Opening Statement to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts

Citizenship and Immigration Canada - The Economic Component of the Canadian Immigration Program
(Chapter 3 - April 2000 Report of the Auditor General)

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to present our audit findings of the economic component of the Canadian immigration program. The purpose of the economic component is to recruit skilled workers, entrepreneurs, investors and self-employed workers. In 1999, more than half of approximately 190,000 immigrants admitted to Canada were immigrants under the economic component.

Our observations and conclusion deal primarily with Citizenship and Immigration Canada. However, other federal partners are involved in attaining the objectives of the economic component. They include the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Health Canada. For this reason, some of our recommendations apply to them as well.

We last audited the delivery of immigration services abroad in 1990. Since then, the Department has gone through many significant changes in its organizational structure and budget and has taken initiatives to rectify some situations. However, it is disappointing to see the similarity between many of the problems we raised in this Report and those we identified in 1990. Therefore, the Department will have to put significant effort into dealing with these long-standing problems.

At present, immigration offices abroad cannot cope with the task. First of all, immigration levels have not been met for the past two years. Further, there were almost 175,000 applications at various stages of processing in late 1999 — 38 percent more than there were three years ago. Average processing times for applications doubled over the same period. In some offices, skilled workers have to wait about three years for their applications to be finalized. These long delays can compromise the arrival of highly skilled immigrants into Canada.

The officers responsible for processing applications are deeply concerned about the present state of affairs, and I share their concerns. We had an opportunity to interview a number of visa officers and program managers when we visited their offices. We also conducted a survey of these employees in all offices abroad. We draw very positive conclusions on their calibre and commitment. However, what they revealed concerns us deeply. They have a great deal of difficulty handling their workload and responsibilities. They also feel they are making decisions that could carry risks that are too high and that could entail significant costs for Canadian society.

In our view, the Department does not have the resources nor the operational capacity to process the number of applications required to reach the immigration levels set by the government. We found that the Department needs much better information to accurately determine the level of resources required to process applications in offices abroad.

We also noted problems of operational efficiency and effectiveness and a lack of rigour that have a bearing on the system’s ability to meet expectations in four main sectors.

First, some weaknesses leave Citizenship and Immigration Canada open to criticism on the quality and consistency of its decisions in selecting immigrants. Visa officers need better selection criteria, better training and better tools. The Department does not sufficiently monitor the quality of their decisions. It is also important to minimize the negative impact of offshore applications.

Second, we identified significant weaknesses in the management of the medical assessments of prospective immigrants. We found that the terms "danger to public health and public safety" and "excessive demand" had not been defined, even though we stressed the importance of doing so in 1990. We are also very concerned about the lack of rigour and consistency in the overall management of medical assessment activities.

Third, there are serious constraints in establishing the criminality and security admissibility of prospective immigrants. Visa officers have little information and support to ensure that applicants are not likely to engage in criminal activities or endanger the safety of Canadians.

Finally, we found that the Department is particularly vulnerable to fraud and abuse. It has no effective measures in place to discourage people from submitting fraudulent applications, and visa officers often resort to detection methods that are costly. In addition, we found inadequate control over revenues, visa forms and computer systems.

Overall, immigration services abroad are faced with serious problems. The deficiencies we observed limit Canada’s ability to gain the economic and social benefits that immigration affords. These also seriously weaken the level of protection for Canadians that was intended in the Immigration Act.

On 6 April 2000, the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration tabled Bill C-31 amending the Immigration Act. The amendments may make it possible to address some of our concerns if the Bill is passed. However, most of the problems we have raised cannot be corrected through legislative changes. Additional funds have also been allocated to improve some areas related to the management of the economic component of the Immigration Program, particularly an increase in the number of visa officers abroad and the implementation of the global case management system. These funds will help the Department to reduce the application processing time and perhaps to improve efficiency in the longer term. However, administrative measures will also have to be taken to solve the current problems.

First of all, it is essential that an appropriate balance be maintained between the resources allocated to the Department and its federal partners and the workload needed to attain the annual immigration levels set by the government, while assuring the integrity of the program. The Department also has to be more rigorous in managing its activities abroad. It will have to take effective measures to ensure sound management of risks, particularly in health, criminality and security checks. It will have to monitor more closely the quality of decisions and improve controls over revenue, visa forms and computer systems. Finally, it will have to clarify roles and responsibilities within the Department and those of its federal partners, such as Health Canada, the RCMP, CSIS and DFAIT, to define expectations, ensure adequate direction and monitoring of immigration activities abroad, and provide a complete report on the results.

Your Committee may wish to follow the situation closely. The Department has to take administrative measures immediately. Your Committee could ask the Department to prepare an action plan and then follow its progress.

That concludes my opening statement, Mr. Chairman. We would be pleased to answer the Committee’s questions.