THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON OFFICIAL LANGUAGES
EVIDENCE
OTTAWA, Monday, May 16, 2022
The Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages met with videoconference this day at 5 p.m. [ET] to study francophone immigration to minority communities.
Senator René Cormier (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Before we begin, I’d like to remind senators and witnesses to please keep your microphones muted at all times, unless recognized by name by the chair.
Should any technical challenges arise, particularly in relation to interpretation, please signal this to the chair or the clerk and we will work to resolve the issue.
Participants should know that they should be in a private area when they participate in this meeting and that they must be mindful of their surroundings.
We will now begin with our meeting.
I am René Cormier, senator from New Brunswick, and chair of the Standing Senate Committee on Official Languages.
I would like to introduce the members of the committee who are participating in this meeting: Senator Rose-May Poirier from New Brunswick, deputy chair of the committee; Senator Raymonde Gagné from Manitoba, member of the steering committee; Senator Jean-Guy Dagenais from Quebec, also member of the steering committee; Senator Bernadette Clement from Ontario; Senator Lucie Moncion also from Ontario; Senator Marie-Françoise Mégie and Senator Pierre Dalphond, both from Quebec; Senator Percy Mockler from New Brunswick. We also have with us today Senator Mobina Jaffer from British Columbia.
I wish to welcome all of you and viewers across the country who may be watching. I would like to point out that I am taking part in this meeting from within the unceded traditional territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe Nation.
[English]
Today, we continue our study on francophone immigration to minority communities.
We are pleased to welcome the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, the Honourable Sean Fraser, who will be with us until six o’clock. He is accompanied by three of his officials, who join us by videoconference: Caroline Xavier, Acting Deputy Minister; Catherine Scott, Assistant Deputy Minister, Settlement and Integration; and Marie-Josée Dorion, Acting Director General, Operations Planning and Performance.
Welcome to the committee, minister, and thank you for being with us. We’ll now hear your opening remarks. They will be followed by questions from the senators. Minister Fraser, the floor is yours.
Hon. Sean Fraser, P.C., M.P., Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship: Thank you for not only having me here this evening, but also for your accommodation around the technical difficulties we had during my last attempted appearance. As you have indicated, I believe there will be a vote taking place soon in the House of Commons. I will do what I can to extend to accommodate any inconveniences that I have to do so.
[Translation]
The advancement of French through continuing immigration remains a priority for our government.
[English]
Our government recognizes that immigration supports the vitality of francophone minority communities across the country and is a contributing factor to the demographic weight of these communities.
[Translation]
Through IRCC’s francophone immigration strategy, we are striving to reach our target of 4.4% of francophone immigrants outside Quebec by 2023.
We have advanced that strategy through targeted international promotion and recruitment and by offering specific pathways to Canada for francophone temporary residence.
[English]
This target was established in consultation with community stakeholders. Our strategy has already seen success and has contributed to the increase in French-speaking admissions in recent years. In 2020, French-speaking immigrant admissions outside of Quebec rose to 3.61% from 2.82% in 2019, and it also represented an increase from 2017 and 2018.
While 2020 projections suggested that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, would reach and, in fact, exceed the set target by 2023, the pandemic-enforced border closures slowed the arrival of all newcomers looking to settle in Canada. That is the same for French-speaking permanent residents, many of whom come from abroad.
[Translation]
During the pandemic, we continued to reinforce the francophone immigration strategies by establishing targeted initiatives such as the component reserved for francophone permanent residents as part of the temporary pathways to permanent residence targeting essential workers and foreign students in Canada.
[English]
Through the temporary resident to permanent resident pathway, or TR to PR as it became known, as of May 6, we have processed and approved more than 7,000 applications. There were also dedicated streams for French-speaking and bilingual candidates that had no limits on the number of newcomers.
IRCC continues to work towards reaching our set goal of 4.4% by leveraging several tools at our disposal, including the introduction of additional points allocated to French-speaking and bilingual candidates under the Express Entry system in 2020 and the improvement of promotional activities in Canada and abroad, some of which I had the opportunity to take part in personally during a recent visit to France.
My department is also pursuing year-round, targeted promotional activities in Canada and abroad to expand the pool of potential qualified French-speaking and bilingual candidates. In 2021, over 450 events to promote francophone immigration were held in Canada, and an additional 277 events were held outside of Canada, with audiences ranging from employers, community and economic development agencies and designated learning institutions.
[Translation]
I recently attended a francophone promotional event in Paris, France. There I spoke to people interested in coming to Canada to work or study, and I explained why Canada continues to attach importance to francophone immigration in all countries.
[English]
With the shift to more virtual promotional activities, a broader pool of French-speaking and bilingual talent can be reached more easily in Canada now and also abroad.
The seventeenth edition of the Destination Canada Mobility Forum was held virtually in November 2021. The highest recorded number of requests for participation were received, with more than 178,000 requests from more than 180 countries and over 4,000 advertised employment opportunities.
Through this online engagement, we can be sure that our message that francophone newcomers are welcome and needed in all parts of Canada is starting to reach the people who need to hear it.
[Translation]
Attracting people is just one part of the equation, however. Once they arrive, they need to feel supported and confident as they settle into their new lives.
[English]
In 2019, we introduced the Francophone Integration Pathway, which offers tailored support to French-speaking newcomers from pre-arrival right through to citizenship. It also ensures that newcomers of all linguistic backgrounds are aware of these services and the possibilities to settle in French-speaking communities from coast to coast to coast and not only in Quebec.
The pathway is implemented by francophone organizations in alignment with the “by and for francophones” approach, which supports the vitality of francophone minority communities across Canada.
IRCC’s Welcoming Francophone Communities initiative is another positive factor in our settlement programming. This initiative gives francophone minority communities the opportunity to grow their capacity through new Resettlement Assistance Program centres, community partnership settlement plans and guidance on the private sponsorship of refugees.
Additionally, under our Action Plan for Official Languages, IRCC is investing $40.8 million over five years. That will include $36.6 million for initiatives supporting the consolidation of the Francophone Integration Pathway and $4.2 million for the development of horizontal policies on francophone immigration, official languages governance and federal-provincial-territorial collaboration.
[Translation]
In conclusion, we know that francophone immigration is important across the country. Canada’s two official languages are part of our history and identity, and as Canadians, our government and IRCC will continue to protect and promote the French language through our francophone immigration strategy.
[English]
I hope I have given the committee some sense of what our department is doing to provide newcomers with incentives to settle in francophone minority communities, both in Quebec and across Canada.
We remain committed to making settling in francophone minority communities a positive experience for newcomers.
[Translation]
We will continue to work with the provinces and territories, as well as francophone stakeholders, including the FCFA, to achieve our objectives.
The Chair: Thank you for your opening statement, minister. We will now proceed to questions from the senators. As usual, I would ask that you use the “raise hand” feature.
Those who are present in person can let the clerk know they want to speak. Please do not hesitate to draw our attention if you are not sure you have been put down on the list. Colleagues, being aware of the time ahead, I will allow five minutes, including question and answer. We will begin a first round of questions with the deputy chair of the committee, Senator Poirier.
Senator Poirier: Minister, thank you for accepting our invitation and being with us today.
Since the early 1990s, the increase in migration from the main sources of Canadian population growth has largely exceeded the effect of natural growth.
In 2017 and 2018, 80% of Canadian population growth was attributable to immigration.
Do you think immigration is the main factor in maintaining the demographic weight of official language minority communities?
Mr. Fraser: The answer depends on how you define what a minority community is. There’s another possibility. The Indigenous communities are growing at a strong pace. Immigration is indeed one of the most significant factors in demographic growth.
Senator Poirier: Minister, please help me understand the government’s point of view. Immigration is the main factor in Canadian population growth, but it isn’t helping to maintain the demographic weight of the official language minority community. The two are interdependent. Why does your government consider them as separate?
Mr. Fraser: I think there are two issues here. The first is an economic and demographic challenge. Immigration is an essential factor in improving our economy across the country.
It’s important to welcome a lot of young families, and we need to focus our efforts on hiring foreign workers to ensure the success of our economy.
The other very important issue is that the government doesn’t want to limit the number of newcomers or close the door to them. It’s essential that we increase the number of francophone newcomers along with the number of newcomers, generally, arriving in Canada.
The Chair: Minister, we’re having trouble hearing you.
[English]
Mr. Fraser: I’m trying to say — and I’ll try to speak slowly, my apologies — that immigration is essential for our economy and to cure certain demographic challenges with respect to our aging population. It is essential to me, if we are going to respect the importance of French culture and the importance of francophone communities in Canada, that as we increase the overall population — including by immigration, but not exclusively — that we also turn our minds to how we can increase the rate of francophone immigration to ensure we are not eroding an essential feature of Canadian identity, which is our linguistic duality, at the same time as pursuing the essential aims of growing our economy and dealing with the aging population, which is a real challenge we need to address.
[Translation]
Senator Poirier: I have a supplementary question for you. Bill C-13 would require you to adopt a policy on francophone immigration and to enhance the vitality of Canada’s francophone minorities.
Would you please tell us what changes you intend to make to immigration policy? Will it include measures and indicators for retaining newcomers in our official language minority communities?
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for your question. I think Bill C-13 provides greater opportunities for our country.
[English]
It’s a mandate letter commitment for me to develop a national Francophone Immigration Strategy. There are some elements that I described in my opening remarks that will feed into this program, but I don’t want to repeat myself.
[Translation]
We have to continue investing in organizations that provide settlement services for newcomers.
I’m very pleased that we’ve added an important feature to the bill as part of our budget implementation.
[English]
With this feature, we want to increase the flexibility in our Express Entry system. This is going to be a major change to the Express Entry system in Canada, which will allow not just me as minister but also successive ministers to use a more precise tool in selecting the people who will gain entry into Canada by completing a more targeted draw. If we wanted to use this flexibility to focus on French teachers or health care workers in specific regions of Canada, we would be able to use this newfound flexibility to achieve that end.
I don’t want to prejudge the total outcome of the consultation process — which is not complete by any stretch — for the new Francophone Immigration Strategy that we will be developing, but those will be some examples of the features that will ensure that as the population grows we do everything we can to protect the demographic weight of francophones across Canada.
[Translation]
Senator Gagné: Thank you, minister.
We all agree that the COVID-19 pandemic hit the immigration sector hard. I think we all saw the impact it had in all areas.
We also know that the immigration sector directly affects the development of official language minority communities. In addition to the pandemic and the government’s commitment to supporting development in that sector, we saw that Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s roadmap encountered some stumbling blocks, particularly in efforts to meet the government’s 4.4% target.
Would you please tell us about the obstacles you’re facing?
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for your question.
[English]
Before I begin, let me say thank you for drawing the attention of the committee to the challenges that have come from COVID-19. You are right, Manitobans are very polite. That was kind of you to be willing to let someone else take the time.
There are two chief obstacles that are tied to COVID-19 and its impact on our immigration system. The first is its impact on operations. You can imagine that around the world and across Canada, for public health reasons, different offices were closed down at different points throughout the pandemic. Not everywhere has the same capacity to allow people to work from home as we do in Canada, and that posed serious challenges particularly in areas that may not have had, for example, a quality internet connection for someone to work from home.
The second challenge is, as you can imagine, that the business of immigration becomes incredibly difficult when you are dealing with a border that is closed to international travel. This required us to adopt a new strategy to welcome more people who were already in Canada for resettlement as permanent residents. At the same time, applications were coming in from all over the world. Many people may not realize it, but in 2021, Canada became the world’s top destination of choice for workers of any country in the world and continues to hold that mantle today.
This has had a particularly significant impact on francophone immigration. Despite the fact that we had an uncapped program for people who were in Canada with a temporary status to transition to permanent residency, we simply don’t have an unlimited number of francophone people in Canada at any given point on a temporary status. This has presented challenges for last year. However, it gives me great confidence that as more people have been applying to come to Canada from overseas, we will be able to achieve —
[Translation]
We won’t be able to reach 4% this year, but we really can achieve that target. I’ve promised it.
Senator Gagné: In an evaluation that it published in 2017, IRCC acknowledged that the Provincial Nominee Program wasn’t making a satisfactory contribution. It was contributing little to francophone immigration.
Have you detected any particular situation that might cause that program to come up short?
Mr. Fraser: Results vary from province to province. When the provincial strategy tends to lend considerable support to francophones [Technical difficulties]. In Nova Scotia, my province, I’ve seen that it’s possible to improve the situation and to increase the number of francophone newcomers.
[English]
But the same thing is not true in every single province. One of the things I’m particularly excited about as we embark on this national strategy for francophone immigration is to understand the nuances in each stream that we can examine to see what worked and what did not. I think the flexibility I mentioned in the Express Entry system through federal channels is one huge opportunity, but if we can find ways to partner with provinces that are looking and excited to adopt local strategies, we now have some provinces that have demonstrated success. Rather than reinvent the wheel, figuring out how we can partner with other provinces to obtain that same level of success — or even better — is something that I think provides an excellent opportunity to ensure that every province in Canada benefits from francophone immigration. The opportunity, I should say, is enormous. If we can teach the world that people can have access to schools, child care centres and health services in their language of choice, then that will open doors for many talented francophones around the world to consider Canada.
The Chair: Thank you, minister.
[Translation]
I would remind you that you have five minutes for both question and answer. The officials have agreed to stay with us at the end of this hour to answer more specific questions.
Senator Dagenais: Minister, I’m a senator from Quebec, and I’m going to ask you a question about Roxham Road, the road your prime minister persistently refuses to shut down, despite what it’s costing Canada and especially Quebec.
How many millions of dollars has Roxham Road cost since it was reopened? Whatever the cost may be, we know it will all be paid out of Canadians’ taxes. Can you tell us how long we’ll be keeping that road open and accepting illegal immigrants who jump ahead of legal ones? It’s the illegal ones that cross via Roxham Road.
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for your question. First, it’s essential that our immigration system be robust and humane, but it’s also important to realize that there’s no magic solution. We can’t just shift the problem around. Our government has to meet domestic and international obligations.
[English]
The solution to the challenges — which are very real — at Roxham Road is not simply to block the passage to stop people from coming through. The border between the United States and Canada is very long. The people who would seek to cross into Canada, I don’t believe for one moment would not simply go elsewhere. We need to find a long-term solution by modernizing the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement. Those conversations are ongoing.
My sense is that it’s important we do everything we can to facilitate regular migration, but for people who do cross into Canada and make an asylum claim, I don’t think it would be appropriate to ignore the domestic and international legal obligations that bind the Government of Canada, regardless of which party is in power.
[Translation]
Senator Dagenais: Minister, I understand that we have to comply with the Safe Third Country Agreement, but, if I were Joe Biden, the President of the United States, and I saw illegal immigrants leaving the United States, I wouldn’t be in a hurry to comply with the agreement, as you say. It suits the Americans just fine to see illegal immigrants entering Canada. They’re also trying to shut down the border with Mexico. How long will this last?
As you know, this results in enormous costs to Quebec, which has to take these people in, put them up in hotels, find them housing and send them to school. I understand why the federal government reimburses a portion of expenses, but between the money that doesn’t come in and the costs this generates…
It’s also frustrating for legal refugees to see these people jump the line. I know, you’re going to tell me that the border’s long and they can cross it somewhere else, but it’s time to reinforce prevention measures at the border and to increase resources to shut down the borders. That’s what the Americans are doing with the U.S.-Mexico border. They’ve even built a wall there. We should take this seriously. My impression is that we aren’t taking the Roxham Road situation seriously.
The Chair: You have one minute in which to answer, minister.
Mr. Fraser: Before I begin, we’re working well with the United States. I’m working very well with my Quebec counterpart, Mr. Boulet.
As regards expenses, we transferred $374 million to Quebec under the Interim Housing Assistance Program between 2017 and 2020 to compensate for the number of asylum claimants. That’s more than $160 million a year at the end of the Canada-Quebec immigration accord. Under the Interim Federal Health Program, we also offer health care protection for asylum claimants who aren’t eligible for a provincial health insurance plan.
We will always work with Quebec. It’s essential.
[English]
Just as a final comment, I think it is important — and I mean no malice when I say this — to choose my words carefully when we are dealing with people who have often come facing very vulnerable circumstances to make an asylum claim. It may be an irregular way, but it’s based in both international and Canadian law. When a person enters our country — regardless of the circumstances surrounding Roxham Road — to make an asylum claim, there is a particular process under Canadian law.
It’s why I choose the language of describing the activity as crossing the border “irregularly.” Until we have an opportunity to profess on the quality of their asylum claim and their entitlement to remain in Canada, in my opinion, it is not an accurate description to say it is an illegal activity nor contrary to the laws of Canada.
[Translation]
The Chair: Once again, senators, please ask concise questions so the minister has time to answer.
Mr. Fraser: Mr. Chair, before we continue, the vote in the House will begin in 15 seconds. May we suspend briefly and resume after the vote?
The Chair: All right, minister. We will await you with great anticipation. We will of course allow you to go and vote.
We will suspend to allow the minister to vote and come back.
(The committee suspended.)
(The committee resumed.)
Senator Dalphond: Thank you for being with us today, Minister.
I have a brief comment before asking my question. Roxham Road is in my Senate division. I spent a winter day there and was proud that the people arriving on foot with their suitcases were welcomed by the RCMP officers and that the security checks were done. It was all done in a warm area, not in the middle of a field where someone could freeze to death, as I’ve seen in Manitoba. We also don’t need helicopters to monitor the border or snowmobiles to chase people down in the fields.
There are advantages and disadvantages, but I don’t think anything is entirely black or white.
My question also concerns Quebec. With regard to the processing of economic immigrant files, we saw in the May 7 issue of La Presse that those applications are first processed by the Quebec government and that the federal government then processes the other part of the file. In that process, it takes an average of 27 months to process economic immigrant files for Quebec but a quarter of that time for the other provinces. Will you try to find a solution to ensure that delays for economic immigration applicants to Quebec are as short as elsewhere in Canada?
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for that question. However, it isn’t true that the federal government takes longer for Quebec than for the other provinces. That’s not the case. Perhaps our officials can discuss numbers at greater length later on.
There’s a very important issue here. The Quebec government is responsible for establishing immigration thresholds, and it’s essential that the federal government abide by what the Quebec government has decided for the current year.
Under the Canada-Quebec Accord, the Province of Quebec may select 28% of the number of immigrants for the entire country. We’re talking about 13% here. What’s the difference between 13% and 28%? It’s approximately 66,000 francophones a year. That’s an enormous number; it’s a bigger [Technical difficulties]. The federal government can’t conduct a case study that the provincial government doesn’t request. I have no problem with the Quebec government. It’s essential that the provincial government establish a threshold consistent with its intake capacity in order to be able to provide the established services. I’ll provide the more technical details in English.
[English]
I am really encouraged about the [Technical difficulties] that my counterpart in Quebec has indicated. Every time we speak, it’s about what more we can do to see how we can bring people here more quickly. I think that they are aware of the challenges, and they are moving in this direction of increasing their levels. However, it is essential, if we have a gap between where the levels are set and where the applications are, that every year there will be a delta that will extend the processing times. If the levels are set high enough that you are accommodating all of the people who make an application, then the chief reason for any delay associated with that economic migration would be eliminated. I think that would be a really important place to start. If we get a signal that the levels will be higher, we’ll do what we can to put the appropriate resources in place to accomplish those higher numbers.
I would invite you to dig into the numbers with our officials in the second half of the meeting if you think that it is appropriate.
[Translation]
Senator Dalphond: Thank you, Minister, and I want to congratulate you on your French language proficiency. You’ve made remarkable progress.
The Chair: We entirely agree with Senator Dalphond’s last statement.
Senator Mégie: Thank you for being with us today, Minister.
I’m going to ask you two questions that you’ve previously heard in another committee. I’d also like them to appear in the record of this meeting.
I wanted to talk to you about the large francophone pool that exists in America outside Canada, and that large pool is Haiti. Why is that country not on the list of countries eligible for the temporary foreign workers program?
We need manpower and support from that francophone pool to meet the immigration targets for francophone communities outside Quebec. Have you planned to admit more francophone immigrants from Haiti?
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for that question. Before I begin, I’d like to thank Senator Dalphond for his compliment. I’ve worked hard to be able to speak French because I couldn’t speak a word of it when I entered politics. It’s a great pleasure to learn a new language.
First, with regard to the temporary foreign workers issue, there are two programs. The international experience program operates under a bilateral agreement between Canada and other countries. However, there is no agreement between Canada and Haiti.
As for programs reserved for foreign workers, they are generally temporary programs. For every temporary program in Canada’s immigration system, there’s a rule requiring that every department responsible must assume that foreign workers will return to their country of origin.
[English]
One of the challenges that I see across many of our temporary programs is that there is no blanket rule that a person from a particular country is not allowed to come, for example, as a temporary worker.
But when you do have country conditions — political or economic — that sometimes impact a large number of people who come from that country to an officer who is considering a file, they may more often than not, with certain countries, look at that rule and say, “Well, if you are going to come permanently, we should seek to bring you in through a permanent program that allows us to manage the overall population growth of Canada rather than taking you through a temporary stream,” knowing that with certain countries there is a much higher rate of asylum claims.
I am seeking to address this by providing a pathway to permanent residency for people who are here on a temporary basis. It is one of my mandate letter commitments, and it’s also the subject of motion 44 that my colleague Randeep Sarai has put forward in the House of Commons. I actually think it would be a very good time for parliamentarians in either chamber to make suggestions on how we can shape the framework contemplated by motion 44 to have it be as inclusive as possible without jeopardizing the integrity of the immigration system.
[Translation]
Senator Mégie: I have another question, Minister. In the promotional activities designed to attract francophones from elsewhere, witnesses in previous meetings told us that the selection was often made based on the most highly qualified individuals as indicated by their application forms. However, when the highly qualified individuals set foot in Canada, their credentials aren’t recognized. I find that incongruous. Is there some way to reorganize all this? Have you thought of that, or has someone else asked you this question? I’d like to know your answer, please.
Mr. Fraser: This has been a major challenge both for me and for every immigration minister in the past 30 years. It’s essential that I find a way to ensure applicants’ credentials are recognized.
[English]
In most instances, the economic sectors that have high needs — not exclusively, but in most sectors — are regulated by provincial governments. To defend my provincial counterparts, in many of the high-need sectors, there is an independent body such as a college of physicians, a professional regulating body for lawyers, for engineers or for people who work in transportation. Sometimes that can be a federal issue as well, of course.
Figuring out how to do this in lockstep with the provinces will be key. The recent federal budget had investments specific to health to establish working groups and a table, essentially, for us to work with provincial governments to help to deal with this.
I do not think that the needs have ever been greater, frankly, when it comes to labour mobility.
Before the Omicron variant landed in our communities, there were nearly a million job vacancies in Canada. We cannot fill those with the population and skill sets that are present in our country today.
[Translation]
Senator Moncion: Welcome, Mr. Fraser. My question concerns the post-secondary institutions of the Canadian francophonie. Some institutions, such as the Cité collégiale, have established a recruitment program with North African countries to attract students and encourage them to come and study in French. When they apply for permanent citizenship at the end of their studies, we’ve heard that the refusal rate is higher among francophone students who have studied at francophone institutions. Could you tell us about that anomaly in the system?
[English]
Mr. Fraser: Perhaps, before we get too far, this would be a good opportunity to dig into some of the numbers with our officials, but I would invite you to do that maybe when you have more time after I depart this evening.
It is really important how you look at the different numbers — and I apologize if I’m in English for this portion, because I do not want to make a mistake by virtue of my linguistic competence. The approval rates, when you look at different regions within Africa, are very similar to one another on the basis of their region, regardless of which language they speak.
So I just want to make sure that I am — and tell me if I am off track in terms of what you are saying. From my perspective, it is a similar issue to what we discussed during a previous question about Haiti, in that there are a number of people who are sometimes refused on the basis that they are not likely to return to their home country. However, I do not see a large linguistic gap on that particular issue when you are looking at comparable regions within Africa.
I do think that there is some good news.
[Translation]
I think we have more opportunities because the situation has improved for students who have filed applications in Senegal and Morocco. It’s possible to improve the situation. It’s not just about the acceptance rate, but also the time it takes to process the applications.
[English]
There are tools we can use, and I do think that an additional presence with a new office that we’re looking to set up in Cameroon soon will help with countries in the region. But there is a massive opportunity here. Because of the quality of the students who do get approved, they make enormous contributions to not just the institutions where they study but to the communities where they live as well.
Senator Moncion: Thank you. You told me to say something if you are off track. It is not that you are off track; it is just that when you are looking at francophone students who ask to become permanent citizens, it seems that if they have studied in francophone establishments in Canada, the rate of refusal is higher than if the same students were to study in English post-secondary institutions. Their rate of refusal is lower.
Mr. Fraser: Okay. So I will have to take a look at the numbers to make sure that what you have said is an accurate depiction of what is happening. And I do not mean to suggest that it is not, only that I cannot confirm.
I do think that there is an obvious solution should that prove to be the case. Frankly, whether it is the case, we may want to pull this lever. With the new flexibilities in the Express Entry system I referenced earlier, I know that we need to increase the francophone immigration to Canada.
[Translation]
We need to do it to protect and promote the French language and culture. If I can identify the needs of the economy in a province, I’ll be able, once the bill has passed, to select the categories of people who speak French and who have the necessary skills to meet the community’s needs.
[English]
If we can find these students who have the competencies that are necessary for local or provincial economies, we’ll have the flexibility to say that we will draw down on our inventory of applications for francophones who meet those criteria. That would make an enormous difference. There is rarely a silver bullet when you are trying to solve a complicated problem like this, but I do think it will be one of the most powerful tools we have.
Perhaps I will give advance warning to the talented officials who are with us today to dig down on the data that might be applicable to your concern.
[Translation]
Senator Jaffer: I have a question for the minister. Thank you for being here today. I come from British Columbia, and I would like the francophone community outside Quebec to expand.
[English]
My son is the President of the Chambre de Commerce Francophone, and he is always telling me, “Mom, we cannot seem to increase the presence of francophone people in Vancouver or in B.C.” Because he is so enamoured and has always worked in francophone culture, he always thinks that is a real loss to British Columbians.
We do have one part of British Columbia, which you may know, in Vancouver, but it is not the presence that should happen in a bilingual country.
So, minister, I know that you are bringing francophones in, but we have to do more. If we are genuinely going to increase bilingualism — and not just in Quebec or in central Canada — people in British Columbia are really thirsting for that, I can genuinely tell you that. But what are your thoughts on that?
Mr. Fraser: We are aligned in our desire to increase francophone immigration outside of Quebec. I come from the East Coast, and we certainly have very strong francophone communities in Nova Scotia.
[Translation]
Acadians are an essential people in Nova Scotia’s history and future.
[English]
There is a huge opportunity as well. This is not something we must do just because it is a nice thing to do. We are missing an opportunity by choosing not to promote francophone immigration in every province in Canada.
I met with an economic development association in Calgary a few months ago. One of the men who helps run the organization told me that he didn’t know it was possible, before he came to Canada, to live [Technical difficulties] in French in Alberta. He found une garderie et des cours for his kids and an ability to work in the community in his language, and he said, “I found it; this is where I want to be forever.”
He is now working at running an organization that employs several other people in Canada, and if we can repeat that success story by not just focusing on the Quebec-and-rest-of-Canada narrative — which so much of the world understands Canada as being — but by actually demonstrating that in every province there are opportunities for people not just to speak French but to actually live and raise their families in French.
We’ve seen across Canada that until you have a community of interest where you can be who you are as a person, the likelihood that you will stay in the first community where you arrive is very small. If you actually realize that you can have the services and comforts that you are accustomed to in your first language — the language of your choice in Canada — then you can actually make the life that you want for yourself.
I’m telling you, if we do not tell that story, it is to our peril. The number of people whose eyes light up when they realize they could live in some of the most beautiful communities in the world — in a coastal environment in your and my case or in a historic French community in Quebec. It is an opportunity a lot of people around the world do not realize, and I think we need to tell that story as often and as forcefully as possible.
Senator Jaffer: I just wanted to follow up by saying that even though I’m not francophone, my children — well, they are not francophone but are surrounded by francophonie culture; my grandchildren went to garderie; they are in immersion; they are very much francophone in a francophonie community. But the challenge is that it is not increasing. That frustrates me because, by now, we should be increasing.
I may run out of time, but maybe you can answer it later. Why can’t we have more immigration offices in Africa, so that we could get francophone communities to come to the rest of Canada?
[Translation]
Mr. Fraser: I want to deliver the goods.
[English]
I want very much to be the minister who is responsible for increasing the number of francophones who move to Canada — not just to Quebec, but outside of Quebec. I am very confident I will be able to meet the goal of 4.4% at least by next year and maybe sooner. We’ll continue to see if we can grow that number year over year because it’s important, and I think it’s in our self-interest as a nation.
Senator Clement: Thank you for coming to speak to us. Congratulations to Senator Jaffer for doing her part in terms of increasing the Francophonie.
I like the way that you ended that last answer. We’re hearing from the Fédération des Communautés Francophones et Acadienne du Canada, or FCFA, and other organizations that 4.4% is not enough. You need to meet it, but then you need to go to 6% or 8% just to maintain where we are. So hopefully your government is thinking about that right now — going past the 4.4%. Could you comment on that?
The next question I have is about the Welcoming Francophone Communities initiative. You alluded to those in your remarks. I have to tell you, there is an expression in French:
[Translation]
The expression is that you’ve made people jealous.
[English]
I think there were only 14 communities that were part of that program and many, like my home community of Cornwall, felt left out and are waiting to join that group.
Could comment on what your plans are to expand that program? I believe you used the word “consolidation” in your opening remarks. Could you comment on the target, moving past 4.4% and the timeline for that? Could you also comment on the Welcoming Francophone Communities expansion and what you mean by “consolidation”? Thank you.
Mr. Fraser: Certainly. If I’m thinking of the same pointed remarks, I think I was referring to a consultation, not a consolidation. If you need to correct me, I’ll revisit that.
Regarding the 4.4%: This was a goal that was developed in collaboration with members of francophone communities across Canada over the last number of years, leading up to 4.4% for next year.
I’ve seen that FCFA has put out a very ambitious goal to consider on a go-forward basis. The only official goal on the books today is 4.4%, but I’m completely open to seeing where the future will take us. I want to be careful before I have demonstrated the capacity to achieve the goal that was agreed to and which we’ve been pursuing for years to not put a different marker out there. But I do want to note that we will be consulting on the national strategy on francophone immigration in the months ahead, in which I’m sure we will be establishing a path forward to increase francophone immigration in Canada. That is the whole reason for the particular strategy. I do want to point out as well that there were a number of measures put in place that have been working to allow us to see consistent growth in that number. It was quite dismal a number of years ago, if I can be frank.
We have done things like add points for francophones and bilingualism to the Express Entry system. The Welcoming Francophone Communities initiative is another piece. The TR to PR stream with uncapped francophone immigration would be another. Additional investments that I announced a number of months ago, including in small and rural communities that serve francophone populations, is another. So we have been adopting a lot of measures that are making it easier, year over year, to achieve a larger number.
Your second question on the Welcoming Francophone Communities initiative — I view this to be one and the same, really, as part of that national strategy. We have learned some lessons from the communities that have been taking part in that initiative. It has been a success, in my opinion.
We’ve not made decisions as to how many other communities or what specific communities will be looped in. But to the extent we can talk to the people involved at a local level to figure out what worked and what didn’t work and apply those lessons in other similar communities — whether it is part of a one-off investment that selects particular communities to adopt initiatives or whether it is a broader theme that we present to say, “Hey, if you are able to provide these services, maybe we can work with you to identify the appropriate supports that work for your community,” because the supports that may be appropriate in rural Alberta may be different than in southern Nova Scotia. To the extent that we can take lessons learned from the Welcoming Francophone Communities initiative, I think that we could be applying them elsewhere.
I could talk on and on, but I feel that you might have another question, so I’ll yield the floor back to you.
Senator Clement: No, I’m good.
The Chair: Thank you, minister.
[Translation]
Senator Mockler: Minister, I too want to join with Senator Dalphond and our chair in congratulating you on your performance in French. The last time I met you was at the International Day of Democracy at St. F.X. with Mr. Mulroney and Mr. McKenna. Your French has vastly improved since then, and I encourage you to keep doing what you’re doing. It’s very much appreciated in New Brunswick and across Canada, given that you’re a very good non-partisan ambassador for both communities.
I previously had the good fortune to be New Brunswick’s minister responsible for the francophonie. We were dealing with some very important issues at the time for which we’re still seeking solutions today. What solution do you propose to improve recognition of foreign credentials so we can bring more immigrants into Canada and further encourage francophones of the Organisation internationale de la Francophonie?
Mr. Fraser: Thank you for your question and your compliment. It was a good day in the history of St. F.X. I’m an alumnus of that university.
Regarding your question, this is a major challenge. In the health sector, it’s vital that the federal and provincial governments participate in the initiative outlined in the 2022 budget. There are other possibilities.
[English]
For example, right now, Nova Scotia is looking to build a facility through the community college system that will actually allow people who happen to be refugees but who come as economic migrants to have their skills recognized in a more expedited way when they land in Nova Scotia.
I have been having conversations with some of my global counterparts about whether there may be opportunities to establish training facilities where there are large pools of talent. That might allow people to qualify through having local instructors visit centralized training facilities in different parts of the world. Many proposals are just at the idea stage, and I’ll forgive our deputy minister if she rolls her eyes at me for speculating about this kind of thing at a committee meeting, but what I am seeing right now is that this is not a unique challenge in Canada. It may be unique in a federation to have so many different jurisdictions where a person needs to qualify before they can practise in their destination country, but there are a few things we can do.
First, we can look at expediting training both pre- and post-arrival for people who have the skills but not the formal qualifications. Second, we may wish to build a qualification element into our provincial admission systems. I’m willing to work with any provincial government that is willing to come to the table with solutions on this. Can we actually build a qualification element into the immigration process? Or can we just make it easier to partner with jurisdictions that have very similar training qualifications?
This is not just an immigration issue. My sister is a physician. We have friends who grew up in Nova Scotia or Ontario but trained and became qualified to practise medicine in another country. Now, they are unable to move home to practise even though they want to work as a doctor in a rural community. Those kinds of stories break your heart when you hear of communities where emergency rooms are closed for lack of a physician and you hear horror stories about people waiting for four hours in their driveway for an ambulance.
This is an emergency, in my opinion, and not just in the health sector. When I see an economy that has 965,000 jobs available at the end of the year, and yet there are barriers which perhaps were more appropriate for normal times when there was a surplus of workers trying to come into a sector. We want to assure the quality of workers; I understand that, but the government wants and I want to do anything we can to work with the provincial governments. It must be done in partnership because we manage immigration, for the large part, and professions are generally regulated at a provincial level. We just have to sit down at the table like adults and figure out solutions together. And, look, I have to say that, to a person, every one of my counterparts has been excellent to deal with.
The Chair: Thank you, Minister. I know you have to leave soon but I will ask you a quick question about governance.
[Translation]
The communities often tell us about the challenges involved in interacting with your department and the various orders of government, and we often hear that francophone immigration outside Quebec isn’t always understood as well as it could be.
In short, we often hear that an assistant deputy minister position should be created in your department along with a specific francophone immigration program.
I’d like to hear what you have to say on this governance issue within your department. Is it being considered?
Mr. Fraser: Yes, I think about every issue every day, but there are only 24 hours in a day. This is a very important issue, and my colleagues in the House of Commons won’t let me forget it since many of them represent francophone communities.
[English]
On governance, it is really important that we have the right governance structure if we are going to have the right decision-making process to yield the right results. I have two lines of thinking. One, my challenges with processing, it is no secret after the pandemic, are extraordinary. I can solve those. It will take a little bit of time and a lot of resources, but I can solve those. I am confident in my ability to solve those, including for francophones who are seeking to come to Canada.
When you start to add layers of different kinds of programs, you do lose certain efficiencies in processing. That said, when people from a particular community don’t see themselves represented in a system, it is cold comfort to them to say, “Well, you will improve everyone’s processing except mine,” and that doesn’t work in a country like Canada.
[Translation]
Our culture is based on linguistic duality; it’s essential to Canada’s culture and identity.
[English]
Right now, we have a few options coming down the pipe. I mentioned the flexibility in the Express Entry system. I think this will make a very big difference.
I am always considering whether we need to hive off something separate for particular communities to treat them as a priority. I have not made an official decision on the creation of a new stream right now, in part because we have certain initiatives coming down that I think will show very real, tangible progress. We are launching at some point in the near future a consultation process for the national strategy on francophone immigration. I don’t want to say, on the basis of a particular stakeholder or a particular person saying, “Hey, minister, this is a good idea,” that we must do it right away. I want to make sure I have the opportunity to engage with francophone communities across Canada, to assure myself that this is something that is both wanted and that will be effective, before I make a final decision. But to your question, I’m actually very open to this idea.
The Chair: Thank you so much, minister.
[Translation]
Thank you for being here, for your comments and for your answers to our questions, which are very much appreciated.
We will now continue with questions for the department’s officials. Thank you for being with us, Ms. Xavier, Ms. Scott and Ms. Dorion.
Senator Gagné: Welcome to the departmental officials.
I wanted to go back to the 4.4% target that was set in 2001 and that has never been met.
The FCFA proposes that the department set a target that would gradually rise from 12% in 2024 to 20% in 2036 for restoration purposes, since the target has never been met and there has been quite a significant decline in demographic weight.
Is it realistic to set such an ambitious target, as well as programs, strategies and measures that would help us meet it? I’d like to hear your comments on the subject.
Caroline Xavier, Acting Deputy Minister, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: Thank you for that question. We’re very pleased to be with you today to answer your questions.
As the minister said, the actual current target is 4.4%, and we feel very confident and comfortable that we’ll achieve it before 2023. Obviously, when the target was initially identified, the people who worked together with us to establish it said that it might take 15 years. So if we meet it by 2023, we may be slightly ahead of schedule, but we’re now in the process of determining what the next target will be.
We’re working very closely with the FCFA, in particular, and consultants across the country to ensure that we understand the logic behind the next target based on the studies they’ll be sharing with us. We need a target that we’re confident we can meet. At the same time, as you say, we have to be able to establish other strategies to assist us in moving beyond that target, without losing what we’ve previously managed to do for francophone immigration.
As the minister said earlier, we want to use the flexibility afforded by the various elements of our system, such as the express entry program, but, to do that, we have to be able to make this change, which we aren’t yet able to do, and to recruit people who meet the necessary requirements in order to meet the target. In short, we’re very happy to continue listening to the communities, which will have much to tell and share with us about the targets that should be established.
We must ensure that we are ambitious, but mainly that the target is achievable so that we don’t disappoint the communities. We also must ensure that the communities where francophone immigrants land, as we discussed in the first hour, have integration organizations to provide them with the necessary support in their community. We have to ensure that they succeed. One of the points we bear in mind when we create the various programs and strategies, particularly with respect to francophone immigration, is that we have to make sure that established programs have the potential for success and that a support community is in place.
Senator Gagné: Thank you for that answer and for trying to take a balanced approach to meeting the 4.4% target. I also think we have to be able to exceed the target to ensure we replenish the coffers, as it were.
As for foreign students and the institutions’ capacity to admit them, guide them and give them an overview of the labour market, couldn’t measures be put in place to ensure a transition from university or college to a potential application for permanent residence?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for the question, senator.
One of the things we are working on closely with the universities and colleges across Canada is making sure that they can provide the support students needed, particularly international students.
When we look at applications from international students — as the minister mentioned and as you know — we make sure that the forms are completed properly, and also make sure that they have what it takes to be successful in their studies and that when they come here to study they have the required ability to do so. We want them to come here to study, not just to look for a job. We want to make sure that when they come here, education is their priority, because that’s why they completed an application to come to Canada.
Beyond that, it’s also possible that they could integrate into our community and become permanent residents. We know that students, particularly those who studied in fields where there are shortages, can address one of our needs. We want them to have the option of integrating into the community to eventually become permanent residents.
Nevertheless, many of the conversations we have had with universities — and it’s really interesting, particularly during the past two years of the pandemic, because we were very flexible with universities and colleges — are about the possibility of online courses. The downside is that students doing that won’t have the opportunity to really integrate into the Canadian community and truly understand how the labour market works, as they would if they had the opportunity to come and have a genuine Canadian experience. We find that’s a key factor for their future success.
If I’ve understood your question properly, it’s important to make sure that when students complete an application to come to Canada, their intent is to finish their studies and, after graduating, be given the opportunity to become permanent residents and perhaps even Canadian citizens. We need to begin by making sure that students are really coming to study and afterwards integrate into the community by doing things like work internships, and they can adapt to Canada by doing so.
The Chair: I’m going to ask a follow-up question before giving the floor to Senator Dagenais. You’re placing quite an emphasis on the fact that it’s important to make sure that students are really coming to Canada to study. Have you identified a problem in that regard that is leading you to focus this point so much?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for your question, Mr. Chair.
We are often criticized because of the refusal rate for students, and it’s certainly something we take very seriously. However, we have to make sure that when someone comes to study at a Canadian institution, they have the adequate financial resources. Not only do they need the money to pay for the tuition fees, but also the means to live and cover the accommodation fees for a university residence. They need to be able to live more or less independently to make sure that they graduate and don’t become dependent on the provinces for care.
There are many different ways of accomplishing this. We have found that sometimes, in certain fields of study, there are problems of integrity. We have to continue to evaluate and pay attention to all that, because some people say they are coming to study, but never really attend any classes.
That’s one of the things we look at when we monitor the quality of services provided at the institutions. There is a program for institutions — except in Quebec, but that’s being worked on with them — and the universities keep us informed about how the students are doing, and whether they really came to Canada and reported to the institution as they promised. On the basis of this quality program, when we review and monitor things, we find that some have never shown up to any classes. One has to wonder where they are and we sometimes discover that they have found a job; that’s all very well, but it’s not always a job that goes beyond the number of hours they are entitled to work, nor a job that is directly related to what they are studying.
This form of analysis is something we are going to continue to do, because we want to maintain the integrity and efficacy of our immigration programs.
Senator Dagenais: My question is for Ms. Xavier, but it could be for her colleagues as well.
I don’t know whether you’ve taken the time to consult the testimony of the various witnesses heard by the committee. Based on what I recall, no one assigned a very high score to the speed with which francophone immigrant applications were processed, and that goes for refugees too. And yet we know that the current government continues to claim that they are open to receiving them.
Do you think that the rules of the departments are too strict, or that it is simply people working for the department having trouble understanding the rules or enforcing them within a reasonable time period?
Now I don’t want to hear about how you would like to fix things, but rather the real reasons for these delays.
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for your question, senator.
As the minister said earlier, we’ve just lived through two rather extraordinary years. We have all lived through a pandemic that has changed how our department has to operate and we had to adapt quickly.
I can tell you that some of the delays we’ve been experiencing resulted from the fact that we had to determine what the priorities were in terms of border restrictions.
For example, when the border restrictions were particularly tight, we knew that there were international cohorts that could not enter Canada. We did an analysis at that point to determine how we could continue to achieve our immigration goals and objectives, and how we could allow economic immigrants to enter the country, while still legally meeting our deadlines without experiencing too many delays.
So we temporarily put a hold on people coming from overseas, because there was no way they could enter Canada, and we continued to focus on people who were already in Canada, as the minister mentioned earlier. That’s when there was the transition from temporary status to permanent status to be able to give immigrants who were here on a temporary basis this opportunity.
For those kinds of applications, we were able to exceed our target, with over 407,000 permanent residents. These were mainly people who were already in Canada or who could return to Canada despite the border restrictions.
We are still assessing the applications in hand. Even though we decided to focus on people who were already in Canada, we haven’t stopped looking at applications from overseas. The pool of applicants has continued to grow. Now that the borders are somewhat more open, we are making every possible effort to study applications from people who have been waiting for a long time. But it’s taking longer and longer to assess the applications. So people in the pool who were waiting prior to the pandemic, right before the border restrictions, think that they’ve been forgotten, but that’s not the case, and we’re doing everything possible to avoid forgetting them. Nevertheless, the pool continues to grow. The volume of applications continues to increase. That’s a good thing for Canada. Canada is a country that attracts immigrants. It’s part of our role and we want to continue to perform this role on an international scale.
Senator Dagenais: Thank you, Ms. Xavier.
Senator Moncion: My question is about the acceptance criteria in the software system you use.
There is one criterion, among others, that refers to the fact that once people have graduated, they have to return to their country.
Before taking this any further, I’d like to know what you have to say about acceptance criteria that allow people to remain in Canada after completing their studies.
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for your question.
As I was saying earlier, when someone applies to come and study in Canada, or to come and work or immigrate permanently, particularly for temporary residence applications, such as when a student applies to come and study in Canada, the application is for that purpose. According to the existing criteria, students must be able to prove that they have the means to pay the tuition fees and live in Canada without relying on provincial or federal social benefits. Students must have a work permit, and be able to work and live independently using their own means.
In these criteria, applicants must also be capable of returning to their country. One of the things we do at Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada is ensure that we have a comprehensive immigration plan for the Government of Canada, and it is tabled each year in Parliament. There is a multi-year plan that enables us to determine the percentage of the various types of immigrants who are going to enter the country. There is an economic stream, a family stream, etc.
There is a huge pool of students who come to Canada, which is a good thing, because it makes our country highly competitive. If we were to accept every student who comes to Canada and automatically grant them permanent residence status, that might allow less room for the full range of immigration applicants. We also need to be able to accept immigrants on the basis of other criteria, including economic, social and humanitarian criteria.
That doesn’t mean that students wouldn’t have the opportunity to become permanent residents, but we wouldn’t want to say that all students would automatically become permanent residents. That’s why we need to ensure that their intent is to return to their own country, and from there they can look at the various opportunities and ways for them to become permanent residents. These pathways exist, but someone who comes here as a temporary resident will not automatically become a permanent resident.
We took advantage of this option last year when the borders were closed. We allowed people who were here, including students, the opportunity to convert their temporary residence status to permanent residence status. This turned out to be very successful, and there is now an unlimited pool for bilingual or francophone applicants.
Senator Moncion: Thank you.
Some of the other witnesses we heard mentioned specific cases. They talked about the computer program you are using, which automatically rejects over 80% of the applications you receive. That’s why I was returning to the subject of criteria.
I wanted to hear what you had to say about the computer application used.
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for your question and for that clarification. The system you are referring to is called Chinook. It resembles an Excel spreadsheet.
The Chinook system is simply another way of visualizing the data already in the immigration system, which is called the global case management system. The Chinook system doesn’t make any decisions. Decisions are made by immigration officers. It’s not the system that is refusing applications.
The Chinook system simply enhances the visualization of the data to help immigration officers be more effective. It enables them to look through the various screens more effectively. For people working overseas in particular, the global system generally used can be very difficult, partly because of Internet connections. It slows the process down. We want to make sure that there is a more effective way of working through all the applications, and that’s what the Chinook system helps us do. It does not make any decisions. It simply shows the information in a different way. The decisions are made by officers.
Senator Moncion: Thank you.
The Chair: Before giving the floor to Senator Clement, I just want to make sure I’ve understood what you said about accepting all the students and giving foreign students who come to Canada access to permanent resident status. You said that if you had to accept all students for permanent resident status, it would take away places to accept other types of immigrants, whether economic, family or from other streams.
I am asking you that because, in Canada’s francophonie, there is a glaring shortage of francophone immigrants. We are dealing with an aging population. Accepting more students and allowing them permanent resident status could be a partial solution for our communities.
I’d like to hear what you have to say about this particular issue.
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for your question. Well, as I was saying, we receive over 500,000 applications. My colleague Ms. Dorion may have more details for you. From the standpoint of our statistics on the pool of students, the sector represents over $23 million for the Canadian economy, which is a good thing.
To get to $23 million, you need a lot of students. If we were to ensure that every student became a permanent resident, there would be a risk of eliminating opportunities for other people we would like to bring to Canada through immigration.
It’s not because we don’t consider students to be economic immigrants or extremely important immigrants. On the contrary, they represent one of the factors that can help us with francophone immigration. As the minister said, points have been added for people coming through our systems. If they are already bilingual or francophone, we try to increase their ability to remain in the country. However, the applications we are receiving do not always come from bilingual people. Let’s be clear. Some people also apply to attend English-language schools. We need to strike an overall balance in immigration.
The Chair: Thank you for that information.
Senator Clement: I’d like to thank the witnesses for spending all this time with us. I have a particular interest in the relationship between the federal government and the municipalities. We know that the federal government is accustomed to working with the provinces. But municipal governments are in closer contact with the communities.
I’d like to get back to the welcoming communities program. How successful has the partnership with municipalities been? How do you maintain effective communication? Communication is always a challenge. What I’m talking about is effective communication between the federal government and the municipalities. Will this relationship with the municipalities actually contribute to the francophone immigration policy in future?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you very much for that question. As you said, we work closely with the provinces. They are key partners in everything we do from the immigration standpoint. We also work with the municipalities, but mainly through the provinces. The provinces have to realize that the municipalities are within their jurisdiction and we have to respect their governance. They play a very important role, particularly in terms of integration into the community.
I’m going to give the floor to Ms. Scott, who will be able to give you further details.
Catherine Scott, Assistant Deputy Minister, Settlement and Integration, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: For francophone immigration, and particularly the framework for francophone integration that has been in place since 2019, there are two important factors, including the welcoming communities that we discussed earlier. For these 14 communities, it’s an opportunity for the local government and stakeholders to get together and develop a plan to welcome immigrants. There are 13 francophone immigration networks across Canada as well. There are also similar networks across Canada that play the same role for immigration in general.
These 13 francophone immigration networks provide an opportunity for all the key economic players, including the communities, the chambers of commerce and social services, to get together and collaborate with a view to setting objectives for the community and the region. In this, the municipalities perform a very important role. They know what the local needs are and can identify issues and possible solutions. So getting local governments involved in developing measures to welcome and integrate francophone immigrants is a very promising approach.
Senator Gagné: The network of colleges and universities of the Canadian francophonie Includes colleges and universities outside Quebec. These are small institutions. In your analyses to determine how many students might be entitled to immigrate and become permanent residents, can you look through a different lens for official language minority communities?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for the question. Yes, absolutely. Much of our work, when we are developing an immigration plan, involves consultation. We conduct consultations across the country with various organizations. We work closely with the provinces and territories, and also make sure we consult the universities and colleges. As deputy ministers, we meet them on a regular basis and they explain their points of view to us so that we can set up programs that will evolve and continue to meet the needs of the communities and the needs of our country in general. All of that is part of the process of developing the immigration plan to be submitted to cabinet, and eventually to the House of Commons.
We also conduct surveys of Canadians and small communities on a fairly regular basis. We focus specifically on minorities, including linguistic minority and racialized communities. We make an effort to find out what their experience was like when they arrived. That’s how, as a department, we learn how to meet the requirements of government, of course, but also how to continue to improve the immigrant experience when they arrive in Canada.
Senator Gagné: My next question is about immigration officers. Do immigration officers properly understand the needs of minority francophone communities from the moment they come into contact with potential students, and also understand how they can help with the shortage of workers?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for the question. Generally speaking, we make sure they understand Canadian issues, including labour shortages. It’s an important part of how the immigration plan is being developed for the next three years. The plans tabled in Parliament are generally for a period of three years. However, there are reviews every year to determine whether we are still meeting the country’s needs, for example with respect to the labour shortage. We also factor in issues like these when we process student applications.
I’ll give the floor to Ms. Dorion now, and she may have further details to add.
Marie-Josée Dorion, Acting Director General, Operations Planning and Performance, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: The immigration criteria are the same, no matter where people are from. The criteria are the same for international students and foreign workers. However, to answer your question more specifically, our immigration officers are given training on an ongoing basis. Particularly when they are posted abroad, they are given specific training about the region they are going to be working in. That includes a lot of areas. We also make sure that people are knowledgeable about immigration generally and about the host communities in Canada. These subjects are addressed in the training, but the immigration criteria, whether for temporary or permanent residence applications, are the same for everyone, no matter what the language.
The Chair: It’s my turn now to ask you a few questions. You spoke at length about the consultations you undertake. Is the Citizenship and Immigration Canada francophone minority communities steering committee still active? If so, how often does it meet? What issues is it addressing? Can you tell us anything about that?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you for the question. I’ll ask my colleague Ms. Scott to answer. She’s more familiar with that subject than I am because she works very closely with francophone integration communities across Canada.
Ms. Scott: Thank you for the question. We do indeed work closely with the FCFA. The committee you’re talking about meets about once a month. We also have a working committee on the target and on the next steps for the future. Discussions with the communities are held on a regular basis. It’s an open and constructive dialogue.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I don’t see any other questions from my colleagues.
I’m going to ask you a final question, but wouldn’t want to put you on the spot. I have a lot of respect for the work you do. I know that within the department, you are in the best position to say what ought to be done to improve your work. As in other departments, yours has to comply with the Official Languages Act. There is a decline in the use of French in Canada, we would like to achieve genuine equality for both communities, and there is the idea of catching up.
If we were to suggest that there should be an assistant deputy minister position specifically for francophone immigration outside Quebec, would this be beneficial? What would be the challenges for a position like that?
Ms. Xavier: Thank you very much for the question, and thank you for giving us the opportunity to be here with you this evening. We feel privileged to be able to answer your questions. We’d also like to thank you for acknowledging the efforts we are making, as a department and as public servants.
I know that someone asked the minister a similar question. What I can say is that in our department, reporting to our Assistant Deputy Minister Ms. Scott, there is a director general who works on francophone immigration. It’s something we take very seriously. Things need to continue to improve and we are going to continue to work with the communities, particularly the FCFA, to identify other possible targets for the future and to make sure that the program is successful. It’s important to respect the French language and minority communities everywhere in Canada.
For the time being, we are grateful that the director general responsible for that is working with the communities. I’m not saying that we don’t want to continue to improve, because we definitely are going to do that. However, we are going to continue to use the tools at our disposal in the department, and it will take more than one person make a difference.
Ms. Scott might be able to add something, as she’s very much involved in this role. We talk about it fairly regularly and report to our minister about it on an ongoing basis. The minister is aware of the importance of meeting this target. It’s important to make sure that we have minority communities across Canada, because it enriches our culture and our communities.
Ms. Scott: Thank you very much. It’s true that the francophone immigration team is also responsible for Part VII, which comes under my sector. It’s a priority for me as the assistant deputy minister. I’m also the official languages champion for the department. Official languages account for a significant part of my everyday work.
I would agree with what the deputy minister said about the fact that the official languages question is a horizontal issue within the department. It would be very difficult to gather together all of the issues related to francophone immigration into a single sector. To be sure, my team places an emphasis on promotion and integration. There is also the whole issue of selection, which is done under the department’s various programs.
I think our model works fairly well. The issue of francophone immigration is discussed on a regular basis by the department’s governance committee. My role, and the role of my director general, is to ensure that this matter is given more consistent and enhanced visibility.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms. Scott. I definitely wouldn’t want to see you in a different position; I’m well aware of the fact that you do your work very well and we appreciate it.
As there are no other questions, I will conclude by saying that you are right to say that francophone immigration is a horizontal issue, not only in your department, but throughout the government structure. It’s an issue that needs to be examined by many departments.
We thank you for the work you are doing on behalf of all Canadians, and for your support to the current minister. I believe that there’s a lot of work to be done. We are relying on your support in future, and will, at the appropriate moment, submit a report that I trust you will find useful
Thank you, and thanks to the senators for having been here today for their questions. I would also like to thank the staff, the interpreters, the clerk and the analysts.
We will now end our meeting. I wish you all a pleasant good evening.
(The committee adjourned.)