I worked with this fall because they came with what was called a single-journey document, which was confiscated from them at the port of entry. That's what they always do. They used to then give them an IOM, a record of landing, but they did away with that record. They were given a very illegible document called a confirmation of permanent residence, which didn't contain a photograph. It had some written material, but you really could not read it. Consequently, it wasn't accepted by anybody because nobody knew what it was.

    We had real problems with these families in trying to open bank accounts because they needed two pieces of ID. We were able to get a medical document from Immigration, the local CIC office, which had their photo on it, an ID that matched their photocopied single-journey document. Eventually, we were able to get the port of entry to allow the refugees to retain the original single-journey document and that at least would allow them to open a bank account. However, we still had problems with the social insurance office.

    I'm mentioning this just to again draw the parallel. For example, let's say I'm carrying a national identity card but I misplace it. I have a birth certificate, a passport, a social insurance number, a medicare card, or whatever, but those aren't accepted because everyone has become so rigid with the idea that this is the only card they accept and they're not going to look at those other cards. That's one concern we have with it being an omnibus card.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): Thank you very much.

    John, I'm going to follow up on Andy's comment. We've been very fortunate to have great support staff. John organized and made sure that the trip from Halifax to Saint John to Charlottetown to Fredericton and back to Ottawa was done extremely well.

    With the kinds of things we ran into, such as a snow storm and cold weather, I believe we were the only plane that landed two days ago in Saint John. It had to be John's fine arrangements. I recall sitting in the airport while he was figuring out what we were going to do next or how we were going to get off the ground--keep your fingers crossed and all those kinds of things.

    John, you've been outstanding, and from all the committee and the support workers, we have a little card for you. Come on up.

    Ladies and gentlemen, I want to thank all the people who have been here today. The presenters have done an excellent job of bringing us in tune with what the views and feelings are here in Fredericton. There are also many support people who have been in the audience throughout the day. They've listened very attentively and have given support where that support was required. I want to thank all of you.

    Committee members, I think we've had really good material to work with and to bring forward. Now it's going to be the staff's task to try to summarize all that testimony and bring forward some of the thoughts that we've put together. I want to say thank you to everyone. Committee members, I think as soon as we can, we're going to try to head to the airport and back to Ottawa.

    Mr. Andy Scott: No, no.

    The Vice-Chair (Mr. Jerry Pickard): We would rather not go back to Ottawa, but we don't have a choice, as you have, Andy.

    Have a good day.