CIMM Committee Meeting

37th PARLIAMENT, 2nd SESSION

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

EVIDENCE

CONTENTS

Tuesday, October 28, 2003

¹

1535

The Chair (Mr. Joe Fontana (London North Centre, Lib.))

Mr. Michel Dorais (Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

¹

1540

The Chair

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

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

¹

1545

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Craig Goodes (Senior Director, Strategic Intelligence, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Craig Goodes

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Craig Goodes

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

¹

1550

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Massimo Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, Lib.)

¹

1555

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Daniel Jean (Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Program Development, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. John McWhinnie (Assistant Deputy Minister, Centralized Service Delivery and Corporate Services, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

º

1600

Mr. Massimo Pacetti

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. John O'Reilly (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock, Lib.)

The Chair

Mr. John O'Reilly

The Chair

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ)

º

1605

Mr. Michel Dorais

Ms. Diane Vincent (Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Daniel Jean

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

º

1610

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau (Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies, Lib.)

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau

º

1615

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Yvon Charbonneau

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Daniel Jean

The Chair

Mr. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River, PC)

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Inky Mark

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Inky Mark

Mr. Michel Dorais

º

1620

Mr. Inky Mark

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Inky Mark

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

º

1625

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Pat Martin

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Pat Martin

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Pat Martin

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

º

1630

Mr. Pat Martin

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Pat Martin

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Pat Martin

The Chair

Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.)

º

1635

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Jerry Pickard

Mr. Michel Dorais

º

1640

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

º

1645

The Chair

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Ms. Lyse Ricard (Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration)

Mr. Daniel Jean

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. John McWhinnie

º

1650

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. John McWhinnie

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. John McWhinnie

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. John McWhinnie

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Ms. Lyse Ricard

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

º

1655

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mrs. Diane Ablonczy

Mr. Michel Dorais

Ms. Lyse Ricard

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette, Canadian Alliance)

Mr. Michel Dorais

»

1700

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Ms. Lyse Ricard

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Grant McNally

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Grant McNally

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

Mr. Daniel Jean

»

1705

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

Mr. Michel Dorais

The Chair

---

CANADA

Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration

---

NUMBER 079

l

2nd SESSION

l

37th PARLIAMENT

---

EVIDENCE

Tuesday, October 28, 2003

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

¹  (1535)  

[English]

    The Chair (Mr. Joe Fontana (London North Centre, Lib.)): Good afternoon, colleagues.

    Pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), the committee is commencing consideration of supplementary estimates (A) 2003-2004: vote 1a (Citizenship and Immigration--Operating expenditures) under Citizenship and Immigration.

    We have before us Michel Dorais, deputy minister, and Diane Vincent, associate deputy minister. I understand that's a new appointment. Congratulations and welcome to the committee. I look forward to your comments, Mr. Dorais.

    I must say I'm a little disappointed that we weren't able to have the minister appear before the estimates were deemed to have carried in the House last Thursday. It's unfortunate, and we had tried our best to have the minister here before then. I appreciate the fact that you're here after the fact.

    We have some important questions. One of the most important duties a committee has--and Parliament has--is to scrutinize the expenditures of departments. I know, ever since the Auditor General challenged all of us as parliamentarians to make sure we know what's going on, that it's important not only for us to look at the estimates and ask some pertinent questions but to do it in a timely manner, before the House is deemed to have accepted them. I know that tonight we actually vote on them. It's important that we're doing this.

    It's unfortunate and a little disappointing that the minister wasn't able to be here before us to deal with the sups, but we do appreciate your being here, Michel.

    I'd like you to introduce the rest of your good team over there, and I look forward to it. I'm sure that after your opening statements the committee will have a number of questions related to the estimates and to other matters if that is at all possible.

    So, welcome to the committee.

    Mr. Michel Dorais (Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

    As you know, as officials we're always pleased to respond to the invitation of the committee. It's in the interest of the department that the committee be as well informed as we can possibly make it as we work together towards a common objective.

    Let me introduce our team. You've already introduced the new associate deputy minister of the department, Diane Vincent, who joined two months ago. Starting on your left is John McWhinnie, who is in corporate affairs and centralized services for the department. Then there's Alain Théault, who's acting for Alfred Macleod. Mr. Macleod is on French training now and will be back with us afterwards. There's Daniel Jean, who the committee knows very well because he's our expert, and Lyse Ricard, who manages the operations of the department, which has just over 3,000 people in all.

    With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I'll proceed with a very short opening statement in order to leave time for questions.

[Translation]

    I would like to first thank the committee for inviting me here today to talk about the Department's supplementary estimates. With your indulgence, I want to first briefly outline some of the main items covered. Supplementary estimates for 2003-2004 provide the Department with additional resources of $32.7 million. These additional funds will be used to cover the costs associated with additional funding for the Interim Federal Health Program (IFH), Canada's War Crime Strategy, improved security at marine ports of entry, Canada's Action Plan for Official Languages, and renovations to visa offices abroad.

[English]

    The department is requesting $17 million in supplementary expenditures to cover additional costs in the interim federal health program. This is an annual funding request. This program provides temporary health coverage for refugee claimants, convention refugees, and individuals under immigration detention who are ineligible for provincial health insurance and who have no means to obtain any other health services. Increased funding will cover the health benefit costs of additional refugee claimants entitled to assistance under this program until the end of the current fiscal year.

    Canada's war crimes program is a government-wide initiative that prevents individuals suspected of war crimes and crimes against humanity from entering and staying in Canada. This program is funded on an annual basis, and $8.4 million in supplementary estimates for 2003-04 will allow the department to continue showing international leadership in acting against war criminals from the World War II era and in preventing modern-day war criminals from entering or staying in Canada.

    In May the department received $16.5 million over five years to improve security at marine ports of entry in Canada as part of the government public security and anti-terrorism program. This was announced in the 2003 budget.

    This year's funding includes $468,000 for the Visa Imposition for Seafarers initiative and $3.017 million for passenger and crew screening. This initiative for passenger and crew screening will enhance the department's ability to screen, target, and examine vessels, crews, and passengers in order to detain terrorists and illegal migrants. The Visa Imposition for Seafarers initiative brings the travel document requirement for seafarers in line with requirements for other foreign nationals seeking to visit Canada on a temporary basis.

¹  (1540)  

[Translation]

    Finally, the supplementary estimates this year include an amount of $2 million to cover the costs of renovations to visa offices in Manila and Shanghai.

    The Government also released an Action Plan for Official Languages earlier this year. The Action Plan recognizes immigration as a key factor in promoting community development. The Action Plan allocates $9 million over five years and $2 million per year thereafter for the Department to promote immigration to official-language minority communities. Supplementary estimates for this fiscal year include funds of $1 million to help attract newcomers to these communities and provide the necessary integration programs and services.

    Slightly less than $1 million is related to the establishment of a new consulate in Chandigarh, India, which the Prime Minister officially opened on October 24.

[English]

    I've come to the end of those preliminary remarks, and I will now be happy--or we'll be happy, because I'll need some help--to answer all the questions of the committee, Mr. Chairman.

    The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Dorais.

    Diane.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy (Calgary—Nose Hill, Canadian Alliance): I have a number of questions, Mr. Chairman, and the first one relates to your section on war crimes. You say that $8.4 million has been added to the money your department is receiving in order to show “international leadership in acting against war criminals from the World War II era and in preventing modern-day war criminals from entering or staying in Canada.”

    However, you're well aware of the heat your minister took in July when he refused to assist the police by giving them information that would have allowed 59 known war criminals to be deported from Canada. Now, 55 of those had already had full hearings and were under deportation orders. I'm just curious why a department that wouldn't even cooperate with the police by giving photographs and information about known war criminals would be getting over $8 million more to remove war criminals when they're not cooperating with the police with the resources they already have. Maybe you can explain that to us.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I'll try, although I'm not exactly sure what the event was. Our 59--or whatever the number is--warrants are on a warrant system and therefore are available to police forces...unless we want to add to this. So I'm not sure if I understand the question exactly, Mr. Chairman, because the police have always had in their hands the warrants for suspected war criminals.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Well, I find this a little strange. According to the newspapers, there was quite a heated exchange between the minister and the chief of police of Toronto, Julian Fantino. Mr. Fantino basically said, why won't you give us the information you have about these people so we can locate and remove them? And the minister said no, we can't do that; we have to protect their privacy. You must remember that.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: No.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: And here you're taking another $8 million to try to remove these people, having already demonstrated, let's say, a marked reluctance to even give their names and pictures to the police.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Mr. Chairman, I misunderstood the question. That was my fault and I apologize to the member.

    What is being referred to is not whether the police have the pictures, the mandate, and the information, but whether that information is made public and published. This was an issue and is still an issue we have before us, one the minister is considering, and the question is whether those 59--I'm not sure of the number--suspected war criminals' pictures should be published in newspapers and made widely available.

    There are a number of issues. Some of them are convicted war criminals while others are suspected war criminals, and that creates some issues the minister is currently considering. So I think that the police have the information, but it is not published in the most-wanted lists.

¹  (1545)  

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: The question is, what are you going to do with $8 million more?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: May I ask Craig Goodes from our war crimes section to outline the details of that $8.4 million?

    Mr. Craig Goodes (Senior Director, Strategic Intelligence, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): The $8.4 million we're asking for is effectively above A-base funding and is to fund the modern war crimes program as it's been funded since 1998.

    Now, with respect to the outstanding warrants, I just want to emphasize that all of those warrants are registered with CPIC, so they are available to any local police force that might come across an individual. At the same time, we have a very close relationship with the RCMP, and the RCMP, as well as providing specially trained investigators for CIC, is constantly looking for those 91, among others.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: But that wasn't my question. I would point out that the police are obviously not happy with the level of cooperation because there was this whole public exchange in which the chief of police of Toronto called the minister silly for his refusal to fully cooperate with the police. It's on the record.

    In addition to that, now we have $8 million being given to the department to deal with these war criminals. My question is, what are you going to do with the $8 million?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: If I may, maybe the member is pointing to the results of that program. The $8.4 million is the funding for the program; it's not on top of it.

    If we look at the results since the war crimes program was put together, we see that 2,000 people who were connected to war crimes have been refused access to Canada.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: You're still not answering my question. What are you going to do with $8 million more?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The $8 million in funds is for the unit we have in Ottawa that does the war crime analysis and feeds information on individuals to our missions abroad when a visa is to be issued. Canada is, I think, the only country that has a filter for war criminals. The information is developed in Ottawa by the intelligence people and then fed to our posts abroad; that's one part of it. The other part is the prosecution and removal of war criminals. That's where the $8.4 million is being spent.

    Craig, do you want to add to that?

    Mr. Craig Goodes: I'll just add that we can mention the 240-plus people we've removed over the last five years, and that's a very expensive process. We have specialized units in Montreal, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Vancouver, and these consist of specialized officers, specially trained people, who are dedicated to the war crimes program. That's not a cheap thing to operate, and that is also a big part of where the $8.4 million per year goes.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: So this money is going for more officers?

    Mr. Craig Goodes: It's going to pay for the ones we have now. As monsieur Dorais said, this $8.4 million is to fund the program in the same way we've been funding it since 1998.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: This is where I think the confusion arises. This is not $8.4 million in addition to the program money; it is the program money. The total program is $8.4 million, and it's funded on an annual basis.

    The Chair: Mr. Dorais, can I ask you why it would show up as a sup as opposed to being part of your A-base? I think that would probably assist us all.

    Usually the supplementaries are for additional expenditures, and I think that's where Ms. Ablonczy is coming from. It looks as if this is an additional $8.4 million that's being requested from the committee for the purposes of the war crimes unit.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I think, if I remember the history of that program correctly, the program was approved for three years at first. Then, realizing there was not enough data for us to analyze the results, the government extended the program one year and then extended it a second time to have a five-year set of data to evaluate whether or not to pursue the program the way it's designed right now. That's the reason we've come back twice.

    The Chair: That clarification helps.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Yes, I appreciate that clarification.

    If I could, I'll just move on to another issue. I was concerned to read recently that a couple who are immigrants to Canada have now brought a law suit against the department for failing to properly inform them that their credentials would not be recognized in Canada so they could find work in their profession. As you know, this committee has repeatedly urged the department to move aggressively on this whole matter of recognition of foreign credentials. We have a number of very talented, well-trained immigrants to Canada who not only are not able to practise their profession but were not told they wouldn't be able to. In other words, they were brought into Canada believing their skills were what we needed and their credentials would be recognized, and then they were not allowed to use their skills.

    Now, if one couple is suing, I think we can imagine that this could well be the tip of an iceberg. So my question is, have you set aside any kind of contingency fund for dealing with what I'm sure will be an increasing trend by immigrants who were misled or improperly informed to look for redress from the Government of Canada? How are you dealing with this new development when it comes to failure to properly deal with the recognition of foreign credentials?

¹  (1550)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: There are a number of points, I think, to the question. You'll understand, Mr. Chair, that I hesitate to comment on the particular case that is before the court, but I think I can comment more generally on it.

    On the funding, I've already said to this committee that part of the new legislation allowed us to set aside some money to deal with litigation, and that's part of that money. But the whole issue of recognizing foreign credentials is something the minister has raised quite aggressively with provincial colleagues. As the committee knows, the institutions that recognize foreign credentials are either universities or professional associations or orders. The issue was raised at the first federal-provincial conference of ministers a year and some months ago. The provinces have made commitments to look into that. We at the federal level are doing some work with our colleagues from Human Resources Development, trying to develop an Internet connection that would inform immigrants as best we can.

    But in the end, the responsibility for establishing foreign credentials lands in the hands of the provinces, and we're putting as much pressure--

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: We're well aware of that, and of course we've suggested that the federal government needs to take leadership. Australia does it and other countries do it. It's not impossible, but it's not happening here.

    My real question was, what can we as committee expect in terms of future expenditures to deal with a possible spate of lawsuits brought by people who feel they were not properly informed about this important area, recognition of their credentials?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: As I've said, we have a contingency fund for lawsuits. There's no indication at this point that there is a spate or large number of lawsuits--we have one--beyond what we have on many other aspects of legislation, so we don't have a specific contingency fund for this type of litigation.

    The Chair: I'll point out to the committee that the government has responded to our settlement report, where as you indicated, Diane, and the deputy minister.... This committee has no fewer than 12 times in its reports indicated that foreign credentials and their acceptance, regardless of whose jurisdiction it is.... We understand and know there was one good suggestion in our settlement report that indicated that perhaps the federal government could play a leadership role through a national coordinating office. This could help the provinces, help associations, and more importantly, help those people, so when they apply in good faith and are told by our immigration officers that their documentation has been accepted...there needs to be a linkage.

    We indicated that, as part of the settlement program initiative, more money and resources have to be put into enabling the good people who do the selection work to inform people as to what their real expectations might be when they come to Canada.

    Massimo.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti (Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, Lib.): Thank you, Mr. Chair.

    I just have a couple of quick questions. On the interim federal health program, even here you state it's an annual funding request. Is this something we already knew, that we were going to be investing in health services for refugee claimants and refugees, and why is this an annual amount?

¹  (1555)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It is extremely difficult for us at the beginning of the year to predict with any kind of precision the exact amount of money we will need for the program, and this is why it comes as sups every year at this time, so we can adjust the amount of money. You'll probably see a last adjustment at the end of the fiscal year to allow for variations in volumes. This is why.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: How much would it have been in the past, so we can put it on a comparative basis?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The base is $32.8 million. It has increased over the last few years, from $35 million in 2000 to $49 million now, and that's due almost exclusively to volume increases and the cost-of-living increases related to health care.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: So it was $35 million last year?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It was $35.9 million, so it's up from $36 million to $49.6 million in 2002-03.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: And the $17 million is for the first six months?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The $17 million is over and above the base of $32.8 million and is requested in order to bring us to the end of the fiscal year; that would bring the total to $57.3 million.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: That's $32 million plus $17 million plus...?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It's $32 million plus $17 million. The estimated total is $57 million, and we'll do another adjustment at the end of the year if the need materializes.

    This program is entirely guided by demand. We cannot use the funds for anything else but reimbursing medical costs for that population.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: Does this money go to the provinces? Do they bill us?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: No, it goes directly to the institutions or the practitioners.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: Is any of that money going overseas?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: No, I don't think so.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: It shouldn't be, right?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Yes, it is spent strictly in Canada.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: The other question I have is on the renovations. How did we determine that the Manila and Shanghai offices needed to be renovated?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I'll ask my colleague to talk about Shanghai.

    Concerning Manila, members may recall that the embassy was closed during a period of time for security reasons, and some renovations needed to be made to the embassy to ensure the security of all staff. Our payment is our share of the renovations. It is essentially, DFAIT, the Department of Foreign Affairs, that decides what renovations need to be made, and we usually share that amount if we occupy a major part of the embassy or mission.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: I guess my question is, in the normal estimates is there not an amount for renovations to all these offices, consulates, or embassies? At what point do we determine--

    Mr. Daniel Jean (Assistant Deputy Minister, Policy and Program Development, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): The overseas operations were for a period of time under the Department of Foreign Affairs, and when overseas operations came back to the immigration department in 1992, there was an MOU that guided the relationship for common services on the financial side. As far as infrastructure goes, it's project by project; we pay our share of the costs through project-by-project negotiations.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: In the normal estimates, is there no money allocated for renovations or improvements? We have another amount here for the consulate in India. That was nowhere in sight in the estimates. It just appeared.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It always appears in the sups, and there is an amount in DFAIT's estimates.

    I'll ask the guy who handles financial matters.

    Mr. John McWhinnie (Assistant Deputy Minister, Centralized Service Delivery and Corporate Services, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): DFAIT's estimates generally contain estimates for renovation, but these are additional items for CIC space within the DFAIT envelope, and the costs are determined project by project.

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: These are all additional costs. Are there going to be any in the next couple of months? Are we looking at additional visa offices being renovated or consular offices being opened?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: In the next couple of months? I don't think we foresee any this year, but there could be some next year. It all depends on the plans for renovations DFAIT has. In some areas we have no staff; therefore, we don't participate. But in areas where we do have some staff, if Foreign Affairs decides there are renovations that need to be made, we're asked to contribute.

º  (1600)  

    Mr. Massimo Pacetti: In the breakdown of the expenditures, I see there is $21.819 million of the $32 million that is going to professional and special services.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: That includes the $17 million for the IFH, the interim federal health program. We can give you the breakdown of the $21 million. I have it here; I just can't find it.

    The Chair: Committee members, could I have your indulgence before I go to Madeleine for some further questions?

    I have nine or ten of you here but there's no guarantee I can keep you here, even though I know Michel and his company are trying their best to keep you captivated in your seats. I need you to pass this motion with regard to the recent meeting we had on Michel Simard's appointment as senior citizenship judge. As usual, once we do these things, I like to report to the House that we have in fact met with Mr. Simard, who was referred to the standing committee, and state that the committee found the appointee had the qualifications and competence to perform the duties of the post to which he was being appointed.

    Could I have that motion, John?

    Mr. John O'Reilly (Haliburton—Victoria—Brock, Lib.): I so move.

    (Motion agreed to)

    The Chair: John, thank you.

    Mr. John O'Reilly: Mr. Chairman, I have to leave this meeting at 4 o'clock. I'm sorry, but I have to go.

    The Chair: I know you're a member of another good committee, and I appreciate your attendance.

    Madeleine.

[Translation]

    Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    I want to reassure the Chairman of the committee. If the Minister is not with us, it's not because he doesn't like us. In fact, he adores us, but I wonder if word hasn't been passed around, because it seems that at several other committees where supplementary estimates are on the agenda, the ministers are not there. Maybe it's because the next Prime Minister is going to review everything. I'm only joking.

    I would like to ask three questions. I must tell you from the start that I'm very disappointed with the small amount allocated to Citizenship and Immigration Canada. During our tour of Canada, we noticed there was a shortage of money and resources for immigrant integration. Since there is nothing here to satisfy me, I certainly won't vote against it, because there's not enough. One must be demanding in life.

    My first question is about the budget for the Official Languages Promotion Program. I'd like to know how this amount is distributed across Canada. Is Quebec included? Let's not forget there's a specific agreement. If, in fact, there is money for Quebec, I imagine this money will be used for the Anglophone minority. I would like to know the percentage, if such is the case. That's my first question.

    My second question is the following. You may not be in a position to answer, but our offices are somewhat overwhelmed with applications these days—I'm not the only one—, notably for the very long period required for work permit renewals. I would like to know whether it is specified in the documents attached to a work permit that a renewal application must be filed within six months before its expiry. What is the required deadline? Not having their work permits is rather stressing for people who are threatened to lose their jobs. According to the information I have, there does not seem to be any real penalty for employers. I think something is wrong in all this. On the one hand, a worker who has a status, i.e. whose papers are in order, is required to have a work permit, but on the other hand, when his work permit expires, it's no big deal and he can continue to work. If we have requirements for work permits, they need to be renewed within reasonable timeframes to meet legal requirements.

    Permanent resident cards are another issue. We've seen in the newspapers—you must have read the same thing—that a certain number of permanent residents who have family abroad and who want to visit them during the Christmas Holidays have not received their permanent resident cards. In this situation, they may want to think twice before leaving, because there's no guarantee they'll be allowed back in the country. This is also part of immigrant integration.

º  (1605)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

    Your question is threefold. With your permission, I will ask Ms. Vincent to answer the question on official languages, as she has accomplished a great deal of work on this specific issue recently.

    Ms. Diane Vincent (Associate Deputy Minister, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you. All the money allocated by the government to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration for official languages is spent on immigration within Francophone minority communities, i.e. on Francophone minorities outside Quebec.

    You also wanted to know which provinces these amounts will go to. The steering committee set up by the Department of Citizenship and Immigration will have to decide how to distribute this amount of more than $900,000 we will be getting this year. I co-chair this committee with Francophone communities outside Quebec. We are about to announce a strategic framework, an action plan to bring more Francophones in outside Quebec Francophone minority communities. This framework will be presented next Monday in the presence of the Minister. For the first year, initiatives are scheduled for promotion abroad in order to attract more Francophone immigrants to minority communities. We also intend to assist the provinces with the Provincial Nominee Program. We want to help them raise awareness among Francophone communities about welcoming Francophone immigrants. We also have pilot projects and a five-year action plan. So these activities are essentially outside Quebec.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Mr. Chairman, I will ask my colleague Daniel Jean to answer the question on work permits.

    Mr. Daniel Jean: During the year, the average processing time for a renewal by the Vegreville Processing Centre is about two months. There are periods of the year when it's much faster, of course, and there are peak periods where it can slow down. Generally, if people file a renewal application two months in advance, it's enough.

    Secondly, if people file a renewal application before their status expires and they qualify, they don't lose their status. If they need to travel during this period, there can be problems, as you mentioned. Normally, in such cases, we try to respond to these needs.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The last issue raised by the member was about permanent resident cards. We will undoubtedly get to it later. I would like to point out that the current timeframe is about four weeks for new arrivals, and 10 to 12 weeks for immigrants who are permanent residents, who are already in Canada. As you know, a year and a half ago, we announced that as of December 31 of this year, the permanent resident card will be the tool used to certify permanent residence.

    People who return have two possible options. The first is to go to a consulate, if they don't have their permanent resident card, and obtain a visa that will enable them to enter Canada. The second option is to demonstrate, at the port of entry, that they are permanent residents using other documents, including the old IMM1000, their driver's licence, or other documents proving they are permanent residents. However, it takes longer when they don't have the card.

[English]

    The Chair: On the permanent resident card, you will note that we finally got a final answer with regard to the costs of the permanent resident card, and I might as well bring that up now just so it's there. The five-year cost estimate is $139.6 million for an estimated 2 million cards produced. The average cost is going to be $69.80 per card. It's estimated the revenue generated by the user or processing fee of $50 will be $116.7 million, so the net cost to the government will be $22.9 million. That's additional information we just got today.

    Can I just follow up with regard to the permanent resident card? It may come up again. Mr. Dorais, I think you will note that this committee has been very supportive. In fact, if you had a request for supplementary estimates for additional resources to deal with immigration and all of these things you find people are due...because we seriously think you're understaffed and under-resourced, and we may have some additional questions on that. We want to be very supportive, giving you the people you need in order to process the applications for the permanent resident card.

    As we plan the permanent resident card, I think it's a little unfair to people who couldn't apply before, all of a sudden, the magic date. I think it was in May or June--I can't remember--that we wanted to process the permanent resident card. We now find ourselves in a position, because it's taken us 12 weeks to do it, where in fact we might cause some people.... And I would hope, as you answered the question from Madeleine, that if people don't have their maple leaf card, there will be other opportunities where they can present other documentation and manage to get the travel document from the mission abroad they might be visiting.

    If I could, I'll ask a supplementary question on that. Is there no way, perhaps within your budget, to process these maple leaf cards? After all, that's why we embarked on such a thing, to give these people an identity document so they wouldn't have any problems as they travelled not only out of Canada and back to Canada but perhaps elsewhere. The permanent resident card was supposed to be the equivalent of a Canadian passport for permanent residents. Is there no way you can assure this committee that we're going to do everything possible to meet that December 31 deadline for those who have applied?

º  (1610)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: In fact, Mr. Chairman, we have already taken a number of measures. Offices are now open at night and on the weekend to be more convenient.

    I want to remind the committee that the actual processing time is relatively short. New immigrants are being processed--that is to say, they have received their card by registered mail--in four weeks. For existing residents it takes a little longer for one very simple reason. For security reasons we've put in a distribution system that forces people to come in to get their card so our officers can verify whether the person in front of them is the person on the card.

    What's taking a little bit more time is fixing the appointment. People cancel the appointment or come a little later, and that's why the average processing time is a little longer; it's for security reasons. But the actual production time is four weeks.

    We have already invested additional money, reallocating it internally, to make sure the distribution of the card is done as quickly as possible. But frankly, Mr. Chairman, there are people who have not bothered applying for the card and are now coming at the last minute saying, we want the card. We've been trying to advertise it as much as possible. People have options, though.

    The Chair: Yvon.

[Translation]

    Mr. Yvon Charbonneau (Anjou—Rivière-des-Prairies, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Dorais if there couldn't be a third option. You said there are two possibilities for these people. A third option, which you could examine, would be to extend the date from December 31 to January 31. This would avoid the Christmas Holidays. There are many legal holidays at this time of the year, people travel, etc., and it's more difficult for them. There is a lot of activity at this time. If it were extended one month, what harm could it do?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: There is always the possibility of moving dates up or down. Of course, for those who hurried up and did what they had to do to get their cards on time, it might seem unfair. But we also believe that it would be a mistake to extend the date because people have options. It should be understood that the card is not necessary to enter Canada. The same goes for the passport. For example, if you travel as a Canadian citizen and you want to come to the country but you lost your passport, you have other options. In these cases, there are two: you can get the documents in missions abroad, or you can deal with it at ports of entry. So there are options.

    Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: In my opinion, examining this possibility would be demonstrating appropriate responsiveness. It's fine for those who did it before, but the others... I don't know if you can put yourself in the shoes of people who are currently travelling in a global security hunt context, etc. People are not sure any more if they're going to be examined very closely. They're sometimes afraid of being noticed because of their racial origin or the country they come from, for example. There are many factors involved. You could demonstrate appropriate responsiveness by examining this possibility. I, for one, suggest you do.

    As for my question, I learned from generally well informed sources that the problems will continue to accumulate as regards the entry of foreign students. I was even told that there were also problems to expect for the end of the year and early January for temporary workers. Yet these questions have already been addressed, and we were told that steps would be taken to avoid these problems. Do you think there won't be any problems? Is this why no supplementary estimates were requested? How do you see this problem in terms of financial or human resource needs, if such is the problem.

º  (1615)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The problem being a timeframe problem?

    Mr. Yvon Charbonneau: Yes.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Daniel, could you answer the question on student entry?

    Mr. Daniel Jean: With respect to processing abroad, whether for students, temporary workers, tourists, visitor visas or temporary residents, processing timeframes are very good. For students, which is what your question was about, universities, with two or three exceptions around the world, recognize that we made tremendous progress with respect to processing timeframes.

    As Ms. Dalphond-Guiral mentioned, we have challenges to meet for renewals in Canada, for people who are already here. These are volumetric challenges. We're trying to respond as much as possible, but volumes have considerably increased. We try to help people in terms of operations, resources, and policy. Can we make policy changes that will cut down bureaucracy for these people? Some of my colleagues attended university and college association meetings last weekend. I met with education institution representatives during the year, and they recognize that we made tremendous progress in terms of processing timeframes.

    In the case of students, we process almost 70% of the cases in one month or less. This makes Canada competitive compared to any country in the world. Visitor visas are processed the same day in 70% of the cases. As for temporary residents, one third of the applications are processed within 48 hours. So we made significant progress, and it's clear we want to make more.

[English]

    The Chair: Inky, I know you have a quick question, and you have another meeting, I understand.

    Mr. Inky Mark (Dauphin—Swan River, PC): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I'd like to welcome all of you here and thank you for coming.

    I'm going to take a different tack; I'm going to talk about numbers. Having watched this portfolio for over three years, I know there are huge pressures on the system. The first question is, in terms of today's budget, where are we relative to 1994? Remember, in 1994 there was a huge cut in your budget. That's the first question, in terms of numbers.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Do you mean the total budget?

    Mr. Inky Mark: Yes.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: We're now at $1.01 billion, total. When I joined the department five years ago, it was under $650 million. Why? We can provide the committee with exact figures, but this gives you an--

    Mr. Inky Mark: The reason I asked the question is that expanded roles in enforcement as well as increased immigration will increase staffing numbers. When you look at the immigration numbers, you see that today they're up to almost 300,000 on an annual basis. Wherever we've gone on trips overseas as well as in this country, one thing we've always heard about is the shortage of staff; that's pretty continual. In terms of staffing needs and the allocation we see in today's estimates, are we up to the same level of staffing we were at in 1994?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: No. Again, we can provide the exact numbers to the committee, but over the last three years we've hired about a thousand people in the department. It's really that the department has grown, thanks to the work of the committee, and it has grown quite substantially.

    As to the matter of being overworked, I hear it too when I travel. The issue there is that we have a target, which has been made public and which has been tabled in the House, of 220,000 to 245,000 immigrants. We are meeting our target, and in some years we've exceeded the target. We could process more--there are inventories--but we're trying to stay within that target.

    The issue of overwork in absolute terms is always a difficult one to explain. We could work around the clock and process more files, but in fact we're trying to operate within the commitment we've made publicly and the minister made to the House, and we deliver on that target. The present level of resources allows us to deliver on the target. In some areas of the world there are difficulties, where people are overworked, but in some other areas there is a reasonable workload.

º  (1620)  

    Mr. Inky Mark: I understand that, but the problem is more than just numbers. It's also security, especially with the post-9/11 environment we live in. From the point of view of enforcement and security, do you have enough staff to suffice, to do more than just an adequate job on the security side?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I would say the investment that has been made over the last few years since September 11 has provided us with very efficient tools in terms of security. You can't ensure absolute 100% security; it's just not possible. There's not enough money in the world to do it, especially with the kind of border we have in Canada, but we're reasonably confident that we now have a system in place to ensure security.

    Mr. Inky Mark: As the chairman said, this committee understands how important immigration is. If you had a wish list, how much more money would you need to make sure the jobs are there for us to do an excellent job of balancing between numbers, so people don't wait for four years to get into this country and also so we have the security?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The chairman is very familiar with my reluctance to answer that question, because I find it difficult to answer. The reason is very simple. If we were to have more money, we could probably get more people in, that's for sure. The actual answer is not as simple as it's made out to be, namely that we need x number of dollars per additional person in Canada. The equation is not so simple. There are a series of policy choices that are associated with the numbers. In fact, the committee will recall the 1997 report entitled “Not just numbers”. There's a lot more, as you know, to immigration than just numbers.

    I find myself in the position of advising the government when it makes policy decisions. This may involve additional money, and it may involve changing processes, the mix of migration, the source of migration, or where they're going in Canada. All these are policy decisions that have an impact on the amount of money.

    In absolute terms, yes, with more money we could do more, absolutely. In exact terms, I always find it very difficult to tell the committee we need $22 million more to do a decent job because it depends on the type of job the government asks us to do. Depending on the policy choices the government makes and guided by the work of the committee and overall government policy at the time, I'm able to advance a number for possible costing to the government.

    So this is why. It's not a reluctance to answer the question. I just find it very difficult to answer that question for the committee in the absence of a policy framework.

    The Chair: Perhaps when you're providing the information Mr. Mark asked for with regard to that base budget in 1994, you can give us the incremental increases for 1995 and 1996. I'm sure it's there and I think it would be helpful.

    Also, of course, the committee knows very well that we've introduced processing fees, and you get a lot of money from processing fees. I know you give it to the centre; it's a question of whether or not you get it back. That's what we're really interested in. The net effect of how much you actually get is what we're really interested in finding out, because those people in Finance like to play the shuffle game, I know.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: We will provide the committee with the information.

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Pat.

    Mr. Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, NDP): Thank you.

    I'd like to follow up a little bit on Inky's theme. I noticed in the main estimates the budget line called “Managing Access to Canada”, which at some $250 million constitutes a full quarter of your overall budget. I'm interested to know just what falls under that.

    We've always maintained we're spending too much of the overall budget keeping people out rather than welcoming them in; that's been a conflict within the department. You're asking for a supplementary allocation now of $3.485 million for public security and anti-terrorism initiatives, yet here was already a budget line of $250 million, and I presume anti-terrorism falls under that.

    Maybe just to keep it in bite-sized bits, can you tell me then, is anti-terrorism activity a normal function under the “Managing Access to Canada” general budget line?

º  (1625)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It is part of it but it's not the bulk of it. The bulk of it is for visa operations abroad, for ports of entry, for staffing all the ports of entries of Canada, for all the inland enforcement functions, including removals, for all the investigation functions, and for all the intelligence functions. They're are included under that. The supplementary budget covers the marine situation, which is marine arrivals and marine ports of entry. It will essentially provide for immigration staff to be available to handle the immigration aspect at major ports of entry in Canada where we have not been present up until now, so it's an addition to the normal operations. The $250 million covers a lot of activity.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Where under the “Managing Access to Canada” budget line would you deal with issues like trying to solve what we hear about the corruption problems in Manila, Nairobi, or Beijing? I don't know about other offices, but my office gets constant, almost weekly reports of people being offered access to Canada for $3,000, for instance, which is the current rate charged in Nairobi by crooked immigration consultants. What kind of concrete steps are you taking to address the burgeoning new organized crime industry of immigration consultants, specifically in Manila, if you could answer that?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I can't answer specifically on Manila, but I'll ask my colleague to see if she has any information on Manila per se.

    You raise a very important question for us, which is the whole question of values and ethics in the department. It's a question that's very dear to us because we live in an environment where, and members of the committee who have travelled in certain countries will know, the price of a Canadian visa is quite often more than a year's salary for the employees. Yet we've had a very low rate of malfeasance in the department. Once a year we publish and make public our report on malfeasance; it typically has about 25 incidents in it, which is very low, given the hundreds of thousands of transactions.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Twenty-five?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Yes, 25. That's been the average over the last few years, locally in Canada and sometimes abroad. Each and every complaint is investigated, the investigations are made public, and the findings are made public.

    Why are we in that situation? About five years ago we started internally at CIC, and we were pioneers at that time. We worked on values and ethics and had a dialogue internally to sensitize our staff on the importance of maintaining ethics in the department, especially with the handling of so much money, which, as the chairman mentioned, is nearly half a billion dollars a year in revenues.

    I'm pleased to report to the committee that our scorecard on this is quite good. We're proud of our employees, but we're always on the watch for these kinds of things.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Well, I'm not sure you're hearing about all the incidents, then, if there are only 25 proven, demonstrated cases per year. We will try to pass on information we have more regularly, perhaps, because--

    The Chair: Pat, I think you're talking more about the consultants, an issue Michel may want to add comments on, because that's where the real horror stories are.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Those horror stories have been confirmed, I think, and you've seen some of them. This is why we've been moving to regulate the function, and that will happen soon.

º  (1630)  

    Mr. Pat Martin: My last point is, again, on “Managing Access to Canada”. We've been very frustrated lately with the incidents of people coming in and working in Canada without work permits or work visas. I come from the building trades, and it's been an ongoing problem with NAFTA.

    I'll give you one example concerning the Halifax newspaper. Currently the Halifax Chronicle-Herald is building a new printing press, and the place is full of Swiss millwrights. Swiss people don't need a visa to come to Canada, but they're not supposed to work here when they do. Now, your office in Halifax is putting the onus on us to get their names. They won't act until we have their names. Surely there's an enforcement obligation to stop foreign workers from taking Canadian jobs, when there are a hundred unemployed millwrights sitting around Halifax looking for a good job and we have Swiss workers building this printing press. Are you too understaffed or under-resourced to go out and act on this information? Do you find you don't have the resources to enforce that aspect of immigration, protecting Canadian jobs?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I'm not aware of the particular case in Halifax, but every week we do proceed to arrest people who are working illegally in Canada without a work permit. They're arrested, charged under the immigration act, and deported. It happens every week of the year. We don't pursue every avenue in every case, but we do act on those incidents. I have reports that this is happening every week now.

    Of course, our priority in enforcement is criminals, and we've been focusing a lot of our limited resources on criminals.

    Mr. Pat Martin: The last thing is, I know that with the war crimes strategy, we as a nation have shifted our focus from criminal prosecution to deportation. There was a policy shift in the 1990s. How much of the $8.3 million you're asking for here will go just for the removal aspect? Do you know how much Justice is spending on the criminal prosecution side? In other words, what's the whole costing of the war crimes strategy?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The whole costing is $8.4 million for Citizenship and Immigration, $4.7 million for Justice, and a little bit more than half a million dollars for the RCMP. The other expenses and support are $1.9 million, and the total is $15.6 million.

    Mr. Pat Martin: Very good. Thank you.

    The Chair: Jerry.

    Mr. Jerry Pickard (Chatham—Kent Essex, Lib.): One of the issues we as a committee look at is the concerns that are brought forward to us by CIC staff members we have talked with across this country and around the world. This committee has done a tremendous amount of travelling and has had many discussions with staff members.

    Do you feel your dollars are adequate? I think this is a primary concern of the committee and has been for a long time. I'm referring not just to what we're dealing with here, your estimates in this case, but to your total budget. If your dollars are adequate, why do we seem to have the backlogs that exist as they do?

    Number two concerns the move to change the means by which people are graded coming into the country. Has this reduced the pressure on the backlog, and will it resolve some of the longer waits we have?

    And three, do you feel that manipulating the numbers you're dealing with up and down is a strategy by which we can resolve a problem? I think a lot of members of the committee also see a shortfall here, and as Madeleine pointed out, our provincial nominee program has a shortfall dollar-wise, I think. I believe that when we look at technical workers, we're short there in many areas, so I guess in some ways dollars affect all these kinds of things we're putting into place.

    I think the whole structure of the scheme by which we've set up admission policy was designed to cut the cost to the department by allowing immigrants to move up and down a scale in order for you to deal with the backlog. But I'm not sure it deals with our overall premise that there are other areas of concern for immigration in this country we're not dealing with. The question is, are the priorities right in the scale you have, and do you have the dollars to deal with the other issues that are necessary, in particular a more technically skilled workforce on the provincial nominee side of it?

º  (1635)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Mr. Chairman, I think the member's question is right at the heart of the whole issue. Again, it's difficult for me to answer it, and I'll try to explain why.

    We prefer to call it an inventory rather than a backlog for one very good reason. If we were not meeting our annual target as tabled in Parliament, then we would have a backlog. But given that we are meeting the commitment the minister made to Parliament, which is to bring in 220,000 to 240,000 immigrants with a mixture of 60:40--60% economic and 40% refugee resettlement and family reunification--then as long as we meet our target, what we have is an inventory.

    Now, the demand overseas will always be greater than what we can take, and the number of people who want to come here is a tribute to Canada. There are some policy decisions that have been made, leading to the establishment of that target, and if the question is whether we have enough money to meet the commitment, my answer has to be yes. It cannot be anything else than that because we're meeting our commitment. We are meeting our commitment on official languages, on staffing, and on enforcement. We're meeting all of the commitments we've made and that have been tabled in Parliament.

    Could we do better? The answer is obviously yes, and how we could do better would depend on the types of policy decisions that were made and the types of priorities that were established. We would cost them, and then decisions would have to be made. We can always do better.

    But if you're asking me in absolute terms if we have enough money, I think our track record has to be on the table and we have to admit we have enough money for what is being asked of us. If something else is asked of us, then that's an entirely different question. If we want to pursue illegal workers in a very aggressive way, then there's a cost associated with that, but I cannot give you a cost in absolute terms. It depends on the policy decisions that are taken.

    Mr. Jerry Pickard: Do you have, within the structure you have, enough money for immigration to supply the technical workforce that's required in this country today? I think we've really slid toward the academic side and we've slid toward the higher-end side very much. We've moved away from some of the more technical sides, in my view.

    I think, on the provincial nominee issues, we haven't really moved that program forward well either, maybe because we don't have proper agreements signed and we don't have a move forward there. I understand there have been technical problems in our dealings with the provinces, and hopefully those will be cleared up. Again, in going across the country we heard nothing but praise for those programs, but if you look at the numbers, they're not working.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: There are two points I'm going to make.

    The question of the member, Mr. Chairman, is an excellent question, but it's probably premature in a sense. Your question was, do we have what is needed to provide this country with the technical help it needs? I would not position the Department of Citizenship and Immigration as the provider. What we need to do and what we started doing about a year ago is to develop certain partnerships we didn't have before: partnerships with the provinces, partnerships with universities, and partnerships with business. We're not alone in that business. It's not an issue of saying, here are a number of people and just pick from among those people. We have to develop partnerships and respond to needs.

    The provincial nominee program has just been assessed by the provinces, and the assessment is very positive in terms of what it's worth. It's very small, but I think there is a desire to improve on that program and grow in it. Some provinces have caught up to it while others haven't.

    The issue, I think, is what kinds of partnership we'll be able to develop to identify those needs and to take action on those needs. Then I'll be able to answer the question of the member, which is, how much money do we need to activate that? But we're a little early in the process of developing those partnerships. It started about a year ago, but it's the major issue.

º  (1640)  

    The Chair: I'll follow up if I could. You could be helpful in this respect, because I think Jerry has asked a pertinent question. Of course, as a committee, we try to find out or understand what those policies and priorities are.

    Now, I know that planning and priorities will be tabled in the House sometime next week. The minister will come to us and report on how well the year has gone in terms of departments achieving their targets. It may very well be that we'll invite you back at that point in time to talk a little bit about planning and priorities. That's because we're late in terms of doing anything.

    As you know, a committee can't add to the sups, although sometimes we can take away. I know that certain committees have done that, and in this new spirit of the democratization of Parliament, who knows what may happen in the future? But we may want to do something interesting, and that is, perhaps next week, after we've had this meeting with you, to look at what all of my colleagues have said so far as to....

    I agree, the money you got delivers certain things, but if I was to ask you.... Because for some of us, waiting eight months to process a family application for a spouse or someone like that might be a little bit long.

    Not attracting the skilled workers we want to come to our country or taking too long, 18 months, two years, two and a half years.... Every time we talk about priorities, we're told, that's a priority. Well, provincial nominee agreements are a priority, families are a priority, and skilled workers are a priority. We've done all of the hard work. They can't all be priorities, because the only way you can fix priorities is by having the people and the resources to deliver on the priorities.

    Michel, perhaps you could lay out those policy options for us with a costing attached to them. Suppose we want citizenship applications to be dealt with in six months, not nine months or 12 months. Perhaps we want provincial nominee agreements to be done a little quicker because they're going to help the provinces and those smaller towns and communities that want immigrants. Maybe we want a benchmark that says we have to process a darn good application in 18 months so people don't have to wait longer than that. This committee would like to be able to know what those policy choices are, including enforcement, as an example, so we can help you by advising the minister and/or Parliament that we think you deserve a heck of a lot more money.

    We've said this all along, but I think we'd like to understand the choices we would have to make as a committee in order to do it. In the spirit of working together on that basis, you could help us if you could provide us with some of the numbers it would take to achieve certain better objectives.

    The status quo might be acceptable to some people, but I don't think it's ever been acceptable to this committee, not because we want to be critical but because we understand, really, the challenges you have. We're talking to your people out in the field and we're talking to the people overseas, who all have the same jobs. We want to be supportive.

    So if you could do that, I think it would be helpful and useful to the committee and, I think, to the people of Canada.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Well, Mr. Chairman, we certainly can help the committee. I have to admit, frankly, that I would probably feel more comfortable if the minister outlined the policy options to the committee rather than I.

    The Chair: If the minister were here, we would have asked him those policy questions, of course.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The question is the right one to ask, I think. As I said earlier, we've committed to between 220,000 and 240,000 migrants in the country and a mixture of 60:40, 40% being for family reunification and refugees. As the demand increases for family reunification because there are more and more immigrants in this country, if we are committed to 40%--actually, the family section is about 28% of that--the waiting times are going to get longer, that's for sure.

    As you said, we can't have priorities everywhere. Unless we decide to increase the numbers and increase the resources associated with that, if we want to maintain that balance, certain members of the family will have to wait longer, that's for sure.

º  (1645)  

    The Chair: I like the first two options, increase the numbers and increase the resources. I think that would solve our problems.

    Diane.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Thank you.

    This is an issue that is of real concern to all of us on the committee. How many individuals are active in the immigration application cube right now?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I'll have to ask what the totals are. We have the numbers; it's just a question of finding them.

    Lyse.

    Ms. Lyse Ricard (Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): We have 250,000 cases, which means that about 620,000 people are in the total inventory right now.

    Mr. Daniel Jean: If that's gone down, pursuant to the discussion we were having last week in committee, it's gone down by 100,000 persons because of the measures we took, where we gave higher marks to skilled workers for a period of time.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Right. I remember that from when you were before the committee. We have those people active in the cube. Now that the pass mark is being lowered, I assume that you are anticipating and forecasting that the number of applications in the cube is going to rise again. Can you give us a figure, a percentage, an increment, or anything that would help us to understand what you're dealing with here?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It's very hard to predict. I think Daniel mentioned that to continue with the targets we have, we need 70,000 applications per year. We need to generate that number, given the proportion of applications refused versus those accepted. When the number of applications goes down, we can foresee a problem down the road. Obviously, we don't have that problem this year with the kind of inventory we have, but as we clean up the inventory, we'll need constant input into the system. That explains why the pass mark needs to be adjusted. Will it generate the numbers? We hope so but we're not sure.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I guess we'll be coming at this again, then, when you've had a little more experience with the pass mark.

    I've been curious about the global case management system. When we visit the field, people in the field are very excited about that and mention a number of advantages. I understand that the first two phases of the project are supposed to be implemented this month. I wonder if you could tell us just what the status of the global case management system is. Also, what kind of resources have you spent on the development of the system, and what additional resources do you think will be necessary?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Daniel will answer as to the exact details.

    The first phase of implementation will be in June, in fact, and it will start with the citizenship area of the department. I will repeat the bold commitment I made to this committee, that this project will be delivered on time and on budget. We are currently on time and on budget with respect to that. You'll remember there was a delay of a few months for the awarding of the contract. We're past that delay; we now have the contractor in place, and things are rolling along as planned. Final implementation is due for December 31, 2005. The whole department will be on the new system. The rollout starts in June.

    Now, as far as how much money has currently been spent, Mr. McWhinnie has the number.

    Mr. John McWhinnie: Up until this particular fiscal year, we'd probably invested close to $60 million in getting the contractors lined up, buying software, and getting organized. So we're right at the launch, if you will, right now in this fiscal year; we're in what we call the first rollout.

    We've had to reprofile the funding a bit because of the delays in the start-up of the contracts. For fiscal year 2003-04 it will be about $44 million, moving into about $62 million the next fiscal year and then into another $26 million in the final year, for the full implementation.

    So it's about a $200 million project, and it is on schedule, on time. It's tight. It's a very major project. It's being looked at very carefully by Treasury Board and other central agencies as one of the leading projects in town, and as we stand right now, we're right on target.

º  (1650)  

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: Is the $200 million an all-inclusive figure for everything that has been and will be spent on the project?

    Mr. John McWhinnie: That's right.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I know your website says the first two phases are to be rolled out this month, but that's been delayed till June. Is that what you're saying?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I don't know what it says on the website.

    Mr. John McWhinnie: It's probably talking about the first phase, which was really the gap analysis and all that sort of work. What we're starting right now is what we call our first deployment, which is the citizenship part we'll be doing for in-Canada. Then we'll move to the next deployment, bringing on overseas operations. It may just be terminology.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I'll just read it. It says, for October 2003, “Implement and pilot the first two business components (releases 1 and 2)” of the system. I understand that to mean that business components would be here in Canada--or maybe you can help us there.

    Mr. John McWhinnie: Once again, the first business component fully deployed will be citizenship, so that's number one, but there will be an overlap from the second, which will start during this fiscal year. There's a stage of each of the business-line deployments that will overlap; as one is rolling out, the next one will be started. There's a kind of concurrent rollout of the project.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: We'll check, Mr. Chairman, as to what the member means. It may be just a pilot in preparation for the deployment in June that's referred to on the site. We'll check the site, and if it's not accurate....

    The key difficulty for us with that project right now, and we discussed it internally again yesterday, is that we have to stop modifying the old system as we move to the new system. The world is constantly changing. There is a point where, in citizenship, for example, it's not worth changing the existing system because it will all be changed in June. When do you stop changing a system that is constantly evolving so as to make very sure you're not damaging the implementation of the new system by changing things? It's a very delicate thing to manage. We think we have things pretty well under control now, and I think I'll be able to live up to the commitment I made to this committee.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: We wish you luck, because not only do you have to get the system up and running, you have to get all of the users of the system up and running. That is sometimes the bigger challenge, the human resources.

    I just have one other question about the supplementary estimates. You have $7 million more for personnel. As you know, I've been a bit critical vocally of some of our border crossings not having immigration officers present during the midnight shift. I'm wondering whether the additional $7 million that is going to go into personnel will allow our border crossing stations to have immigration officers available to do the secondary checking of people coming into the country.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I don't know what the proportion is. Can you answer that question, Lyse?

    Ms. Lyse Ricard: For the salaries in the sups, you have the war crimes strategy, which with 76 employees accounts for a little more than half of our personnel; marine security, with new, additional employees to cover the CIC share of that file; the action plan for official languages, with seven new employees there; and the mission in Chandigarh, where we're adding staff. That's what comprises the almost $7 million personnel portion of the sups.

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I think those are good additions. We saw the headlines today about the drug trade going through airports, and I assume that seaports are an additional concern for the department.

    I guess we go back to Joe's comment that if you came to the committee and made a case that you needed additional personnel, particularly immigration officers at border crossings, for example, which I think most Canadians would support, then we could be your allies on that. My question is, where do you need additional personnel? You've described seaports, you've described war crimes, and you've described official languages. I assume those aren't the only places you need additional personnel. Can you give us some idea of what your staffing needs might be in addition to those three?

º  (1655)  

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Again, it's a difficult question to answer. The question of personnel at ports of entry has to be looked at in conjunction with CCRA, the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency, because at many ports of entry we're just not present. The customs officer is the designated immigration officer. If there is a very complex case, we can serve that port of entry on demand, but the customs officers are empowered to execute immigration responsibilities.

    In some ports of entry there is stress, there is no doubt about it, and we're trying to accommodate internally through reallocation. It is obvious that when Pearson airport adds flights, it adds to our load, it adds to CCRA's load, and it adds to Transport's security load, and we have to accommodate that. Usually there is enough flexibility to do that, but there comes a point where it gets very difficult. The last PSAT money we obtained after September 11 allowed us to reinforce a large number of ports of entry and gave us some sense of comfort that we could respond to the demand.

    The implementation of the safe third country policy with the United States will also lighten the load on staff at ports of entry and allow us to find a little zone of comfort. I think we're following the demand as it happens. In some ports of entry it has come down and in some it has increased, and we're trying to meet it as it comes.

    But overall, if you ask me how many more people, I find it very difficult to answer. I would like to believe we have enough people to ensure the immigration service is available everywhere, at all ports of entry, in a reasonable way, but there are tensions sometimes.

    The Chair: I want to give you an opportunity--your colleague asked the question--because time is moving on. Do you have another one?

    Mrs. Diane Ablonczy: I just have one quick question to follow up on that. I assume some people will need to be detained until their status can be checked out more thoroughly. I just wondered if you could tell the committee what the status of detention facilities is. As you know, there have been reports of a facility to be built near Pearson airport. Can you just tell us what's available in the inventory as far as detention is concerned?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Lyse, can you answer this one?

    Ms. Lyse Ricard: In order to elaborate I'll have to go through my notes or provide it to the committee after.

    How many places do we have? We have beds in detention centres CIC operates. We have a detention centre in Laval, and we have one in Toronto we'll move into in the new year. We have some space at Pearson airport and at Vancouver airport as well, and in the rest of the country we use municipal and provincial facilities. It depends on our needs, but we always find space.

    The Chair: The department has been good enough to give us a full report on our detention facilities and the costs. I think it was in May or June that we asked. I wonder if you could facilitate a response to Diane's question and just give the committee an update on the detention costs as well as on how many people we have in there and so on.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: We'll provide the committee with the numbers.

    The Chair: Grant.

    Mr. Grant McNally (Dewdney—Alouette, Canadian Alliance): Thanks, Mr. Chair.

    I'm looking at “Transportation and Communications”. Is there any contracting out to private companies for reports or for communication plans, or is that all in-house?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: No. The item “Transportation and Communications” includes the relocation and travel associated with the establishment of the new mission in Chandigarh. It also includes the relocation of Canadian base officers, temporary duty staff, locally engaged staff, and whatever we need to implement the CAIPS operation in the new mission, so it's really not as much for communications as for transportation costs.

»  (1700)  

    Mr. Grant McNally: On the renovations that have been done abroad, you mentioned Manila and Shanghai, I believe. What's the contracting process for that? Are there Canadian firms involved at all?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I don't have that. It's DFAIT that does it, the foreign affairs department.

    Do you have the answer?

    Ms. Lyse Ricard: No, we don't have the answer. It's DFAIT that managed the overall competition process.

    Mr. Grant McNally: So they manage the process, but they get some of the money from Citizenship and Immigration.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Yes, they get some of it from us. We use the facilities, so we pay a share.

    Mr. Grant McNally: Is there a way for us to know? Seeing as the dollars are coming out of our ministry or this purview, so to speak, I'm wondering if there's a way for us to get into the loop on that process. Who's getting the contracts? Are Canadian firms involved? How many dollars are going out? We see our portion, but what's the total portion? Obviously, we can look at foreign affairs estimates as well, but is there a way for us to get that information at this committee?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Yes. We'll undertake to pass that on to DFAIT and obtain the information for the committee.

    Mr. Grant McNally: Thank you.

    These estimates are obviously very general in terms of what they cover, and there are lots of specifics we don't see here. Are there any items that are contracted out to outside agencies or contractors that would fall in here anywhere? Can we get that information? I know that's a sort of tough one to throw at you here towards the end of the meeting, but are they all in-house expenses? Are there expenses that are going to outside agencies or contractors?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: The whole $17 million of the IFH program is in fact channelled through a private contract, where claims are managed at a cost of $2 per claim. The contract is tendered regularly--that's a public tender--and the company that has it now is FAS in Edmonton.

    Mr. Grant McNally: Oh, is it tendered?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It's up for tender next year for three to five years, depending on the contract.

    Mr. Grant McNally: You mentioned the name of the company. Did we get that read into the record?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: It's FAS Edmonton.

    Mr. Grant McNally: I'm not really good at following all the acronyms. Thank you.

    The Chair: If I could, before I thank you all very much for your useful information, I'll mention that we probably do want to create a report. We may wait for the planning priorities. We'll wait for your information with regard to some of those options you talked about, Michel, in terms of costing priorities and so on. As all of us have agreed and indicated to you, we as a committee want to be your partners in trying to deliver a good product, one Canadians can have not only an awful lot of confidence in but pride as well. So far we're all very proud of what we as a country have been able to accomplish with immigrants.

    I have two quick questions for my part. You're going to spend $468,000 for the Visa Imposition for Seafarers initiative and $3.017 million for passenger and crew screening. Now, that sounds like a lot of money. I'm just wondering, how big is the problem that you would devote about $3.5 million to passenger and crew screening? Is it because we have an awful lot of passengers trying to jump off and stay in Canada or crew members trying to do the same thing? That sounds like an awful lot of money. Perhaps you could tell me very quickly something about that particular program, because obviously it's an augmentation. This is an ongoing program I know we have, so maybe you or Daniel could talk about it.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: I'll think I'll ask Daniel to comment on the details.

    Mr. Daniel Jean: Seafarers were clearly an area of vulnerability in terms of numbers. There was abuse by large numbers of people coming in as seapersons and trying to get in with fraudulent papers. They were exempt from the need for travel documents and exempt from the need for a visa. As a matter of fact, the maritime industry agreed that this was a major source of abuse and that we should be doing something about it. What we've done there is consistent with what other countries have done.

    As far as marine security is concerned, this is more about risk and magnitude of risk rather than about volumes of people at risk. There was an agreement whereby we would be able to work in concert with the RCMP, Transport, and all the authorities that have anything to do with marine security. We would provide our expertise when required to make sure we screened out certain people, whether they were a security risk or a criminality risk or were people trying to come into Canada in an irregular fashion.

»  (1705)  

    The Chair: Thank you.

    Lastly, one of our reports...and I think it was the provincial nominee agreement Jerry referred to, or our review of...and dialogue with communities across the country that are dying to get some immigrants. We all know they're going to the major centres. I know we have a strategy or are looking at how we can try to get people to come to some good parts of the country, rural and small-town Canada, as well as our major centres.

    I know you're going to spend $9 million to promote immigration from outside the country to minority francophone communities, and I think Diane told us a little bit about it. There are an awful lot of those communities, and we know there are an awful lot of potential immigrants who want to come. They may want to come to Quebec, but they very well may want to settle somewhere outside of Quebec, and there's also a million dollars to help attract newcomers to these communities. That's been a focus of our provincial nominee report. How are you going to do that?

    We believe that if you promote communities, if you work with them as partners as well as with the provinces.... More specifically, I know we keep using Winnipeg as the perfect example of how a community that wants something goes out and gets it. How are you going to partner? It would seem to me a million dollars by itself may not do it. I'm not only talking about money. It is actually about creating the partnerships with the local communities in order to try to implement the program of attracting newcomers to their communities.

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Mr. Chairman, as you know, we're experimenting on that front. We started discussions with the provinces last year, and we've launched a set of experiments. We've also had some discussions with some cities--Winnipeg, as you mentioned, is one of them--where we have an agreement with the province and the municipality. We have agreements with some universities as well, where we're trying to see how we can get them involved in the processing of students in order to lighten our load and also for us to be more efficient.

    We are at the stage where we're observing how those pilot projects or initiatives are evolving. I think there's a lot that can be done without us necessarily throwing money at it. As I said, the provincial nominee program is expanding now. It's still extremely modest, but it is working. The results we have show that what's in there works. The minister has been very open in offering an expansion of that program to get provinces more and more involved in it.

    I think that as the year develops, we'll see that the establishment of those new partnerships is a priority for the department, and we'll see what that yields in terms of action.

    The Chair: On behalf of the committee, Mr. Dorais, I want to thank you again for being here and helping us through those things. Thank you, Ms. Vincent, as well; welcome, and hopefully we'll see more of you. Daniel, it's always nice to see you on immigration stuff. To all of you, thank you very much for being so helpful to the committee.

    Next time, bring your minister along, will you, Michel?

    Mr. Michel Dorais: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members.

    The Chair: Thank you very much.

    The meeting is adjourned.