CITI Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

COMITÉ PERMANENT DE LA CITOYENNETÉ ET DE L'IMMIGRATION

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Wednesday, December 3, 1997

• 1542

[English]

The Chairman (Mr. Stan Dromisky (Thunder Bay—Atikokan, Lib.)): I'd like to call the meeting to order. We have a quorum. We've met the requirements of minimum quorum.

Yes, Mr. Ménard.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard (Hochelaga—Maisonneuve, BQ): Is the technology on our side, Mr. Chairman?

An Hon. Member: It is on the right side.

Mr. Réal Ménard: Mr. Chairman, I would ask that we discuss the motion of which I gave notice yesterday at the end of today's meeting, so that we do not delay hearing from our witnesses. I would like us to discuss the motion at the end of the meeting, once we have finished hearing from the witnesses.

The Chairman: Yes, at the end.

Mr. Réal Ménard: Fine.

[English]

The Chairman: I don't need a motion for that. I will simply take into advisement what you've said.

I'm sure we could have unanimous support for the recommendation that has been given by Mr. Ménard, which is to deal with the tabled motion after we deal with our witnesses.

Since this really means that we haven't changed our pattern of operation, we will start by having presentations and then we will jump from side to side with five minutes each. Today I'm asking each member to be extremely concise in their presentations. Don't have rambling preambles. Get right to the point and ask your very intelligent questions so we get some very informative, intelligent answers. Okay? Don't deviate. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much for coming. I don't know who's going to be the first to speak. Mr. Tsaï, welcome.

Mr. Georges Tsaï (Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Services, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We are pleased to have this opportunity to make a presentation on foreign students to your committee. As a department, Citizenship and Immigration Canada recognizes the importance of international students to the economy and business community of our country.

[Translation]

Mr. Chairman, I would like introduce the colleagues I have with me today for this presentation. They are: Mr. Bill Sheppit, who is the Director General, Case Presentation but who is also the Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, and Ms. Joan Atkinson, who is the Director General, Selection Branch. Mr. Sheppit and Ms. Atkinson will be making the presentation today, after which we will try to answer committee members' questions. Thank you.

• 1545

With your permission, I will turn the floor over to Mr. Sheppit.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Sheppit.

Mr. Bill Sheppit (Acting Assistant Deputy Minister, Operations, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You may recall that approximately one month or six weeks ago we gave a presentation to the committee entitled “How the System Works”. As part of that presentation we provided general information about overseas processing of immigrants and visitors. Today we want to discuss student processing in more detail.

Students are a specific subset of visitors, according to the Immigration Act. As such, they must meet the same general requirements as all other visitors. They must be bona fide temporary entrants. They must meet statutory requirements, including criminality and medical where appropriate. In addition, they must also meet certain specific requirements, including having a letter of acceptance and having sufficient funds to pay for their course.

As Mr. Tsaï indicated, the education sector is a large and growing sector of the economy. Its estimated value in North America is approximately $700 billion and it's growing rapidly. Increasingly schools, universities, educational institutions throughout Canada, are looking at the foreign student market as a means of meeting some of the funding pressures they find themselves under. As a department we also recognize the importance and benefit of students to Canada. We're taking steps to increase our market share and to streamline our processing.

The number of student applications has increased by more than 136% from 1985 to 1996. There are now more than 100,000 foreign students in Canada. Last year we processed more than 45,000 student applications and accepted approximately 90% of those. More than 20% of the applications received were processed on the same day, and 70% were processed in less than 30 working days.

That being said, we think there's still room for improvement and for growth in the area. We're looking at what additional steps we can take to improve processing. Joan Atkinson will outline some of those for you now.

Ms. Joan Atkinson (Director General, Selection Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you for having us here. It's a pleasure to be here with the committee to discuss the issue of student authorizations today.

I thought I would talk first a bit about the processing of student authorizations, then refer a little to some of the statistics: where our students are coming from, how many, and so on. Then I will tell you, as Bill has already mentioned, what we are doing to try to make Canada a more attractive destination for foreign students and to enhance our competitiveness in this very important area.

As Bill has already said, students are a subset of visitors. Therefore they must satisfy a visa officer that they are coming for a temporary purpose and that they will leave Canada at the end of their studies and return to their home country. They must therefore meet the requirements all visitors must meet, which include coming temporarily, having a passport or travel document, being in good health and of good character, and meeting the health, security, and criminality requirements of the Immigration Act.

About being in good health and meeting the medical requirements, like any other visitor a foreign student to Canada may need to pass a medical examination before a student authorization may be issued if the student is coming to Canada for longer than six months and has lived in an area of increased public health risk. Since the vast majority of our students come from Asia, which is an area of the world where generally we require medical examinations of visitors who are coming for longer than six months, and since most of our students are indeed coming for longer than six months, most of our students are subject to medical requirements.

In addition to those basic visitor requirements, students must provide a letter of acceptance from an educational institution. The letter of acceptance may be conditional on meeting certain requirements, but it must be clear on the program the student is being accepted into and the length of time the program of studies is envisaged for.

In addition, the student must provide proof of funds to cover tuition and living expenses, obviously. Those living expenses would cover not just the student but also any accompanying family members who may be coming with the student.

Once all the documents have been accumulated—and I hasten to add it is the letter of acceptance that is critical here—the student would submit the documents, together with a completed application form and a cost-recovery fee, which is currently $125 Canadian, to the nearest visa post.

• 1550

In many cases we are able to waive interviews in student cases where all the documentation is in order, where there is no question as to the bona fides of the student, and where the visa officer is satisfied that the student meets the basic visitor requirements.

Upon an assessment of the documentation, medical instructions for the medical examination are generally issued, and the student undergoes a medical. Once medical results are received, a student authorization may be issued together with a visitor visa in the passport if the student is a national of a country where a visitor visa is also required.

We are able to issue long-term student authorizations to many university and college students. The authorizations are generally issued for the period of the program of studies. If the student has embarked on, for example, a four-year degree program, we are often able to issue a student authorization for that length of time if we are satisfied as to the funding arrangements for that period of time and as to the bona fides of the student and so on. That then saves the student, and us as well, from having to extend student authorizations once the individual is in Canada.

It's important to note here in terms of the processing environment that, not surprisingly, student processing is a very seasonal part of our workload; 40% of all our applications are received in a six-week window, the period of June to August.

That presents us with certain challenges, as I'm sure you can appreciate. It corresponds with our peak visitor visa-processing period overseas, because most of our visitors come to Canada not at this time of year but during the summer period. It also corresponds with our normal staff rotation. In the overseas context, with Canada-based officers the summer period is the time when staff rotate.

So it does present us with challenges in delivering student visas quickly and efficiently, because it comes at a very busy time of our period, and it's very seasonal. However, as Bill has already alluded, it is generally a movement we are able to facilitate. It does not generally present us with significant enforcement problems. Fully 90% of all student applications received are accepted and issued with student authorizations.

Moving now to some statistics to give you some idea of the size and extent of the student movement, there are at any given time, as Bill has said already, more than 100,000 foreign students in Canada. These would include students who are here on student authorizations and those who come for short-term training, such as English as a second language or French as a second language, for less than three months, where they in fact do not require a student authorization and come simply as visitors. So at any given time in Canada we have approximately 100,000 foreign students.

We processed last year 47,000 student visa applications. In terms of where they're coming from, over the last 10 years the Asia-Pacific region processed approximately 50% of all students destined for Canada. In 1996, of the 47,000 applications we processed, our posts in the Asia-Pacific region processed 32,000. So the vast majority of them are coming from that area of the world.

The second-most important source area is Europe, where last year we processed 8,000, and after that, Latin America-Caribbean, where last year we processed 4,000 student authorization applications.

As we've already mentioned, we recognize the significance and the benefits of the movement of international students to Canada, the benefits to our economy and the benefits to the business community in general. It's important to recognize that we are in competition for the international student. We are primarily in competition with Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom for English-speaking students, and other European countries for other languages.

Given the fact that foreign students are of great benefit, and given the fact that we are in competition, the government has taken steps to try to enhance Canada's competitive advantage in the foreign student market.

• 1555

There are essentially two ways in which we have approached this. The first is in the area of marketing; that is, positioning Canada as a favourable destination for the international student. On that front, Citizenship and Immigration, working in partnership with the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Asia Pacific Foundation, and the Canadian International Development Agency, have established a network of Canada education centres, or CECs, as we call them overseas.

We currently have 10 Canada immigration centres abroad. They are almost all in the Asia-Pacific region because that is where the biggest market is. But there is also one in Mexico. The purpose of the Canada education centres is to market Canadian educational services abroad, to promote and recruit foreign students, and to facilitate those educational institutions that wish to market their services abroad to assist them in promoting and marketing their services.

As a result of the increase in the government's marketing efforts in partnership with the private sector, we've seen the 130% increase in student authorizations that Bill mentioned previously. In 1993 we processed 30,000, and, as I said before, in 1996 we processed 47,000. So over a period of time we have seen some success in our marketing efforts in terms of increasing Canada's market share, if you will, of the international student movement.

But marketing is not enough, obviously. If we market Canada as a destination for international students, we have to be able to deliver on that in terms of being able to deliver the student authorization to get the students to Canada as quickly as we can. And in that regard Citizenship and Immigration has taken measures to streamline the processing of student authorizations.

I mentioned at the beginning that one of the requirements is a medical examination in most cases. That is one of the parts of the process where we have, in the past, experienced some delays. So we have initiated a pilot project in some of the key posts in Asia to try to streamline the processing of the medical.

Essentially what we're doing with the pilot project is we have trained Citizenship and Immigration officers to look at the medical examination assessment done by a local physician and make a determination on whether there is a medical problem or not and issue a student authorization without necessarily having to go through a medical officer. So we streamlined the medical processing within these pilot projects to try to speed up the process.

We have also looked at the standardization of acceptance letters. This is a critical area, as you can probably appreciate, given this is a key document that a foreign student must submit in order to get an authorization.

There are as many different types of acceptance letters as there are different educational institutions across Canada, and we have been working with the educational institutions to try to find a way to standardize, to the extent that is possible, acceptance letters; and secondly and most importantly, to try to get those acceptance letters issued as early as possible, because the student cannot go forward if they don't have that very critical document.

We have standardized procedures in the way we process student applications overseas and we have simplified our regulations. Students of English as a second language and French as a second language, for example, coming for less than three months no longer require student authorizations; they come as visitors. This certainly has facilitated the movement of that particular part of the student movement.

In addition, we have established an advisory committee. I mentioned before a partnership with the private sector and other government departments. The advisory committee on international students and immigration is one of the key forums we have established in order to try to address, with the educational institutions, with their associations and with other government departments, the problems that arise in student processing.

We have on this advisory committee representatives of both public and private institutions. We have representatives from the Canadian Bureau for International Education. We have representatives from the Association of Universities and Colleges. And we have representatives from the Departments of Foreign Affairs and International Trade and Industry, and other departments. In this forum we discuss and hopefully resolve some of the processing issues. I think we have found this particular forum to be very beneficial on all sides, both from our perspective and that of the educational institutions, to try to understand what the issues are out there and hopefully find some constructive ways of resolving them.

• 1600

We have achieved some encouraging results in terms of trying to improve our processing times. Despite the tremendous increase in student authorization applications, we have managed to decrease the amount of time we spend on processing individual applications.

Same-day processing of student authorization applications increased from 17% of the movement to 21% of the movement from 1996 to 1997. In 1996, half of all student applications were processed in less than two weeks. In the Asia-Pacific region, our biggest market, more than 50% of all applications were processed in fewer than three weeks. So far in 1997, our figures to date show that more then 70% of all student applications worldwide are processed within one month.

These are improvements on the processing times that we have had in previous years in our student authorization application processing. We will continue to work on streamlining our processes and finding innovative ways with our partners in the educational sector and other government departments to try to continue to improve our processes and enhance Canada's competitive advantage.

Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Now we will go through a questioning session of five minutes each. We'll start with the official opposition. Mr. Reynolds, please.

Mr. John Reynolds (West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, Ref.): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Talking about how the system works, what safety checks do we have to make sure that the 47,000 return home at the end of one year, three months, or whatever the time is?

Mr. Bill Sheppit: Basically, it's just by past experience. There are provisions in our databases to identify somebody who, having come in and obtained legal status here, may request to change that status, overstay, or have difficulties with law enforcement agencies.

Traditionally, there's been very, very little problem with student movement for quite some time.

Mr. John Reynolds: What percentage would apply for refugee status or be a problem? Say there are 100,000 here at any one time, or 47,000, would it be 5%, 10%?

Mr. Bill Sheppit: Barring specific situations in foreign countries where the situation might change, I think it would probably be in the order of certainly less than 5%. It's possibly 1%. It's a very good movement from the department's perspective.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: I think I'd also add that in terms of assessing student applications, this includes an assessment of the intention to return. This is obviously since student movement is meant to be a temporary one.

But I think we have to recognize that some foreign students at the end of their four-year program and at the end of the period of time they're permitted to work—after completing a program, students are permitted to work for one year in a field that's directly related to their area of study—will apply to immigrate to Canada in some cases.

They apply generally in that situation as independents. Not surprisingly, many of them can in fact meet our selection criteria: they have been here for a period of time, they have Canadian educational qualifications, and they have Canadian work experience.

It's not unheard of, to be sure, to hear of foreign students who come here and then apply legally and properly through the proper channels to become permanent residents at the end of their stay. They obviously can't do that from within the country. They have to submit their application outside Canada, but that is certainly doable.

Mr. John Reynolds: What percentage of that 47,000 a year do apply to stay in Canada? I had a note from somebody that in November 1995, 29 students and two teachers arrived from the PRC to study English at the Prince Albert rural school division of Saskatchewan. They tell me, as of today, that the two teachers returned, but only two of the students. Some of them are in Toronto creating some problems. I just wondered if that's a specific incident whereby maybe a whole bad batch got in. Do you have any explanation for that?

• 1605

Ms. Joan Atkinson: It's interesting that you mention PRC students, because they do present us with a bit of a unique challenge. Students coming to study English as a second language—that is probably unique even further in terms of that context. Students coming for short-term courses are probably ones where we have a little bit more of a concern, possibly, than those that are coming for a longer-term program.

Again, what we look at when we assess those applications is what are the pull factors that are going to bring that student back? Is it credible and reasonable that an individual would come to Canada to study English as a second language, with no further plans to do any further studying? What is their funding situation, what is the situation, in the home country, of themselves and their family? What is the likelihood of that student coming back at the end of a short period of time in Canada studying English as a second language? What are the longer-term plans of that student, and does it make sense for that individual to be investing that amount of money to go to Canada for that period of time? It's not always an easy decision to make, obviously.

I don't think we have any statistics on how many foreign students end up staying, either applying as independent immigrants through posts abroad once they have completed their studies here, or, in other cases, possibly marrying a Canadian citizen and applying as a family class applicant—that happens too. But I don't think we have any statistics that can give you precise numbers on that.

Mr. John Reynolds: In this specific instance where you had 29 come all in one group and arrive in Toronto, and some of them are involved in some activities that are bad, how easy is it to deport them if they're arrested for crimes?

Mr. Bill Sheppit: Essentially it depends on the nature of the crime. It's possible they may have used the acceptance letter they had received from the school you are referring to to get a passport and a travel document and get permission to leave China. It's still very difficult to leave China. They may be quite properly enrolled in an education institute in Toronto, and you know, got here, changed their mind, or didn't have any intent of going to the original school off the bat.

Mr. John Reynolds: Could they have been sent by the government of China?

Mr. Bill Sheppit: Yes, that's not impossible either.

The Chairman: Mr. McKay.

Mr. John McKay (Scarborough East, Lib.): Mr. Reynolds has basically asked the question I was going to ask, so I'll pass.

The Chairman: Mr. Obhrai.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai (Calgary East, Ref.): Regarding these students who come over here and then get a one-year work permit, if I'm not mistaken...does that mean within the university or anywhere? You said that they have Canadian work experience. From what I understand, they are restricted to the educational institution in which they are enrolled.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: There are basically three opportunities for foreign students to work in Canada. During their course of studies they can work if the work is part of their program, co-op students being the most common example. Foreign students who come here into co-op programs can obtain employment authorization to work as co-op students, since that's an integral part of their program. They may work on campus—I think that's what you're referring to. During the period of time that they are in their course of studies, if it's not a co-op program, they may work on campus. Finally, at the end of their studies, they can work for a year in a field of study that is directly related to their course of studies. That is open to students who come to publicly-funded institutions at the post-secondary level.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: When you extend their visa, what sort of extension is it? Does that extension relates to a work permit specifically, or is it still part of their student visa? Say a guy wants to work after he has completed his studies, what kind of extension do you grant?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: He would get an employment authorization. It's not a student authorization as such. It's an employment authorization at the end of the student authorization period, providing that he has a job offer. He has to get the employment and it has to be clear that it is employment in a field related to the course of studies.

For example, let's say you had a student who came in the computer science area, in a co-op program, and worked for Nortel in a co-op situation during the four-year period he was studying. If at the end of that four-year period Nortel offers him a year's employment in the area in which he graduated, he would get an employment authorization to cover that one-year period.

• 1610

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: Then how do you make sure that after the year that individual has left the country? Now that you have your money, your authorization, then what? Is it exactly one year? If the job demands, has it gone to two years or three years, or what?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: No, it is one year, and it is restricted just to the one-year period. So the employment authorization is for one year. They have 30 or 60 days—I can't remember—after graduation in which they have to get the employment. So it's not that one year after you've graduated you can ask for your employment authorization. There is a restriction on the period of time post-graduation in which you must locate that employment. Once you've got the employment, the one-year period of authorization runs from that date. It is only one year and there are no extensions.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: There are no extensions?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: No.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: In your final listing you said that about 5% of the people stay back. Under what conditions? Are they claiming refugee status or that situations have changed back at their home? What's happened?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: As I said before, we don't have any hard statistics on the number of foreign students who end up becoming permanent residents or who end up staying.

I think our experience would be that foreign students who decide to stay in Canada go the independent immigrant route. They apply. If they're here in Canada, they submit an application overseas or through Buffalo or through one of our consulates in the United States and make an application as an independent immigrant.

Again, since many of them have had the educational background and the Canadian work experience, they meet our point system and are accepted.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: They can go just across the border and apply. They don't have to go back to their country.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: They don't necessarily. As with any other immigrant or intending immigrant, they can submit their application at any visa post in the world.

Mr. Deepak Obhrai: Okay. He applies there and it takes approximately six months to go through all the process. What happens within that period of time?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: This is where some foreign students will find themselves in a bit of difficulty, because the employment authorization is not extended. So if that's run out and their immigration application is not completed, then they have to leave.

Ms. Sophia Leung (Vancouver Kingsway, Lib.): Thank you for your presentation.

When you talk about proof of funding, in what form is that? Is it a bank deposit? If a student wants to cover for four years, that's very sizeable for some third world countries. So I want to know what form it is in. Can you tell me if it can be sponsored by relatives from Canada?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: As you've said, it's a very significant investment and a very significant financial obligation to support a foreign student for four years or longer in Canada.

When we look at the finances, we look beyond simply bank statements. If the student is being supported by the family in the home country, then we need to take a look at the family's financial situation.

We need to take a look at the income to determine what are the chances that the family is going to continue to be able to support. We obviously need to look at cash in hand and money that is in the bank and whether tuition fees have been paid up front and so on, but what is of most importance is to assure ourselves that the funding will continue for the period of time during which the student is going to be in Canada, and in many cases that involves looking at the family's financial situation.

In terms of relatives in Canada, yes, it is certainly possible for foreign students to be supported, rather than by the family at home, by relatives in Canada. If that's the situation, then we need to be satisfied that the sponsoring relatives in Canada have the financial wherewithal to support the student. We look at the sponsors, if you will. There's no formal sponsorship here, but we look at the sponsoring relatives' financial situation in Canada.

Ms. Sophia Leung: I see. Do you interview the relatives?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: Generally not. Generally we rely on the documentation that is provided to us. If there are concerns and questions about the finances, obviously we will ask for more documentation, and the student will undoubtedly be interviewed.

• 1615

Ms. Sophia Leung: Thank you.

Now the second part. You did mention that the PRC tends to be more of a challenge for you, and I understand also the refusal rate is quite high. Can you give me a number? What is the percentage of refusals for students from the PRC?

Recently in my riding a group from a small private school came to me to present a concern. They said while they did not have any problem before, now they are having problems.

Mr. Bill Sheppit: Processing students from China is very problematic, as you can appreciate, for a number of reasons. Essentially we're dealing with a country where until very recently, and even to some extent now, there were very strong internal travel controls, so you couldn't even move from one city to another, or one province to another, without the permission of the central government. As I mentioned earlier, obtaining a passport is very difficult. Even now there's no such thing as private tourism from China. The government won't allow you out unless you're coming for business purposes or as a student or for family reunion. Somebody who wants to book a package tour and visit Niagara Falls will not be allowed out of China.

At the same time you have a country where the standard of living and the average income are extremely low by Canadian standards. In Beijing, which is one of the economically more developed cities in China, the average monthly earnings are approximately $150 Canadian a month. So if somebody comes along to us and says, I want to spend $10,000 in one year to study English as a second language, you have to question their intent. Do they in fact intend to come back? Only 2% of the population in Beijing earns over $4,000 a year, so we're dealing with an extremely small population.

Contrasted with that are the expectations of Canadian educational institutes, which look at a market of 1.2 billion people. With a lot of the funding pressures educational institutes are under now, with budget reductions from the provincial governments, they are naturally looking at the foreign student market as a potential source of revenue. They see 1.2 billion potential clients and they say fine, let's go.

The reality is considerably different. Because the standard is so low and the amount of disposable income is so low, there's really a very, very small potential market for them.

It's not uncommon for Canadian educational institutes to go on marketing trips to China. They will accept a large number of people who simply don't meet our requirements. We end up with a much more significant refusal rate.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: It really varies according to the level of study here. For example, those coming for Ph.D. degrees have a very high acceptance rate, and the refusal rate is only about 13%, whereas for students who are coming to study at the primary level and the secondary level the refusal rate is almost 80%. There's real variation in the refusal and acceptance rate in Beijing according to the level of study. I think that relates to the sorts of pressures Bill is talking about here.

The Chairman: Mr. Ménard, please.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: I must tell you that I know this program works very well, because a few months ago, I fell in love with someone who was here on a student visa. All the procedures worked very smoothly. This program will not be the committee's greatest concern, and I do not want to go into too many details about my private life.

I would like to ask you three questions. You referred to the grounds for refusing to issue a student visa. There is not much of a problem, given that 90% of all applications are accepted. Am I to understand that the main factors involved in refusing to issue a student visa relate more to income considerations and the level of study? I would like you to explain why the level of study comes into play, because, at first glance, I see no link between rejection of an application and the fact that the candidate is at the BA or PhD level. That is my first question.

Second, how do you account for the fact that most students come from Asia? It would be interesting to understand the reasons for this, if you could provide us with some data.

Third, is it correct that after filing an application for permanent residency, students here on students visas must leave the country?

• 1620

Given what I said earlier, I'm sure you will appreciate that it would be rather painful for me if that were the case. Perhaps this rule could be waived in some cases.

Those are my three questions.

[English]

The Chairman: Keep your answers as painless as possible.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Mr. Bill Sheppit: With regard to refusal rates, as we indicated, the student is a visitor and must meet all the other visitor requirements, including the fact that they plan to be here temporarily. So we look very closely at their intent to return.

Somebody who has gone through university in their home country and is sent here by their government on a scholarship for a master's degree or a post-grad degree, and who may often sign an undertaking to go back and work for the government, is much more likely to return to their home country than somebody who is coming in and wants to start secondary school in Canada when, depending on the country, the situation there may be....

In Thailand, for example, your ultimate social situation and where you end up working to a large extent is determined by where you went to school and who your classmates were. If you're not in a school in Thailand, it's very difficult for you to get a job, because you don't have those essential connections that everybody else does. So from the perspective of the immigration officer, it's less likely that they will have an incentive to return home and therefore more likely for them to try to stay in Canada.

So that's the connection on the level of education.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: Many of the reasons for refusal do relate to finances, because as we've said, it's a very significant investment to make to send your child overseas to Canada to study. And it's difficult, in many countries where these people are coming from, to amass that amount of money or to satisfy the visa officer that there is a source of income coming into the family that will allow them to continue to support the student.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: You were saying that you took steps to get the educational institutions to issue the letters of acceptance to students more quickly. What steps could be taken? The educational institution sends the letter after studying the applicant's academic record. Who's responsible for sending out the letter within a certain period of time? That has nothing to do with your department, and everything to do with the educational institution. How could you insist that the Faculty of Medicine of the Université de Montréal send out a letter more quickly, for example? How did you go about doing that?

[English]

Ms. Joan Atkinson: As I mentioned, with our advisory committee that we have established, we've been working with the educational institutions to try to encourage them to come up with better processes to speed up the issuance of acceptance letters.

It's very interesting, because we talk about the documentation requirements we have in order to issue student authorizations, and they talk about the documentation requirements they have in order to issue acceptance letters. They also talk about the issue that, when you're looking at a university, it's dependent upon individual faculties. We talk about consistency in decision-making amongst visa offices overseas. They have even more of a challenge, in some cases, in consistency amongst faculties and individual universities to achieve some consistency in the process by which they issue acceptance letters.

So to try to resolve the problem, we're working with the institutions to try to encourage them to work with their faculty members to standardize their process for accepting students and to standardize the way they issue the acceptance letters.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: With the chairman's permission, I would like to ask a final question. Why do you say that in Sydney, three countries are involved in a tight competition? I would have thought that the European countries would have been our main competitors. Leaving aside the climate and the romanticism of the place, why would Australia and Sydney be so attractive to foreign students?

Mr. Georges Tsaï: If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would just say that of course there's the geographic proximity of the source market, and the very active recruitment campaigns undertaken by the Australian authorities. Marketing is extremely important, and explains the opening of these foreign education centres in 10 Australian cities. So that is the explanation. There's also the appeal of an education in English. That is a very attractive feature for a number of Asian countries.

• 1625

[English]

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

[Translation]

Ms. Folco.

Ms. Raymonde Folco (Laval West, Lib.): I've a number of questions I would like to ask.

First, I would like to say that I am a member of the generation that experienced the exodus of students from Africa and the West Indies to other Commonwealth countries. This was caused in large part because of the university scholarships these students were offered. Although some of the figures you gave us were for Latin America and the Caribbean, nowhere do you mention Africa and the West Indies. So I'd like to hear you comment on that.

Second, what happens when a foreign student becomes ill? What type of medical or social assistance is available?

Third, do students whose applications are rejected have the right to appeal? How do they go about that?

My fourth point is perhaps more of a suggestion. From what I can see, you do an absolutely outstanding job. I was in Toronto a few weeks ago for a ceremony at the University of Toronto. Of the 400 people who received a degree, 350 of them were from Asia. I was told that the University of Toronto actually offered degrees in Hong Kong, that a ceremony was held there. That shows how well the program is working. However, there are still a few problems. I was wondering whether you could tell us about them. Perhaps at some future meeting we could invite people to appear before us to tell us about the type of problems they experienced with the process.

[English]

The Chairman: Would you answer the first two questions, please?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: In terms of Africa, it's obviously a smaller proportion of students. In 1996 we processed 1,584 applications for student authorizations from the region of Africa and the Middle East, but I believe most of those would probably be from Africa. I don't have the figures on how many of those students would be scholarship students—CIDA scholarships, Commonwealth scholarships, international Rotary scholarships. I would think a significant proportion of those would be scholarship students.

On your second question of what happens in terms of medical problems when a student gets sick, most of the provincial health care plans do not cover foreign students. This is a change. Previously, provinces did cover foreign students, but, not surprisingly, we have seen that benefit dropped. One of the requirements—and I didn't mention this before—or one of the things we also look at when we look at the funding, is whether or not the students have arranged private medical insurance for during their stay. Most foreign students would hopefully be coming with private medical insurance to cover that.

In terms of whether or not there is an appeal against a refusal once a student is refused, there is no appeal per se against student refusals. As we mentioned in the presentation on how the system works, as with any other visitor applicant, there is no right of appeal for individuals who are refused visitor, student or temporary worker authorizations overseas. If an individual feels the process was not done fairly, and he or she has a Canadian lawyer, a motion for a judicial review can always be filed in the Federal Court of Canada. We don't see that very often with students, however, because it is a very lengthy and costly process.

The Chairman: Okay?

Ms. Raymonde Folco: That's fine.

The Chairman: Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle (Halifax West, NDP): Thank you for a very clear, informative presentation. I just have two small questions around the medical aspect.

You mentioned that if a student is coming for longer than six months, a medical exam is required, I believe. Now, if it's for less than six months, is any kind of documentation required, any kind of proof of health?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: If they're coming for more than six months and they're coming from a part of the world where there's increased public health risk, it's both of those things together. If they're coming for less than six months, they are required to be in good health, like any other visitor.

• 1630

We don't generally ask for medical examinations or medical certificates, but, as with any other visitor, if a visa officer determines that an individual might potentially be medically inadmissible, he can always require that person to undergo a complete medical examination, even if that person is coming for less than six months.

Mr. Gordon Earle: So even if they are coming for less than six months from a health risk area, they don't require....

Ms. Joan Atkinson: That's correct.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Okay. You mentioned that in trying to streamline the process the pilot project is aimed at the medical component. The immigration officer would make some assessment rather than having the person seen by a medical officer. Now on what basis would the officer make that assessment? How would it be carried out?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: On the medical examination process for visitors and immigrants, generally the way it works overseas is they're not seen by a medical officer in person. They go to a designated medical practitioner. These are local physicians who are approved by the visa post abroad as being credible, trustworthy, and knowledgeable about the process. They're issued very detailed instructions in terms of the medical examination and what is required. The student would go to one of the designated medical practitioners and have the medical examination, the X-ray, the lab reports and so on.

In this pilot project the designated medical practitioner then makes an assessment as to whether there are any medical problems or not, and basically checks “no problem” or “some problem”. That assessment from the local physician then comes to the visa officer and the visa officer looks at what the local physician has assessed. If the local physician has said “no problem”, we'll go ahead and issue the student authorization.

For the purposes of the pilot project, since this is an experiment, all of the medical results will still go to a medical officer, and a medical officer is a medical doctor employed by Citizenship and Immigration, who in all normal circumstances reviews all of the medical examination results from the local physician.

For the purposes of the pilot, the medical officer is still reviewing all of these cases. We're trying to see what the level congruence is between the local physician's assessment and our own medical officer's assessment.

Mr. Gordon Earle: Thank you.

The Chairman: Very good. We're going to jump to this side. Mr. Saada.

[Translation]

Mr. Jacques Saada (Brossard—La Prairie, Lib.): Thank you for your presentation. I have two questions—one factual in nature and the other speculative.

First the factual question. I have heard that it often happens that students from developing countries, particularly those with assistance from CIDA, who come here for their education do not return home. That defeats the main objective of the program—namely to enrich the infrastructures of the countries of origin. Does this happen or not? Are there any figures to back up an assertion that a significant percentage of these foreign students do not go back to their home countries? That is my first question. I will let you answer it before asking my second question.

[English]

Ms. Joan Atkinson: Again, I don't know whether we have any concrete figures to give you in terms of the return rate of students. It is a sensitive issue, and I think it's particularly an issue with scholarship students. The whole idea of scholarship students who are funded by either their governments, CIDA, or commonwealth scholarships is that they come, gain the skills and experience, and return to their home countries, where they apply those skills and experience. So it is an issue we are sensitive to.

On the other hand, anyone is free to apply to immigrate to Canada. Again, I'm not sure if we have any figures. Just recently, as a matter of fact, we spoke to representatives from the Rotary Club International organization because this question had come up. The information we got in our discussion with them was that they didn't feel the attrition rate, as they described it, was a significant problem for them. They still felt significant enough numbers of students they were funding on scholarships were returning home.

• 1635

It's really to Canada's advantage as well, in many respects, to have these students return home. We've been talking about the economic and business benefits of international students, but there's also a very significant cultural benefit and foreign policy benefit to having people who have lived and worked in Canada for a period of time, who have gotten to know Canadians, gotten to know Canada, return to their countries to become, hopefully, important people, if you will, to become members of government in those countries. That bodes very well for us in terms of our bilateral relationships with those countries.

So it's certainly in our interest to try to ensure that these people do go home.

Mr. Jacques Saada: I do fully subscribe to your views on that.

I have a speculative question now. With the opening up of the Internet world, and direct-link access to university from wherever you are in the world, do you expect the number of applications from students to come and study here to decrease? If not, would that mean it's more than studying that these people are looking for, more experience in life? In this case, is it a component, or an essential component, of your promotion programs?

Ms. Joan Atkinson: Interesting question.

Mr. Bill Sheppit: I don't expect the program to decrease in the near future. I think one of the questions earlier was why so many students were coming from Asia. I think the two are tied together. Where you have rapidly growing economies and a rapidly growing middle or upper class, and a government that can't necessarily develop educational institutions as fast as necessary to keep up with the growth, there's going to be continual pressure for education for students from other countries.

I think you're dead on that the education is one aspect of it, but living, working, experiencing another culture.... I mean, when I went to university I did the obligatory backpack and hitch-hiking routine around Europe after university, which was almost part of the education experience. A large element of that—meeting people from a different culture, living in an environment where there's a different language—is part of the life experience students gain from being educated in Canada.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: I think that is an important part of the marketing process. We're selling not just the quality of education but also the quality of the experience of living and studying with Canadians—including our winters.

Mr. Jacques Saada: That's what I was hoping would be the answer.

The Chairman: Thank you very much.

Mr. John Reynolds: I have a short comment, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman: Go ahead.

Mr. John Reynolds: What you're saying is so important. I think you're right about the Internet. I would hope that just like any other department.... And Mr. Tsaï is here. You know, we were having a hard time getting some answers as to what happens when people come. With students it's really important that we know, if there are 47,000 coming in, how many at the end of the year left and went back—in other words, how many did what they said they were going to do.

Part of this world is being honest, too, being honest with ourselves, and being honest with yourself if you're looking for a future. If they're using it as an easy way of getting into the country, because they can either apply as a refugee or can get a job and then go down to Buffalo and apply, then that's another story.

I don't have any problem at all with students coming to Canada. I think it's good business for some of our institutions, especially the private ones. But I would also think our records should be kept so that we know, at the end of the year.... I mean, with computers today, just like with the Internet, it's so easy to put the names in. At the end of the year they've either gone or they haven't gone. If they haven't gone, where are they? Have they claimed refugee status? Did they get a job? Did they marry somebody? That's the easiest way.

I was going to mention that to you, Mr. Ménard. If you have a problem, just get married. It solves your problem right away. I mean, it may not solve all your problems....

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: We're not talking about marriage, unless your party has become more progressive in this regard.

[English]

Mr. John Reynolds: But other than that issue, I would hope that whenever you come back next year, or maybe even sooner, you can compile that information. I know we've asked for it from the other departments, as Mr. Tsaï knows, and we've been promised that we're going to get that. So I think it's very important in the deliberations.

Other than that, Mr. Chairman, I know this side has no more questions. You may want to adjourn and discuss the motion.

The Chairman: Do you have something?

Ms. Maria Minna (Beaches—East York, Lib.): Very quickly, Mr. Chairman. This is more of a clarification.

• 1640

I was in Calgary, Alberta last week. I met with a group of institutions and educational organizations on the student visa. They mentioned two things. One was that the post-graduate scholarships you were talking about are easy. They are practically accepted automatically unless there's a medical...or what have you. But the self-financing students felt there was still a major problem or impediment in that area and some of the impediments were not warranted in many cases; the processing is slow and the refusal rate is not necessarily warranted in the way we are judging them. I wonder whether you have had any discussion with the stakeholders about that issue specifically.

Ms. Joan Atkinson: The short answer is yes, we have had discussions with stakeholders. Again, in many cases we are talking about the PRC. As we've talked about here, it's potentially a very lucrative market. It's huge. There is a lot of interest. Institutions are eager and anxious to get involved in that market.

Our advice to all the institutions we speak to is before you go out marketing your services to the PRC or to any other market, come and talk to us first; we want to help you, we want to be able to support you, but we don't want to run into a situation such as Mr. Reynolds mentioned, where 29 people come and only two go back and we don't know where the 27 have gone. We don't want to get into those situations. We want to work with the institutions before they head out to market their programs so they know what our requirements are, they know what the environment is in which we are operating, they understand what we are looking for, what the documentation requirements are, and so on. We are trying to head off these problems before they happen, to the extent that we can.

Mr. Georges Tsaï: Education in Canada does not come cheap. It has been estimated that tuition and living costs for a student in Canada are approximately $20,000. That can explain why the self-funded may have a problem in being approved.

The Chairman: Mr. Earle, I believe you have a short question.

Mr. Gordon Earle: And a comment. The comment was in response to what Mr. Reynolds mentioned about honesty. I don't think we should always interpret a change in a person's plan as being honest or dishonest. Even in Canada students who enter university may start out with one goal and halfway through, because of circumstances, change and do something different. I wouldn't want us to leave with the impression that all students who come and don't do exactly what they indicate at the beginning are being dishonest.

That aside, you perhaps touched on my question. I was going to ask if student tuition fees present problems for students coming. I know for local students that's a very serious issue. What about for students coming? Do they find after they come here they run into problems, or have they had their circumstances sufficiently arranged ahead of time that they don't run into problems?

Mr. Georges Tsaï: I will let my colleagues answer your question more specifically, but this is why we have to examine very carefully whether or not they will be able to sustain themselves while they are studying in Canada. As I said, the cost being around $20,000, for some countries it's probably more difficult.

Mr. Gordon Earle: But with the changing of fees....

Ms. Joan Atkinson: Occasionally students will run into difficulty through no fault of their own. Occasionally their funding will be cut off because of civil disturbance or war in their home country. We have provisions in the regulations for students who find themselves in that situation to be able to work in an unlimited capacity. When we find students run into that situation where their funding has been cut off through circumstances beyond their control we try to ensure they can become self-supporting in Canada by giving them authority to work.

The Chairman: Thank you very much for appearing before the committee today. We certainly gained a tremendous amount of knowledge. Possibly in the new year we will have to meet again. Who knows?

Now I will continue with business. Mr. Ménard tabled a motion yesterday. Mr. Saada and Ms. Leung, I think you are aware of the fact that any motion tabled has to have 48 hours of advance notice. However, at the discretion of the chair, if the chair wishes, he can ask for unanimous approval from all members of the committee to present the motion before the committee.

As the chair, I am asking for unanimous approval to present Mr. Ménard's motion on the floor, and to let us discuss it. Do we have unanimous approval?

• 1645

Some hon. members: Agreed.

The Chairman: I'll read what's proposed by Mr. Ménard:

That, for the smooth working of the Committee's business, strict working rules should be adopted. Each party should have 10 minutes for the first round of questions and comments, and 5 minutes for the second round.

Really, he's saying ten minutes for each party, in the first round, and five minutes for each party in the second round.

The proposed order for political parties to intervene is the following: Reform; Bloc Québécois; Liberal; N.D.P. and P.C.

That was the motion proposed by Mr. Ménard.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: May I explain the motion?

[English]

The Chairman: Sure, go ahead. It's open for discussion right now.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Right. So there are two possibilities.

[English]

The Chairman: Since you've made the motion, you should be first to discuss it.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: There are two possibilities. I said initially that each party should have 10 minutes, but after discussing this with opposition members, I think an amendment may be in order.

First, I'm working from two assumptions. I assume that all colleagues here are here in good faith and that we all want to work on reviewing the Immigration Act and all related matters.

However, there are some rules, and they should be as satisfactory as possible for everyone. I'm also aware that there must be a balance between members from the government side and from the opposition parties as far as speaking time goes. If the government thought that ten minutes on the first round and five minutes on the second were inadequate, we might consider a different motion. If government members think this would not give them enough time to ask questions, we could start with a 10-minute round for the opposition parties and 15 minutes for the government side. That is the view of Ms. Folco and myself.

I know there are more members on the government side. Perhaps this suggestion might be acceptable. However, I think the important point is that we agree to begin with the Official Opposition, then go to the Bloc, then to the government, then to the NDP, and so on.

The idea of starting with the Reform Party, going to the government, coming back to the Reform Party and then to the Bloc is something I have never seen in any other committee. We have to be flexible.

Mr. Chairman, I know you are a good person—goodness is your defining characteristic. I know you do not seek confrontation.

[English]

The Chairman: Did you hear that?

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: I know that because I sat with you on the Human Rights Committee. However, we cannot have a situation where the first person to raise his or her hand has the floor. That is one approach, Mr. Chairman, and I will be very pleased to hear what my colleagues have to say about this.

[English]

The Chairman: Mr. Ménard, are you recommending a slight variation in your motion, or are you just putting it on the floor for discussion?

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Let us begin the discussion.

[English]

The Chairman: Okay, let's go. Anyone?

Ms. Maria Minna: I'll start, but just for a point of clarification for a moment, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Ménard, your second suggestion says ten and fifteen. Are you suggesting ten per party and then fifteen, and then you go back to...? The second one would be what, five-five-five?

Mr. Réal Ménard: No, ten-five-five.

Ms. Maria Minna: Okay, I see. So you're then able to go down to—

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: In other words, the government always has five minutes more.

Ms. Maria Minna: Yes, I understand.

Mr. Jacques Saada: But it is not really five minutes more.

[English]

The Chairman: All right. Anyone on this side? John?

Mr. John Reynolds: Mr. Chairman, I can understand what Mr. Ménard is getting at. If you look at the seats in the House, though, or if I were to go on his suggestion, the Reform Party, which is the official opposition, gets ten minutes out of the first fifty minutes. Meanwhile, three opposition parties end up with thirty minutes. Mr. Ménard's party plus one of the others equals our seats. So I just don't see that working. I don't see it as fair. If you look at other committees I've looked at, some of them have had....

I was just looking at one option here. I think we could throw these numbers on to strength if you're looking for ten minutes to start. I understand the five-minute problem, in that it's very short. But if my party were to have ten to start, and if it were then to go to the government for ten and then back to my party for five—which would give us fifteen minutes on the first round—and then back to the government for ten, then to the Bloc for ten, then back to the government for ten, and then back to the NDP for five, then five for the.... That's the way it is in other committees.

• 1650

Ms. Maria Minna: I apologize. Since this is a bit of a free flight, could I hear Mr. Reynolds' one again? It's a bit different, so maybe I could write it down.

Mr. John Reynolds: I was looking at it from the point of view of how some other committees proceed. If you're looking at the minutes, that would give us 25% of the first-round questions time-wise.

Ms. Maria Minna: Could you repeat your—

Mr. John Reynolds: I was saying ten minutes to start—

Ms. Maria Minna: For?

Mr. John Reynolds: Reform. Then you go to the government for ten; then back to Reform for five, which would give us fifteen minutes and there we are; back to the government for ten; back to the Bloc for ten; then go back to the government for five; then to the NDP for five; the government for five; the Conservatives for five—

Mr. Réal Ménard: That's what we want to change.

Mr. John Reynolds: It gives you some ten-minute ones to start, for your lead-off people. In fact, if you look at what we've been doing, most of the time by the time you get down to the second or third person they are taking one or two questions and are finished in a few minutes anyway. Your lead-off people would have the larger times, and I think that percentage-wise it equals what the seats are in the House, if you look at the percentages of time.

It would give you a balance. Right now we get five minutes to start, but we end up with fifteen minutes on the first go-around versus ten minutes for the Bloc, if you stay in the five-minute questions, because they usually have two people on the committee, and then five minutes for the NDP and five minutes for the Conservatives. We're losing on the proposal you make, because you're giving everybody ten minutes.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: No, 10 minutes per party. I think the mistake we are making is thinking in terms of speakers. If the government has 15 minutes, it, not the Chairman or the opposition, can use that time as it chooses. If Ms. Minna wants to use 10 minutes and give five to Mr. Saada, that is up to them.

Mr. Chairman, could we agree on one principle? The idea is that we must begin with the Reform Party, the Official Opposition. After that, the floor goes to the Bloc Québécois, then the government, then the NDP and the Progressive Conservative Party. That is the order that is generally accepted in House committees.

What I don't understand is why we would start with the Reform Party, and then go to the government. That's not how it works in other committees.

[English]

The Chairman: I'm going to interject here.

First, both speakers on this side have already indicated this is the norm. You're talking about patterns of operation with the assumption and believing that that is the general norm and that's the way committees operate, but that is not so.

You'll find that in the last five, six, seven, eight years committees have had a variety of patterns for operation. I've been on a committee where they started right there and everybody got five minutes all the way around. I've been on a committee where everybody got ten minutes all the way around, and rarely did we finish, not everybody was heard. Then I've been on committees where it was ten minutes for each of the opposition and ten minutes for the government. So there's been a variety of patterns.

All I was trying to do at the very beginning was to give everyone an opportunity to become a dynamic partner in policy development here. We have some problems, there's no doubt about it, but you must understand that there is a variety of patterns.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: But, Mr. Chairman, would the Reform Party accept that we should first agree on the order? Could we reach a consensus to say that we would start with the Opposition, that we would then go to the Bloc Québécois, then to the government, then to the NDP, and then to the Progressive Conservative Party. If we were to agree on that, we would have quite a good consensus. Then, we could talk about the amount of time. Do you agree? Would the government agree with that? Ms. Minna?

[English]

Mr. John Reynolds: Mr. Chair, we have about four or five meetings going, and I can understand why.

I suggest that we all think about it until the next meeting. Maybe we'll have a chance to think about it, rather than trying to bounce numbers back and forth. Maybe next Tuesday?

The Chairman: There's no meeting tomorrow. We will have a meeting next Wednesday, a week from today, and again we'll be dealing with visas.

Ms. Maria Minna: May I suggest something? Mr. Chairman, I apologize. It's a bit of a free discussion.

The Chairman: Yes.

• 1655

Ms. Maria Minna: To follow up on what Mr. Reynolds was saying, if we do postpone it so we can work it out and discuss it, I would very much like for it to be dealt with at the very beginning of the meeting, before the officials come into the room, so we clear it away and it's not constantly haunting our meeting.

The Chairman: Since the chair has the control, I am going to recommend, number one, that we all meet on time and start on time, and then half an hour later, we'll ask the witnesses to appear before the committee. So we have half an hour in which to resolve this problem, have a cup of coffee and be refreshed, and work together as a team and go full speed ahead. Okay?

Mr. Jacques Saada: Mr. Chair, since we're going to have some time to think about it—and it's worth thinking about it, indeed—I would like to make another suggestion, not in terms of allocation, but in terms of contents.

[Translation]

The time we have also depends on the answer we get from the witnesses. I think that if the idea is to reduce the time a little in order to distribute it differently, we should not be asking five questions at once, thereby using up all the answer time and causing problems for everyone.

I agree that the Opposition needs time to ask its questions, but I think that if we proceed in this way, the time required for the answers cuts into the time for answering our questions. This is something we can think about, because we don't have to make a decision right away. I would suggest that if we have a question, and even a supplementary, we should ask the question and get our answer. Then, if we have a second question, we could ask it, but in such a way that the time is distributed fairly.

So we would ask a question or a supplementary at the same time, we would wait for the answer, and then we would come back with another question, rather than asking five questions at once and getting a whole series of answers at the same time.

Mr. Réal Ménard: As Ms. Folco did.

Ms. Raymonde Folco: Yes, that's true.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I did too. It's an old trick.

[English]

The Chairman: That raises another problem too, and you noticed it was happening in the meeting today. The witnesses could have given more information to some of the questions that were raised, and I cut them off and went to another member of the committee. That's something I would like you to think about. Should we stick to a very rigid time that will include questions plus answers or should we stick to a very rigid time that would mean questions and part of the answer possibly, though not the whole answer?

Ms. Sophia Leung: I just want to comment. I've been on other committees too. I think each committee should set their own pace and it should be decided by the members. When I ask questions, it's not very clear if I have five minutes or ten minutes for my questions. Sometimes the answer could be long, taking some of my five minutes. It's not clear and it's not fair.

The Chairman: No, it is clear. I've said four, five, or six times—

Ms. Sophia Leung: Five minutes including the answer?

The Chairman: Oh, yes.

Ms. Sophia Leung: Including the answer?

The Chairman: Yes.

Ms. Sophia Leung: Then it's five minutes too short.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh!

Ms. Maria Minna: Mr. Chairman, could I interject for just a moment?

The Chairman: Yes, go ahead.

Ms. Maria Minna: I want to add something to what Madam Leung just said. There are two issues I would like my colleagues to think about before we come back to the table next time. One is that the question and answer must be included in the time we're talking about; otherwise it will never finish.

When I did the social security review four years ago, we had witnesses all day. We need to think also about when we start getting into some public hearings and witnesses. We've had the luxury of the officials and we're taking time, but when we have witnesses from across the country or elsewhere, generally it's half an hour per witness, which includes their presentation and our questions. This is how it usually works when you have a lot of witnesses all day and you're touring the country.

We need to think about how that will work. It's well and good to say ten minutes, but you may only have ten minutes left to the half hour, in total. At that point we may need to revisit how it works. It may be one question per party and you choose who leads on each round. All I'm saying is we need to think about this, because we don't want to go through this again. So let's settle both issues.

The Chairman: Okay, thank you very much.

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: As I understand it, Ms. Minna, you are suggesting that we establish a set amount of time for each witness. On the committees of which I have been a member, witnesses were told that they had 10 minutes for their opening remarks, not 15 or 20. Some committees give them only five minutes. I think we have to limit the time we give witnesses as well. We must have a reasonable amount of time to ask questions and get into a good discussion. That is really important.

• 1700

[English]

Mr. John Reynolds: Perhaps I could just suggest that everybody get their positions to you before the next meeting so at least you can talk to your caucus. You people have the vote anyway. There's no sense coming back here and talking numbers for half an hour. If we tell you what we think before the meeting and you talk to your colleagues it shouldn't take half an hour. We can do it. We have lots of time.

The Chairman: There's a third item too regarding plans for visitations in the new year and whether we should leave the Hill and go to some major centres in this country to be plugged into a very realistic process.

Mr. John Reynolds: I want to go to B.C. in January or February.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr. Earle.

Mr. Gordon Earle: I don't want to complicate it any further than it is, but if we want to get the most out of this everybody should have a chance to speak. For that to happen we have to be less occupied with talking ourselves and get to the point with very short questions.

Even though we don't want to get too formal, perhaps we should use the process that's used in question period, where you have 35 seconds to phrase your question and get it out and then allow time for the answer and move on to the next person. In all honesty, quite often you get such a long dissertation to get all your questions in that by the time—

Mr. Réal Ménard: Not me.

Mr. Gordon Earle: —they answer I can see why you're concerned about time.

The Chairman: So you all have a task.

Mr. Réal Ménard: I need some love and tenderness.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

The Chairman: The meeting is adjourned.

Mr. John Reynolds: Before you adjourn, I'd like to give notice that I want to put a motion at the next meeting based on the Auditor General's report of yesterday where he talked about the refugee board and the fact it had some problems and agreed it was going to make some changes. We didn't get a chance to talk to its officials yesterday about that. I would like to put a motion at the next meeting to bring them back to talk about the Auditor General's report and the problems that were found in the department. Obviously, if we'd had this information yesterday we could have asked them the questions, but we didn't have an opportunity.

If you read the Auditor General's report carefully, you'll find there are some good questions we could ask officials of that group about what they are going to do. They've promised to provide information to Parliament now and they've agreed to two of the recommendations he made. But we don't know when they're going to do them or how they're going to do them to make sure we get the information we've been seeking. So I'd like to give notice to put that motion at the next meeting to bring them back. If it's agreeable to your side and you want to bring them back, just—

[Translation]

Mr. Réal Ménard: Did we not pass a motion to invite the officials to discuss the war criminals issue?

[English]

The Chairman: We're heading in that direction, Mr. Ménard.

Mr. John Reynolds: Maybe it could be at the same time, because it's part of the same group.

The Chairman: We'll look into that. Will you put your motion in writing and give it to the clerk?

Mr. John Reynolds: Sure.

The Chairman: All right then, the meeting is adjourned. We meet next Wednesday.