Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Senator Gold, I have a question for you, and it is about immigration. A study by the Desjardins group has determined that planned large-scale immigration — planned by the government; I support it; you know that — will lead to higher real GDP growth at the national level and in all Canadian provinces. At the same time, the impact on per capita real GDP growth is more mixed, depending on where immigrants settle and possibly how quickly they are able to use their education and qualifications in the employment market. However, there is a real knock-on effect on housing. The current supply of housing is insufficient. This will lead to increased pressure in housing prices, and the impact will be felt across the country.

Senator Gold, my question to you is this: What is the government planning to do to increase the housing supply in Canada for Canadians and immigrants?

Senator Omidvar: Thank you for that answer, Senator Gold. The report by Desjardins also points to a solution, and that is the dispersion of immigrants to all parts of our country, not just the hot spots of B.C. and Ontario, in particular, to the Prairie provinces. They note that this would decrease the pressure on housing prices and housing affordability in certain parts of Canada and provide a substantive offset to the impact of higher immigration on home prices.

Can you help us understand the government’s current plan with the current immigration numbers for better distribution of immigrants across the country? Thank you, Senator Gold.

Senator Omidvar: Thank you for your answer, Senator Gold. I think it is inevitable to expect that some members of this community will look to Canada for refuge, and I’m wondering if the Government of Canada will consider a special refugee program that goes beyond the existing numbers of the current immigration plan. Otherwise, we’re just shuffling one lot of refugees with another lot of refugees. Will the Government of Canada consider a special program that goes beyond the 400,000 cap?

Senator Omidvar: Thank you for your answer, Senator Gold. I think it is inevitable to expect that some members of this community will look to Canada for refuge, and I’m wondering if the Government of Canada will consider a special refugee program that goes beyond the existing numbers of the current immigration plan. Otherwise, we’re just shuffling one lot of refugees with another lot of refugees. Will the Government of Canada consider a special program that goes beyond the 400,000 cap?

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I rise today to speak on Bill C-242, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, specifically on temporary resident visas for parents and grandparents. I am officially the critic of this bill, and the dictionary defines a “critic” as someone who finds fault with the substance, disagrees with it or has an unfavourable opinion of it. If that is the case, colleagues, I stand before you as a complete imposter because, in truth, there is very little in this bill that is not to like. I would like to congratulate MP Kyle Seeback and Senator Victor Oh for bringing this bill to our attention.

This bill is very personal to me, as it is to many immigrants and aspiring immigrants. Five short years after I arrived in Canada, I sponsored my parents to come and join me as we were building a new life. You have heard me say often in this chamber that I am only a senator today because my mother stayed behind to look after the children and the home while I worked long hours, evenings and weekends.

My application to sponsor my parents on a permanent basis was approved in six short months. Now, of course, that is a pipe dream, and we have had to find new pathways, new innovations and alternative routes to hold families together.

While I did not agree with many of the immigration policies of Prime Minister Harper, I must say that the expedited pathway for parents and grandparents through super visas was, frankly, a super innovation. It recognized that many parents and grandparents want a secure yet nimble pathway for extended stays without necessarily wanting to move permanently to Canada. They have lives of their own in their countries, they have homes and I know that many dread our winters. This is not to say that there are not others who want to live permanently in Canada, and I will remark on this cohort a little later in my remarks.

This bill is an expression of our larger ambitions for what I would say is a bigger, bolder Canada. We know that roughly one quarter of Canada’s population is or has been a landed immigrant or permanent resident in the past. Recently, the government announced its ambition to bring in 500,000 immigrants. Further, a recent poll by Environics underlines that 7 in 10 Canadians support these immigration measures. I personally believe that more immigration — done right — is good for Canada, it’s good for immigrants and it’s good for all of us. This bill on parents and grandparents moves us in that direction for a simple reason.

Honourable senators, I believe that Canada has a competitive edge over other countries because of our stance on parents and grandparents. We know that there are backlogs in every business stream in the system. We know that there are challenges in integration, and yet immigrants are not turning their backs on Canada. In fact, the queue to get in is getting longer and longer. You may well ask why. Well, there are a number of really important reasons. First, we are a safe and secure country. Second, we have an excellent public education system and a public health system, which may be under stress at this point. As a final touch, it is our capacity to welcome parents and grandparents. This final bit is our secret sauce. This sets us apart from other countries. It is our jewel in the crown.

Yet, family reunification has had a very bumpy ride in the last 10 years. The demand has grown. The numbers for permanent family reunification of parents and grandparents are limited to 20,000 a year, and are scooped up in a nanosecond. Because this is an online application, I always worry about those who are able to fill out the application in a nanosecond and those who are left outside. The government has resorted to different strategies to try and manage the waiting time, including instituting a lottery system at one point, which in my view is an abrogation of their management responsibility.

Bill C-242 takes an important step to facilitate longer-term visas outside the permanent stream of parents and grandparents. It improves the off-ramp that we have created. It allows the parent or grandparent to apply for a temporary resident visa for a longer period of time — not 2 years out of 10, but 5 years out of 10. That doesn’t mean they’re going to stay here for five years. It means that they can come and go as they wish. It allows them to purchase health insurance from a company that is not located in Canada. Many of these parents and grandparents have insurance companies of their own. Like in Canada, they must buy car insurance, life insurance — all kinds of insurance. They have a relationship with these insurance companies, and it is likely that they will get better rates and better approvals with the companies that they are associated with.

This bill allows for international companies to provide health insurance to applicants of the super visa stream with a proviso. The proviso is that the minister has to approve their name. There has to be a list. This will likely be done by ministerial instructions, and I think this is a question that the committee that this bill is assigned to should reflect on carefully.

On the matter of cost, buying insurance from a Canadian company, depending on your age, can be anywhere from $2,000 to $5,000. Consider the cost of flights, medical checks and insurance — you’re looking at possibly close to $10,000 every two years in the current system. For many middle-class parents and grandparents, this could be a deterrent, and one I believe this bill seeks to remove.

The bill also has an extremely interesting nugget. The summary of the bill reads as follows:

It also requires the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration to prepare and table a report in respect of a reduction to the minimum income requirement that the child or grandchild must meet in order for the visiting parent or grandparent to be able to enter and remain in Canada for an extended period.

I support this measure. Studies have shown that the financial requirements for family sponsorship — either permanent or temporary — are onerous. New Canadian families are getting their lives started. We know the hurdles they face in obtaining employment. I believe it is precisely at the time when they are low-income that they most need their families with them so they can be helped — in the same way that my parents helped me.

This bill calls for the minister to table a report within one year of Royal Assent so that we can find a fact-based, reasonable way forward.

Honourable senators, I do have three comments, if I may put it that way: The first is outside the scope of this bill, but is worth your consideration.

There is a permanent stream of parent and grandparent immigration. It, too, is dependent on income level. Since we have this off-ramp that is largely designed for middle-income, middle‑class parents of immigrants outside of Canada, I believe the permanent stream should be privileged and prioritized for low‑income parents.

The second is that no Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, or IRCC, official has ever been able to tell me the breakdown between how many parents versus grandparents enter in the permanent or the temporary stream. That information is important because there are too many myths surrounding this.

The third — and this is important for the committee to consider — is that this bill does not provide for any appeals for rejected temporary visas for parents and grandparents.

Finally, on a happy note, I should say that this bill was roundly supported in the other place. In an era of hyper-partisanship, I’m happy to see that there are moments when all parties agree — and agree on fixes to immigration, which we know can be a divisive issue. It is heartening that there is growing political consensus that immigration — when done right — is not only good for Canada, but integral to our future prosperity. Thank you, colleagues.

Hon. Ratna Omidvar: Honourable senators, I rise to speak very briefly on Bill S-8, An Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, to make consequential amendments to other Acts and to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations. I was unable to lend my support to this bill at second reading, and therefore I am taking a bit of your time today to do so.

I will not repeat the essential features of the bill. You have heard them from the sponsor, Senator Harder, and from others.

In a nutshell, this bill aligns our aspirations in the sanctions regime with appropriate legislation in Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada to ensure that individuals who are sanctioned for various reasons under either the Special Economic Measures Act or the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act are not inadvertently admitted into Canada.

The right hand must know what the left hand is doing, and this is what the bill seeks to ensure.

I think of this as a bit of a cleanup bill, but a bill that is nevertheless urgent in that we must make sure that we are clapping with both hands.

These amendments are essential. For one, the horrifying context in Ukraine — cities and communities decimated, thousands dead, brutal carnage which has been left behind by the invaders, mass graves, people with hands tied behind their back, torture, rape, et cetera.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has displaced close to 7 million people who have fled to Poland, Romania, Moldova, Hungary, Slovakia and also into Canada. Unfortunately, as this conflict sees no end, I fear that more will be displaced.

We also know that Russia is forcing tens of thousands of Ukrainians into camps in Russia. An estimated 200,000 children are among the people who have been removed from Ukraine into Russia. Russia has, in essence, kidnapped them.

This is all horrifying, but if there is one tiny sliver of a silver lining, then it is the alignment of like-minded nation states to come together on sanctioning Russians in different ways.

An example is, of course, the swift and severe sanctions that have been imposed on Russia at SWIFT, and others, too, have been implemented. I am pleased that the government, through this bill and through other proposed changes in the budget implementation act on the repurposing and confiscation of frozen assets, is now taking a more expansive measure to approach our sanction regimes. Both measures will further strengthen Canada’s commitment to holding foreign corrupt leaders, henchmen and entities to account for committing human rights abuses and grave breaches of peace and security.

No one sanction regime imposed by any one jurisdiction can be as effective as when we collaborate and coordinate our responses with other like-minded jurisdictions. But in the least, we need to ensure internal coordination and alignment.

As the sponsor has pointed out, the application of this bill is broader than simply that to Russia and Belarus. It will apply, and can apply, to other sanctioned individuals and entities from places like Iran, Myanmar, South Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Zimbabwe and North Korea.

This bill makes sense in other ways as well. First of all, on the basic point, we don’t want sanctioned individuals coming to Canada. We don’t want their money and we do not want their presence, and Canada should in no way be a temporary or a permanent safe haven for them.

Second, it makes sense to align the Special Economic Measures Act with the Sergei Magnitsky Law. Magnitsky already has inadmissibility grounds for individuals that have committed grave human rights violations, torture and grand corruption. Having sanction regimes that are consistent from one to the other also makes good sense.

Finally, we know that sanctions applied by Canada and by others are having some effect. We know and we have read that there are a few Russian oligarchs who are already speaking out, and we need to tighten the noose every which way we can.

In conclusion, colleagues, for far too long corrupt, brutal and criminal foreign officials and entities have acted with impunity. The government needs more tools to hold brutal leaders to account, and Bill S-8 provides another way to do so. Calling them out is not enough. Sanctioning them is not enough. We must ensure that they never set foot in Canada because I think we all know that once you are in Canada it is extremely difficult to remove an individual.

I will borrow a line from Senator Woo’s speech on Bill S-6 when he urged us to send that bill to the other house. I will urge you to do the same by adding a yellow sticky note and marking it, “super urgent.” Thank you, honourable senators.