CIMM Committee Report

Supplementary Opinion of the Conservative Members of the Committee

Our members support much of what is in this report, particularly the recommendations related to strengthening sanctions against firms that exploit the temporary foreign worker program and modernising the Labour Market Opinion process.

The Minister of Immigration has already announced that he will be publishing regulations in the coming months to address many of the issues raised by the witnesses during the course of this study.

We do not support many of the recommendations in this report which we believe would undermine the nature of the temporary foreign worker program, create roles for the government which we do not believe that it would fulfill effectively, hinder the ability of reasonable firms to conduct their business, empower an undefined set of groups, or adversely affect the domestic labour market – particularly in a time of global economic uncertainty.

It is our view that there is a place for a temporary program in our immigration system to address our temporary labour needs, and therefore we oppose any move to alter the design of the Temporary Foreign Worker to make it a permanent program in all but name. That would undermine the integrity of the Federal Skilled Worker Program and, thus, our immigration system. As such we respectfully dissent from recommendations 3 and 6.

It is our view that government operates best when it undertakes its specific functions with a high degree of focus; rather than increase the scope of its powers in undefined and limitless ways. We oppose efforts to create an unnecessary advisory board, or to require the government to respond publicly to the comments of every group or individual who chooses to express a view. As such we respectfully dissent from recommendations 2, 7, 19, and the third point of recommendation 11.

We oppose efforts to levy a tax on employers of temporary foreign workers: a tax is a tax, even when it’s mislabeled as a fee. We are not comfortable with establishing disincentives to the use of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program by responsible firms. In fact, we want to encourage responsible firms to make use of this important program. As such we respectfully dissent from recommendation 21.

We are not comfortable with the role for NGOs that this report seeks to establish. We are concerned with putting NGOs in quasi-judicial roles like determining labour law compliance. We are also concerned with the potentially wide definition of the term NGO, and are sceptical of providing such varied groups special status under the law. As such we respectfully dissent from recommendations 22 and 23.

It is our view that the Temporary Foreign Worker program should not be designed to allow the family members of low skilled workers to enter the Canadian labour market without a separate Labour Market Opinion. In rural communities, an influx of individuals with open work permits would drastically distort the local labour market, displacing local youth and Canadian visible minorities from entry level employment positions, essentially pricing them out of the local labour market. As such we respectfully dissent from recommendation 8.

We would also like to note of our scepticism of the magnitude of positive results likely to be obtained from the posting of various informational websites. This seems unlikely to be effective.

In closing we would like to thank the witnesses who appeared before this committee during this study, the committee members from the 39th Parliament, and the committee members from the 40th Parliament, who for the most part worked cooperatively to complete this study and produce this report.

Respectfully Submitted,

Rick Dykstra, M.P.
St. Catharines
Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration