:
Good afternoon, everyone. This is meeting number 87 of the Standing Committee on Public Accounts.
We welcome all of you here today. We remind you that we are televised. If you have a cellphone or any type of mechanical device, we would encourage you to please shut it off or put it on silent mode so we'll have less interruption.
Pursuant to Standing Order 108, we are looking at report 3, “Settlement Services for Syrian Refugees—Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada”, of the fall 2017 reports of the Auditor General of Canada, referred to the committee on Tuesday, November 21, 2017.
We're very pleased to have with us today, from the Office of the Auditor General, Nancy Cheng, assistant auditor general; as well as Nicholas Swales, principal.
From the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, we're happy to have the deputy minister, Marta Morgan; David Manicom, assistant deputy minister, settlement and integration; and Ümit Kiziltan, director general, research and evaluation.
We welcome you here today.
We will begin with Ms. Cheng.
We thank you for this opportunity to present the results of our audit of settlement services for Syrian refugees. As you mentioned, joining me at the table is Nicholas Swales. He is the principal responsible for this audit.
In 2015, the Government of Canada committed to help bring approximately 47,000 Syrian refugees to Canada over two years. As of April 30, 2017, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada reported that almost 45,000 Syrian refugees had arrived in Canada since November 2015. This number is three times higher than the average number of refugees who have been admitted to Canada every year since 1995.
[Translation]
This audit looked at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada's $257-million initiative to help Syrian refugees settle in Canada. The audit focused on whether Syrian refugees received selected settlement services funded by the Department that were needed to help them integrate into Canada. It also examined whether the department measured the outcomes of its efforts to settle Syrian refugees.
This audit is important because the Syrian refugee initiative will succeed in the long term only if the people it brought to Canada integrate into Canadian society.
[English]
In the area of delivering settlement services, we found that most Syrian refugees received needs analysis, language assessments, and language training during their first year in Canada. More than 80% had their needs assessed, and 75% of those who received language assessments attended language classes.
We also found that the department identified the settlement services that Syrian refugees needed, and allocated funding to the organizations that offered these services. The department increased funding for services when it determined that refugees arriving under the initiative needed more settlement services than expected.
However, the department did not allocate all of the additional funds early enough in 2017 to meet the needs of the service providers. The purpose of these funds was to sustain additional settlement services established in 2016. When they did not receive funding, some service providers cut settlement services for at least three months.
[Translation]
In the area of managing information for decision-making, we found Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada did not have sufficient information to efficiently manage language training wait-lists for Syrian refugees. It also lacked information to ensure the consistent delivery of services to Syrian refugees in all regions. Although the Department expected the Syrian refugees to receive a standard and consistent level of service across the country, many of the contribution agreements we examined contained no service expectations.
These findings matter because many of the Syrian refugees who arrived in Canada needed extensive settlement services. It was therefore important for the government to have accurate and timely information about the demand for language training, and for it to set clear expectations for the services it funded to ensure that those services would meet the needs of clients.
[English]
Finally, in the area of measuring outcome, we found that although the department had developed a strategy for measuring the integration of Syrian refugees into Canada, it did not collect information from the provinces for some important indicators, such as access to health care providers and school attendance.
The department is responsible for promoting the successful integration of permanent residents into Canada. To assess whether the Syrian refugees are successfully integrating into Canadian society, the department needs to know that they have access to provincial services.
[Translation]
We are pleased to report that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada has agreed with our recommendations.
Mr. Chair, this concludes my opening remarks. We would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.
Thank you.
:
Mr. Chair, thank you for inviting me to address this committee today on the issue of settlement services for Syrian refugees.
Since November 2015, Canada has welcomed more than 50,000 Syrian refugees. As the Auditor General's report highlights, in order to ensure that these newcomers can integrate into their new communities and ultimately succeed in Canada, it is crucial that they have access to the supports they need. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada thanks the Auditor General for his recommendations, which we accept.
The findings of this audit also confirm the results of our own early evaluation and research findings, which overall indicate that Syrians are integrating well and at the same rate as other refugee groups.
[Translation]
As you know, Mr. Chair, through our settlement program, IRCC funds various pre-and post-arrival supports for immigrants and refugees. These services help newcomers to fully participate in the economic, social, civic and cultural life of our country.
Some services are also provided specifically for refugees through the resettlement assistance program, such as meeting the refugee at the airport or port of entry; temporary accommodation; help in finding permanent accommodation; basic household items; and some health supports.
[English]
Once refugees and immigrants have arrived, they have access to a number of in-Canada settlement supports that are financed by the department and provided by local service provider organizations. These include language assessments and training; support to build networks in communities, including with other newcomers and community members, public institutions, employers, and community organizations; one-on-one and group mentoring with established immigrants or other Canadians; child and youth leadership and peer support projects; and information, orientation, and help in finding and retaining employment. Other supports, such as child care, transportation assistance, crisis counselling, and provisions for disabilities, are also offered to help newcomers access these various settlement services.
The department is pleased that the Auditor General found that Syrian refugees received a wide variety of these settlement services in their first year in Canada. It's also worth noting that Syrian refugees received settlement services at a higher rate than other refugees who arrived during the same period. Almost 90% of Syrian refugees received needs assessments, and 88% had language assessments. This compares to 80% of non-Syrian refugees who accessed needs assessments, and 78% who accessed language assessments during the same period.
As the committee is aware, the work of the Auditor General resulted in four recommendations for IRCC. These relate to the timely transfer of funding to service providers, service expectations in contribution agreements, the management of language training wait-lists, and updates to our performance measurement strategy. Let me go through these one by one.
First, to support the settlement needs of newcomers outside of Quebec, IRCC is investing approximately $762 million in total in 2018-19. This includes more than $58 million in supplementary funding for the Syrian refugee effort. This represents a 4% increase over 2017-18, and a full 29% increase over the past three years. This includes $25 million for pre-arrival services to ensure that newcomers arrive prepared to settle in their new community, as well as $32 million devoted to service delivery improvement, innovation, and experimentation to continue to find better ways to deliver our services.
To fund the delivery of settlement services across the country outside of Quebec, the department manages more than 700 contribution agreements with more than 500 service provider organizations.
[Translation]
IRCC remains committed to delivering services in a timely manner.
The department will review its practices to see where it can make further improvements to its planning and approval processes, particularly for urgent and unexpected program needs such as the Syrian refugee initiative.
This includes looking at the department's business processes to more effectively manage grants and contributions. The review will also examine the ways we engage and work collaboratively with all stakeholders, as well as provincial and territorial governments, in the delivery of the settlement program.
[English]
With respect to the audit's recommendation on language training access, first I wish to note that all refugees have priority access to language services, and this includes an initial assessment.
In 2016-17, IRCC invested more than $27 million to increase language training services for newcomers, including Syrians, at literacy and basic skill levels. Since then, more than 7,000 new language training seats have been added across Canada to meet the needs of Syrian refugees. In addition, more childminding spaces and transportation subsidies have been added to facilitate access to language classes for these clients.
Additionally, to ensure that services kept pace with the arrival of Syrian refugees, service provider organizations that serve a high volume of refugee clients received additional funding to help meet increasing demands.
With respect to outcomes measurement to ensure the integration of Syrian refugees across Canada, IRCC developed a strategy that included a rapid impact evaluation of their early outcomes. As the Auditor General noted, this strategy has not yet been fully implemented, especially with respect to measuring health and education indicators.
IRCC acknowledges that it takes time for all newcomers to integrate in Canada and this is particularly true for refugees, given their unique challenges. In addition to our own efforts to monitor and track the progress of Syrian refugees, research is under way in partnership with the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council.
Overall, IRCC is pleased with the progress that the recently arrived Syrian refugees have made to date in their settlement journey. Our evaluation of their early outcomes suggests that this group is already on the right path towards full integration. We look forward to the continuation of such a trend, as we continue to closely monitor their progress and make service delivery and program adjustments as needed.
We expect that Syrian refugees will ultimately succeed in Canada, just as other refugee groups have in the past, needless to say, with the participation of the whole community.
As you know, Mr. Chair, the success of this resettlement initiative was made possible due to the extraordinary support and co-operation of organizations, businesses, governments, and communities, and the compassionate consideration of Canadians. Collectively, they assisted with the arrival of these refugees by helping them get settled and established in their new communities, and in multiple other ways to help them start their integration journey.
[Translation]
The department has taken—and will continue to take—action to ensure that all newcomers, including refugees, are able to access the settlement services they need. But, if we want to ensure these refugees can further integrate and succeed in Canada, continued support from these various players will also be necessary.
My officials and I would be happy to respond to any questions the committee may have.
Thanks very much.
Thank you to the representatives from Immigration, as well as the Auditor General, for their presentations prior to our opportunity to ask questions.
To Immigration, I can certainly accept that there are going to be gaps and cracks, with the size of the program that was being instituted and the speed with which it needed to be done. I think that everybody around this table would recognize the incredible work that was done to meet a timeline and a goal that were thrust upon you in a very short time period.
I'd like to go to the report itself. On page 10, some bar graphs show the assessments and training, the services being provided, and the difference between government-assisted and privately sponsored refugees. The three sections are needs assessment, language assessment, and language training. Needs assessment is 91% government versus 75% private, language assessment is 85% to 76%, and the actual language training is 82% to 63%.
My question to the immigration officials is, when you're looking at those numbers, are some of the privately sponsored individuals provided services outside of what you would characterize as taking part in your programming or that of organizations you work with?
As these things go, it's a pretty good audit. You know I'm a hard marker, and I tried to get something a little less than “pretty good”. However, all things considered, I think it is.
I have a couple of thoughts. First of all, this file had the benefit of being an absolute top priority for the new government, so it was getting a lot of attention. However, having been involved in the transition from one government to another, you don't have any systems in place. There are no mechanisms for any kind of routine or “We'll pick it up at this point with these people.”
The absence of that meant that an awful lot had to fall to the staff, to the public service, and I want to compliment them. You rose to the occasion. You were there to meet the need of an incoming government, regardless of the party, and you assisted them with a critically important, difficult, stressful file without a lot of political guidance.
I want to compliment you, Deputy, and all of your people, because you served us well. You did a good job. You really did.
I also want to give a shout-out to my former colleague Mr. McCallum, because my instincts tell me that along the way some pretty sophisticated political judgment needed to be made, again, without the usual processes and second and third looks, so compliments there.
I'm also mindful of Bob Rae, who liked to say, when he became premier, that becoming premier and learning how to do the job was like learning how to play the violin in public. He is a funny guy, and again, compliments there.
At the risk of being completely uncharacteristic, I want to add more compliments. I don't normally comment. They're supposed to do their job, and if they don't, I come down on them. However, this is really good. It's a great action plan. It looks like you went a step beyond, and I'm impressed. Usually at this point I say, “Having said that” and turn the artillery to something, but really I don't have much artillery.
I have a few questions, though.
:
Mr. Chair, first of all, I would like to thank the member for his appreciation. I was not the deputy minister at the time of the Syrian refugee initiative when most of the heavy lifting was done, and I wish that Anita Biguzs were here today to hear this. I'm sure she would really appreciate it.
However, David is with me, and he was one of the lead ADMs on the initiative, as was Dawn Edlund, our associate assistant deputy minister of operations. We do appreciate it. It really was a big lift for the department, and one of those seminal lifetime events, I think, for everyone who was involved with it.
We are committed to implementing the action plan that has been set out and has been provided to the committee. It was very helpful for us in terms of providing us with insights into what we can do better.
On the issue of service expectations, we certainly do have descriptions of the services that we expect will be provided, and we have now put in place service expectations for language training that are quite detailed. I think one of the challenges for a national program that is this broad and diverse is having a consistent set of expectations across all the various organizations that deliver the programs in various circumstances.
One of the commitments we've made in the action plan is to clarify our service expectations in other areas of programming that we currently undertake, such as welcome and orientation, and to roll that out over the next six to 12 months as we update our contribution agreements.
Thank you, everyone, for being here this morning.
Mr. Manicom, I have a slight problem with what you said a few minutes ago about rural areas. You said that there is still work to be done; that is what I understood from your conclusion. You say that the services are not always provided. I am from La Pocatière, a town of approximately 4,200 people, and we have access to all the public services you have mentioned.
I find it regrettable that, when floods of immigrants arrive, as they did in 2015, there seems to be no system to establish priorities and to allow those immigrants to be brought to the regions. The population of the Bas-Saint-Laurent is aging more than most in Canada, as Rémi Massé, my colleague on this committee and also the member of Parliament for that region, can attest. It is important to invite immigrants arriving in the country to come and settle in rural areas too.
Do you have any strategies, or a plan, to improve this situation, which has occurred as the result of our country's great generosity?
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I want to start by thanking the Office of the Auditor General for its work on this report, and the IRCC for its tremendous undertaking in settling the Syrian refugees. I know it has been a tremendous task to settle 45,000 Syrian refugees over the past two years.
Having read the report from the Auditor General and having heard the testimony here today at committee, I can see that the early outcomes have been very good. Despite some challenges that we have identified today with the flow of funding and the management of language training and wait-lists, this is largely a success story.
It also remains a story that is unfolding. I have had the pleasure to welcome, as some of my other colleagues have, a number of Syrian refugee families, and even helped to pack some welcome kits for them upon their arrival. What struck me the most is that some of these families include many children. Having an educational background, and having spent nine years as a school board trustee in Toronto, I can tell you that educational outcomes are a crucial measurement of successful integration. We know that schools can play a very important role as the centres of community, not only for the children but for the families as well.
The data on how the children are doing should, in my mind, be readily available from the school boards, as well as through the coordination of ministries of education across the country. My question is, have we looked at that data in terms of the educational attainment of the Syrian refugee children? How does that information, or how can it, play a role in measuring the successful integration of the families? How do we plan to use that information to more effectively target resources and supports?
Given what we know about the importance of schools, particularly among immigrant families where there are large numbers of children, looking at their education is crucial to being able to measure the success of their integration.
:
From the very beginning, even before the first refugees arrived, the outcomes monitoring framework was set up. There was a ministerial meeting in Ottawa with all provinces, all ministers, and we tabled this joint framework. From that moment on, we knew that we needed provincial information, as is also mentioned in the report.
However, it takes time to build those information sharing agreements. This is all private, personal information. We are negotiating with all the provinces. With Ontario, we have made a lot of progress in terms of establishing this education-wise. As you already heard, we have health data linkages with two provinces already, British Columbia and Ontario. New Brunswick and Manitoba are going to come in very soon, before the end of March. These are all attempts to ensure that the relevant performance information from provinces is reaching us so that we can monitor health and education because they are closely linked.
Another initiative we have, as you heard, is with the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. Right away, from the very beginning of the movement, we initiated a huge, rapid research initiative. Over 27 projects were started, and the results are coming in. These are top academics across Canada looking at the Syrian refugee population specifically, and some of them have been zeroing in on youth, education, and schools, their integration and their challenges. The insight they are generating is essential for us to understand how trauma is affecting youth, and how mental health issues are impacting their education and integration.
These results are just beginning to come out right now, and we have a range of observations, including using more cultural brokering, if you will, so people can build bridges between refugee communities and other, already established communities. The research, more data through the information sharing agreements, and, of course, our other linked data such as income and looking at the families, will all complement our understanding of how the integration process is moving forward for young Syrians.
I will take the opportunity to make a couple of contextual comments as well. I think it is important to note that this is a significant initiative, a major undertaking. In my opening statement, I said it is three times the normal volume since 1995. Being able to bring in the people under those circumstances is, I think, important to note.
The other important point I would like to make is in our conclusion. For every audit, the methodology requires that we make a conclusion, and the conclusion is that they have provided these selected programs. We didn't look at all services. The services we looked at were provided when they were needed. I think that's important to note. That's to the point that several members have spoken to.
What we've observed is really ways to see whether we can enhance things. Nothing is ever perfect. While we are doing well overall, there is a need to ask if there is room for improvement, and how that can be done so that we can further the programs in the future. A bit of it was about accountability, but I think a good part of it was looking forward, to see how this can benefit future refugee programs.
I have a couple of comments, if I may. First of all, just now, we talked a fair bit about working with service organizations and how, post-audit, there has been more information about how some of them weren't able to get the funding when the department was indeed in a position to give it to them.
It seems to me that it behooves us to help smaller organizations access that, because if they don't have the assurance that the funding is going to be there, it's very difficult for them to implement programs, especially when they are smaller organizations. There seems to be a bit more of a challenge for us, and it's a challenge that we need to rise to in order to help them get there, because ultimately, to do a lot of this work, we're relying on these 500 service organizations. That's the point I want to make.
To the point that was raised by the member about the outcome framework, it's absolutely essential that we have a framework like that. We're very happy that a framework has been laid out. They were looking at different steps, initially looking at some performance indicators for different periods, then having some rapid evaluation to see quickly on the ground whether things are going in the right direction, and doing some research. The overall framework is described in the report, and we're quite happy with that.
A member also pointed out that there was a lot of detail in the management action plan. We noted that too. We haven't audited the management action plan, but it looks quite comprehensive to us.
The important thing to do now is to make sure that all the steps in the management action plan get implemented. Especially for the outcome, knowing what's happening on the ground is quite significant in terms of knowing how to deploy resources if there are resources remaining to be deployed in this area. Also, in carrying out settlement services and programs in the future, it is important to understand whether there are things we can learn from this exercise. This is a big exercise, involving large numbers, and maybe there are more areas we can learn lessons from.
The linkages and the need to get information from the provinces are absolutely critical. Just now, members raised the question, “What's the ultimate purpose? What can we hope to accomplish?” We are a compassionate people. We are helping refugees and bringing them into the country, but we're also hoping they will contribute to the Canadian community.
There is a need for us to help them be capable so that they can contribute. The outcome discussion, in terms of education, is absolutely crucial, as is health care.
If people come from war-torn countries, there are mental health issues. Do we know whether they are supported? The indicators also speak to the fact that some of the children will have special needs. To what extent do we know about them, and to what extent are those needs being addressed? The broader Canadian population has learning deficiencies in our school system. How do we help our refugee population deal with that as well? The family members have a large population of school-age children, so we need to really look after them.
It's really trying to support the point that the management action plan is there. We have to make sure it gets implemented, and we need to get the information on how well they are ultimately integrating so that we can move forward.
:
Thank you, Chair. I will try to be very brief.
I think in my community there might have been at least one group impacted by that funding. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that there was at least one.
Here is the question I have. You approach NGOs, for the most part, and you say to them, “We're pretty sure that this money is going to be here and we want you to upfront it.” Now, clearly there was a gap of 12% at least, and that's where I want to focus, because for those 12% there was some harm done in some communities.
Here is what I don't get. If the government is saying to them, look, you're all but sure.... What percentage was the government telling these NGOs? Was it 98% guaranteed, in which case those who wouldn't take the risk look like they should be a little less cautious? However, if you said to them that there is a 70% to 80% chance they're going to get it, I can see board members, especially in this day and age, saying, “Wait a minute. Given the way politics goes in this country, I'm not going to justify our spending $200,000 that we may end up not having.”
How did that happen? How did we go so far?
I'll finish with this. I'm assuming that you couldn't give them a 100% commitment, because that would be a decision. It was something less than 100%, but how much? Where was the problem? Was it with these groups that should have taken signals that the money would be there? Was that the problem? Or did the government fail to signal sufficiently that it would not leave them high and dry, and they would be okay, like 99%?
Help me understand, please.
:
I'll do my best. We're getting into fairly technical territory here.
At the time, we were renewing our entire settlement programs funding arrangements, not just for Syrian refugees but for everyone. Those agreements had already been renewed for an additional year because of the election cycle, so we were in that process. Our increased, but not infinite, number of staff were renewing 700 agreements.
Then we received information that we would have supplemental funding re-profiled for Syria. That required the amendment of many of those 700 agreements, which we were in the process of renewing. We had to make a management decision as to whether or not to continue down the path and get the 700 renewals done, or interrupt it in order to do the amendments at the same time.
We took the management decision to not put the 700 renewals at any risk and to make sure we got them all done, with money in the organizations for the start of the fiscal year on April 1.
That meant that we had to say to many organizations, “You will receive additional Syria money. It will not be in your bank account on April 1, and we cannot tell you definitively how much or exactly on what date you will have it.”
This is my understanding. If we have to correct any details, we will correct them.
We made a management risk decision. Most organizations said, “We understand. We're going to get an additional x hundred thousand dollars, and it will come during the fiscal year. We will do the programming. We will spend the money.” A small number decided not to, and they waited until we could do formal financial initiation.
:
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
I have no questions, only observations. I also sit on the government operations committee, and this morning we had an outside consultant tell us that Canada is looked at as an example by many countries on many things, except procurement. We're very bad at procurement, and are seen as really not an example to follow.
One thing we're very good at, apparently, which many countries around the world look at us for, is our settlement services for immigrants and refugees. My job as an MP demands a lot of continued attention to the issues of immigration and refugees. Having worked in the field for over 15 years, I can absolutely attest to the excellent work you do.
I come from Quebec, so there's a little difference there.
[Translation]
To answer your question, Mr. Généreux, language services for immigrants are always in French in Quebec. There are no free language services for learning English, or any other language. If people want to learn more English, they absolutely have to pay to do so. All the welcome and integration services are provided in French. I am not saying that is bad: it simply reflects the reality of Quebec. It is how the province does things.
Let me end by saying that welcoming, settling and integrating immigrants and refugees is a matter of nation building, if that is the correct expression to use.
[English]
Nation building is what immigration is all about, particularly in a country of such slow and limited demographic growth, so hats off to you and to your department for what you're doing.
If we can help you with reports and recommendations, hoping to improve what can be improved, you can count on us.
Thank you again.
:
So it will be made public fairly soon.
The other question I have is more of a personal question. In my very rural Alberta riding, we have a number of immigration.... Especially around the Syrian refugees, a kind of umbrella organization came together in one of my communities, Camrose, a community of just under 20,000. They were initially disappointed that they were unable to access government-assisted refugees. They are 50 miles out of Edmonton, and they have a really strong record with refugee resettlement and working with refugees.
Today I heard some of the reasons why. Let me just make it very clear that some of these small groups and communities really take an interest in the process. It may not be a government program that's helping these refugees through; it can be community organizations or faith groups, such as mosques or churches, where everybody really gets engaged.
I would ask a couple of questions. Of the just under 45,000 Syrian refugees who came in during the timeline we're studying here, how many were government-assisted refugees, how many were privately sponsored, and how many may have been some blended form of visa office-referred refugees?