Thank you, Madam Chair.
It's always an honour and a pleasure to be here. Knowing time is short, I trust I won't use my entire six minutes.
This system is exciting in terms of potential. The creation of pools of applicants was a dream 10 to 15 years ago. Some improvements can be made at this stage, and I'll get to them, but in principle, an employer-driven, flexible selection system will work for Canada strategically in the long run. It may well be a model for other countries to adopt.
There are some technical issues that we should be aware of. First, I think we should seriously contemplate an upgrade within Canada. We need an explicit, regulatory umbilical cord to HRSDC to make this work properly.
The current information-sharing agreements between HRSDC and CIC are inadequate for the expression of interest program. An explicit statement allowing information sharing between HRSDC and CIC will facilitate implementation.
Along the same line, a limited information-sharing exchange with the Canada Revenue Agency is needed. Why burden Canadian employers with paperwork regarding their financial capability to hire someone when we already have a corporate tax return that can illustrate the health of the business?
Financial statements will require highly experienced, expensive public servants to make this determination. Do we really have to go there?
The last information exchange upgrade would be international. We ought to seriously contemplate an explicit regulatory information-sharing arrangement with our sister countries, such as New Zealand and Australia. Why not build a global pool of talent?
If Canada has a supply of skills, we have learned on the free trade side that free trade builds economies. The same principle applies equally to the free trade of skills internationally.
I will end my opening remarks.
In my view, there is a fundamental weakness in the design of the expression of interest system. I have an issue in that I'm challenged by the preamble of our Constitution that reflects fundamental Canadian values. The preamble of the charter makes reference to the rule of law.
The traditional Canadian oversight of our immigration system has taken a back seat to the expression of interest system, because, let's face it, we are creating a “wizard's curtain” around the selection of immigrants. People unseen, and frankly unaccountable, will make the selection of one out of every five immigrants coming to this country. It is a step back in time, decades, where discretion that's not supervised will select immigrants to this country. It is a marked step backwards from the 1976 objective point system where you knew in advance whether you were in or out, based on your skills.
Having said that, I'm okay with moving forward with an expression of interest system as long as we have our traditional Canadian safeguards and do it cost-effectively.
I would recommend independent oversight by a kind of data ombudsperson who would by regulation be allowed to access every facet of the expression of interest system, including real-time access to management reports. This would ensure that selection rules are applied fairly and consistently. Reporting on proposed systemic modifications to the standing committee should be done semi-annually. This might well address the criticisms directed at the expression of interest system by others who may appear before you. It's something that would protect the Canadian public and counterbalance the power of public servants.
Thank you.