SoVote

Feb/8/24 4:15:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member for Rosemont—La Petite-Patrie is right about one thing. The housing crisis cannot be blamed solely on immigration. No one here is doing that. Perhaps some media outlets are, but I completely disagree with them. The housing crisis is not just due to immigration. It is due to a lot of other things, as I mentioned in my speech. The current economic climate is not conducive to building housing. In recent years, housing was not built at times when there was less immigration. During the pandemic, we were unable to build housing. Even before that, housing was not built. For nearly a decade, we have been behind on our housing construction targets. However, it is important to note that immigration does have an impact on demand. It may not be solely due to immigration, but immigration does affect the demand for housing. Thus, there may be a mild to moderate impact that is related to immigration and that must be considered in our capacity to integrate newcomers.

173 words

Mr. Tom Kmiec (Calgary Shepard, CPC)

Feb/8/24 4:16:09 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to ask a question as a follow-up to the question from my NDP colleague. In fact, the misleading information about how immigrants are partly responsible for Canada's housing problem came from the Liberal Minister of Housing. He said it, not me. For the past two months, we have witnessed two ministers publicly pass the buck by saying that the other is to blame. There is chaos in immigration, and both are accusing each other of bungling their policies. I would like to know the member's opinion on that.

96 words

Ms. Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné

Feb/8/24 4:16:52 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the current federal Liberal government's bickering is nothing new. Ministers passing the buck and playing ping-pong with very important issues is nothing new either. As I mentioned in my previous answer, although immigration may be having a mild to moderate impact on the housing crisis, it is not, I repeat, not the cause of the housing crisis. Many other causes are at play. I encourage the current ministers, both the Minister of Housing and the Minister of Immigration, to reflect and perhaps start listening to the people on the ground, because they are clearly out of touch with what is happening.

105 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 4:17:35 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I have been following the issue of immigration since the early 1990s. I have been very passionate about and have understood many different aspects of immigration over the years, whether at the provincial level or the national level, both when I was in opposition and now while we are in government. I am very passionate about it because I understand and appreciate the true value of immigration and how Canada is what it is today because of sound immigration policy. It would take quite a bit to fool me on some of the things I have been hearing on the immigration file, and I want to quickly make reference to that. One of the concerns I had was about a comment made by the member for Calgary Shepard. He was talking about immigration, and I actually wrote down the quote. Before I continue, I will say that I will be sharing my time with the member for Scarborough Centre. We were debating immigration target numbers and so forth, and the member for Calgary Shepard said, “They bear responsibility for the chaos on our streets today with crime that is out of control.” I do not like whatsoever that the member opposite was trying to imply in any way that immigrants are a problem when it comes to crime and chaos on our streets. That is surely what could be interpreted, based on the manner in which he presented himself. I then take a look at my New Democratic friends. I want to be kind, but it is hard when one gets statements saying something like if someone is an international student, they should become a permanent resident, and, at the same time, saying we should have no cap on international students. To me, that is irresponsible public policy. Just so the member is aware, I can guarantee that, virtually overnight with that sort of policy, we would exceed, and I will be conservative with my number, well over a million international students applying every year. Further, the member from the New Democratic Party said that she would like to see temporary residents in the form of workers also automatically becoming permanent residents. That is the reason I posed the question to the NDP. Does it have any cap whatsoever? If one follows the advice or the comments that were provided, we would probably be taking in at least 1.5 million to 2.5 million residents a year. I do not think that would be a practical number. It is important that we be serious. I will now move to the Bloc. The Bloc brought forward a motion. I will talk about immigration any day of the week, and I asked whether they have done consultation. I know the importance of consultation on this file; as I said, I have been working on the file since the early 1990s. I understand the role and the impact on the Manitoba economy. That is one of the reasons I was a very strong advocate for Jean Chrétien and the provincial nominee program. History will show us that no province in Canada did better than the province of Manitoba in taking advantage of the provincial nominee program. Our immigration numbers grew rapidly as a direct result of a progressive program, at that point instituted by and signed off on by Jean Chrétien and, in my home province, Gary Filmon. Manitoba has benefited; the program has been gold to the province of Manitoba. When one thinks of the provincial nominee program, when one takes a look at the unique nature of immigration into the province of Quebec and when one factors in temporary visas, obviously there is a great deal of discussion that takes place at many different levels, whether it is with ministers, deputy ministers, civil servants and so forth. It takes place all of the time and in different ways. I posed the question to members of the Bloc, and I am of the opinion that they did not do any consultation with the Province of Quebec, in terms of the resolution they are proposing today. Many would ultimately argue that there is a bit of a hidden agenda with the Bloc whenever immigration matters are raised, but that is for another day. When we talk about immigration as a whole, let us take a look at the targets and understand and appreciate the actual numbers. When we think about provinces, they are involved in a direct way. I mentioned the provincial nominee program. Let us take a look at the targets that were provided to the House. In 2024, the targeted number is 110,000; in 2025 it is 120,000, and it is followed again, in 2026, by 120,000. That is a very high percentage that is going toward supporting provinces, and that does not take into consideration the number, which I believe is around 35,000 a year, going into Quebec under the skilled worker type of programming. Let us look at the numbers and at the freedoms the provinces have in terms of recruitment. There is a wonderful opportunity to deal with things such as health care workers and the trades, whether it is the plumbers, electricians or so forth. That program is designed to support them. Members opposite point the finger and say that Ottawa is to blame for this or that. They talk about the issue of housing, but do they not believe that provincial jurisdictions have the capability to understand what is happening in their local economies? If they really want to get more electricians, plumbers and so forth approved, they have an excellent window through the provincial nominee program, because they are the ones that issue the certificates. They should not just try to say that it is immigrants who are to blame, because that is not true. What we find is that through the skilled worker program and the nominee program, it is provinces and territories that are identifying what they believe are the priorities in terms of their economic development. We can look at other numbers. The federal government actually gets fewer than the combined provinces do in terms of skilled workers, but we do process just over 100,000 a year. Then we also have the spouses. There is somewhere in the neighbourhood of 75,000 to 85,000 spouses and partners on an annual basis. Are we going to start saying no? That is a really important aspect of our immigration policy, which the federal government has complete jurisdiction over. We can look at how we have actually managed that file. When I was critic, people were waiting for years and years. We are talking three, four or five years to get a spouse to come over. I used to apply under dual intent, to try to get someone a temporary visa while they were waiting. Do members know how many times I applied and the number that were actually approved when Stephen Harper was the prime minister? It was a big goose egg. Nothing. Since we have been in government, I have been successful. I have talked with immigration officials; I have talked with ministers of immigration; I have explained the situation to caucus, and we have seen significant movement, not only in terms of processing times but also in terms of providing temporary visas for those who are trying to get a spouse here from abroad. I could talk about parents and grandparents. When I was critic, Jason Kenney cancelled the program. He said people could not sponsor their mom and dad. The response I get when I pose that question to the Conservative critic is that they came up with the super visa. Yes, the super visa is a good thing, but they also cancelled the program. They also say, “Well, we wanted to deal with processing times, and we improved processing times.” Sure, they did, because it was so bad under Stephen Harper in terms of sponsoring parents and grandparents that people were dying or actually dead by the time they finally got to them. We do not need a lecture from the Conservative Party on immigration policy. All we have to do is reflect on just how bad the Conservatives were, and that does not include the many different programs in terms of refugees, whether they were from Afghanistan, Syria or Ukraine, or from what is taking place today in the Middle East. We understand, appreciate and value the role that immigration plays in public policy, and we will continue to work every day on that particular file.

1444 words

Mr. Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

Feb/8/24 4:27:50 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I listened carefully to the speech given by the member for Winnipeg North. He said that he is an immigration expert. He has been working in that area for years. He said that he even participated in the process with the Chrétien government at the time, so I would like him to explain something to me. In 2015, the federal government's immigration target was 285,000 people a year. Ten years later, in 2025, it is 500,000. That is a 75% increase. I would like my colleague to tell me whether the government consulted the provinces, particularly Quebec, to determine what impact an 75% increase over 10 years would have on Quebec's ability to integrate these people and help them to learn French. Second, this will have an impact on infrastructure, the education system and the health care system. Was that taken into account? It is not good enough to pick a number out of a hat, thinking it is good ideologically. We need to consider the consequences. What we are saying today is that the government needs to respect the integration capacity. In order for immigration to be successful, we need to be able to properly receive people in suitable, decent conditions.

212 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/8/24 4:29:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, absolutely. It almost goes without saying that all one needs to do is take a look at the provincial nominee program. At one time the program was somewhere in the neighbourhood of 40,000, and now it is well over 100,000. The demand is there. We know that because there are provinces that want to receive more provincial nominees. The provincial nominees have contributed immensely. That is only one aspect. In the provincial nominee program, for example, if a single person later gets married to someone from their home country, their spouse would be able to come in through the spousal program. Of course there has to be coordination taking place. That coordination has been taking place for decades, in some jurisdictions more than others, depending on the province or territory, what its agenda is in regard to immigration and how it ultimately complements the national targets and agenda. All in all, immigration has been a gold mine for Canada and will continue to be well into the future, as Canada needs immigrants more than immigrants need Canada, quite frankly.

183 words

Mr. Adam Chambers (Simcoe North, CPC)

Feb/8/24 4:30:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am not sure if I just heard the member opposite refer to immigrants as a gold mine. One of the other members also referred to immigrants from “puppy mills”. The member opposite made a reference earlier to people dying. Under this government, multiple students a month have been sent home in body bags because they are being invited here without a reasonable prospect of success. By the way, each student visa is stamped by the federal government. It is unfair to those students to invite them to a country and then not provide the support they need to succeed. In fact, it was the Prime Minister, when he was the leader of the third party, who wrote an op-ed that said Harper had broken the immigration system and the temporary foreign worker program. Since he has become the Prime Minister, he has tripled the size of the temporary foreign worker program and blown a hole through the student visa program. That was all under his watch. Now, every single person and every op-ed is saying that there is no longer a consensus on immigration in this country. It has been reckless.

198 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux

Feb/8/24 4:31:34 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the member is wrong on several points. I only wish you would grant me the amount of time that would enable me to provide a complete answer. I would be happy to do that if I had unanimous consent. In terms of international students, there has been great demand. That demand, in good part, has been fuelled by individuals out there courting and getting students to come into Canada, in a very real and tangible way. The Conservative Party of Canada, along with others, needs to recognize that provinces also have to play a role. At the end of the day, how many international students does the Conservative Party believe we should have? We know what the NDP believe. They believe there should be no limit. We believe there has to be a sense of responsibility. We are working with provinces. That is the reason there is a cap. They can distribute the students among the post-secondary facilities and others, so that we can have a reasonable and responsible policy to help the provinces, the territories and, in fact, the international students themselves.

186 words

Students

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/8/24 4:32:46 p.m.
Watch

It is my duty pursuant to Standing Order 38 to inform the House that the questions to be raised tonight at the time of adjournment are as follows: the hon. member for Saanich—Gulf Islands, Natural Resources; the hon. member for Spadina—Fort York, Public Safety; the hon. member for Kitchener Centre, Oil and Gas Industry.

58 words

Adjournment

Mrs. Salma Zahid (Scarborough Centre, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 4:33:51 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House to provide information to the members on how the federal government has supported Quebec, and all our provincial, territorial and municipal partners, as we all work together to support newcomers to Canada. Immigration is a shared responsibility that involves the input of provincial, territorial and municipal governments. We also need to continue to respond to global issues. For example, there are more than 110 million people displaced all around the world. People have been displaced because of wars, coups, and economic and political upheaval. They could also be fleeing oppressive regimes and violations of human rights in other, less progressive countries. We, as Canadians, have an obligation to step up and continue to support individuals. Our government will continue to be responsive and support individuals today and into the future. Canada remains committed to our humanitarian efforts and to supporting those who arrive at our borders needing a new home. Immigration requires all levels of government to work co-operatively to attract new workers in areas such as construction, homebuilding and health care. We are also mindful of the special relationship established for immigration under the Canada–Québec Accord from 1991, which clearly outlines the work that the federal and provincial governments will undertake separately and together. Not only have we made sure to respect the decisions the Province of Quebec will make, but we have also been there as a strong partner. When larger numbers of people began crossing into Canada, the federal government was there to support provinces and municipalities with funding, programs and support. Canada established an interim federal health care program to pay for the health care needs of asylum claimants. The federal government set up transportation and paid for temporary housing for the asylum claimants. As the challenges persisted, we set up a formal program, the interim housing assistance program. That program reimbursed the costs faced by the provinces and municipalities to support newcomers. The first part of the program was launched in 2017, and it ran for five years. A total of $750 million was provided by the federal government to provinces and municipalities to support rehousing asylum claimants. Nearly 60% of that funding went to Quebec. That is $440 million in federal funding to support costs borne by the Province of Quebec. The Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship recently renewed funding for the interim housing assistance program to reimburse provinces and cities for housing costs related to asylum seekers. The amount of $150 million was specifically set aside for Quebec. When a province, territory or municipality needs help from the federal government, we are there to respond. When COVID began, the federal government established temporary housing for asylum seekers to quarantine, even if they were asymptomatic, before they could enter Canada and take up interim housing. At the request of the provincial government, the federal hotel spaces continued to provide hotel rooms after the pandemic measures were lifted to ensure the availability of additional living spaces for communities in need, including in the province of Quebec. Quebec had asked for the federal government to get our agreement with the U.S. government renegotiated so that asylum claimants could no longer cross at Roxham Road. We agreed. In March 2023, President Biden took his first official trip to Canada to announce the renegotiated deal of the safe third country agreement. Under the new agreement, anyone entering a country deemed as safe from persecution had to make a claim to the first country they arrived in. Asylum seekers could no longer take a trip to the U.S. and then travel to Canada to make a claim. Thanks to our continued efforts, the safe third country agreement now applies to the entire land and water border between the United States and Canada. Additionally, the safe third country agreement has significantly reduced asylum claimants at our land entries. The federal government was also there to be a partner for Quebec when the premier said that Quebec was reaching the limit of its capacity to manage new asylum seekers. The federal government worked in co-operation with the other provinces and municipalities to share the burden, as the premier had asked. Starting in early 2023, the federal government supported new arrivals' being willingly relocated to other parts of Canada, including locations in most of the Atlantic provinces and numerous cities across Ontario. The program helped relocate over 11,000 asylum seekers from Quebec to places such as Cornwall, Niagara, Saint John, St. John's, Halifax and Ottawa. Under the accord, since 2015, we have provided $4.4 billion in funding to Quebec to support immigration, settlement services and all the other supports. For 2023-24, over $700 million will be provided to support the provincial government of Quebec in welcoming newcomers. As everyone can see, the federal government has been there as a partner with Quebec and all the other provinces and territories, as well as the municipalities, to support their needs. We have delivered federal support for housing, health care, transportation, relocation, integration and settlement, and also renegotiated a major international agreement with the United States. Canada has a strong tradition of welcoming newcomers in this country. Canadians are proud of their immigration history, as they should be. It has made our country strong and allowed it to grow. It has strengthened our nation by diversifying our communities and fuelling our economy. We will continue to work with partners from all levels of government to support newcomers, whether they are refugees, asylum claimants, family or economic immigrants. We are a country built on immigrants.

942 words

Ms. Lori Idlout

Feb/8/24 4:40:29 p.m.
Watch

Uqaqtittiji, I rise on a point of order in response to the erroneous comment made by the member for Kings—Hants when, in response to my question, he said, “I noticed that she voted against the fall economic statement and the measures that actually contain the housing that was put to Nunavut just recently.” I abstained on the ways and means vote because this government has and continues to fail Inuit and indigenous communities. The housing crisis and all the consequential impacts of overcrowding continues among my territory. For the record, I abstained. I did not vote against as the member indicated. I ask that the member apologize.

111 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/8/24 4:41:20 p.m.
Watch

This is well noted, and I will ask the hon. member to do so at the first opportunity.

18 words

Noted
Ask

Ms. Bonita Zarrillo (Port Moody—Coquitlam, NDP)

Feb/8/24 4:41:32 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I think the point my colleague for Nunavut made is a very important one. It emphasizes the fact that this Liberal government cannot do two things at once. It has not been able to provide the housing required and handle immigration in this country. I think it is a disgrace that a member from across the aisle today made those comments about my colleague for Nunavut. However, I want to ask the member specifically about the government's decision to continue to beef up profits for corporate landlords and then to try to blame the housing crisis on immigrants. Will the government take the necessary measures to stop the financialization of housing, such as implementing a moratorium on the acquisition of affordable housing units by financial landlords and creating a non-profit acquisition fund, such as they have in B.C.?

143 words

Mrs. Salma Zahid

Feb/8/24 4:42:37 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, housing is an important issue, which we are all facing here in Canada, and immigration is one of Canada's greatest strengths. As we continue to face an aging population and see the decline in birth rates, it is very important to welcome newcomers to Canada. At the same time, we need to make sure that we build appropriate housing so that all those who are coming to Canada have a safe place to call home. We will continue to invest in housing and in building housing faster. Over the last few months, the Minister of Housing has been working actively with municipalities on the housing accelerator fund to make sure that we increase the stock of housing. However, one thing cannot resolve the housing issue. There are certain factors. We have a national housing strategy, and we will work on all fronts to make sure that we build housing while we continue to make sure we welcome new immigrants to Canada because we are a country that has been built by immigrants, and we will continue to do that.

182 words

Mr. Mike Morrice (Kitchener Centre, GP)

Feb/8/24 4:43:54 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, an NDP amendment to the motion was put forward today that I want to read a part of. It looks to add the following to the motion: e) call on the government to table in the House, within 100 days, a plan to ensure adequate resources are provided to Quebec, Provinces and Territories to support the successful resettlement of newcomers. This exactly reflects what I have heard from settlement agencies in my community. They are calling to ensure that, whether it comes to housing, health care or employment, those resources are there for newcomers, as they require them when they come to Canada. If this is not put in place, then our immigration goals will actually counterproductively feed anti-immigration sentiment. I wonder if the member for Scarborough Centre could comment on the extent to which she supports that part of the amendment to the motion.

148 words

Mrs. Salma Zahid

Feb/8/24 4:44:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we consult the Government of Quebec and all the provinces and territories whenever we implement any new programs and policies. Under the Canada-Québec Accord, Quebec has the exclusive authority to determine its immigration levels in line with its ability to welcome and integrate newcomers. We continue to support Quebec. In the last two years, we have provided over $1 billion under that accord to support—

71 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Feb/8/24 4:45:34 p.m.
Watch

I need to give the opportunity for one more question. The hon. member for Nepean.

15 words

Mr. Chandra Arya (Nepean, Lib.)

Feb/8/24 4:45:39 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am sure the hon. member understands the importance of immigrants for the economic development of Canada, whether it is in the housing sector, the manufacturing sector or the tourism sector. I would like to ask her whether she recognizes the need for more skilled immigrants in the country for Canada to keep up its economic growth and improve the growth of the economy?

66 words

Mrs. Salma Zahid

Feb/8/24 4:46:17 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, immigration is very much needed. My own riding of Scarborough Centre is home to so many new immigrants. People from different parts of the world have called that place home. Whenever I talk to the businesses in my riding, they tell me about the shortages of labour. I have been a member of the immigration committee for over eight years, and I have heard hundreds of testimonies regarding the need for making sure we continue to welcome new immigrants.

81 words

Mr. Xavier Barsalou-Duval (Pierre-Boucher—Les Patriotes—Verchères, BQ)

Feb/8/24 4:47:02 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I wish to inform the House in advance that I will be sharing my time with the member for Berthier—Maskinongé. The Bloc Québécois has decided to devote today's opposition day to the issue of immigration. I will give a bit of background to explain why, but basically, on November 1, 2023, so last year, the Bloc Québécois decided to devote its opposition day to immigration. We unanimously passed a resolution calling on the federal government to review its immigration targets for 2024, after consulting Quebec, and the provinces and territories, to verify their integration capacities in terms of housing, health, education, francization and transportation infrastructures. The aim was obviously to ensure successful immigration. Today, we remember this vote because despite the fact that the vote of November 1 was unanimous, less than an hour later, the Minister of Immigration left the House to announce new immigration thresholds of 500,000 new immigrants, without consulting Quebec. It would be hard to believe that he could have held a proper consultation in less than an hour before announcing these new thresholds. In fact, this borders on perjury after voting with everyone in favour of our motion. We are back at it today because there is currently a fundamental problem in the Quebec nation, but also in Canada: our integration capacity has been exceeded in housing, health care, education and francization structures. At some point, this no longer works. We are calling on the government to sit down with the different provinces and territories and ask them for their respective integration capacities. Once the government has their integration capacities, it will have to provide a revised plan for its measures within 100 days to have the 2024 immigration plan truly correspond to the integration capacities of each. The much-touted target of 500,000 immigrants that the minister mentioned is essentially what the century initiative policy is all about. This policy was put forward by Dominic Barton who was, at that time, head of both the consulting firm McKinsey and the Canadian finance minister's advisory council on economic growth. The initiative's goal was for Canada to reach a population of 100 million by 2100. At the rate the Liberals are going, we will reach that goal much sooner. There is this vision that Canada is going to become a bigger country with a large population. Therefore, we need to bring in as many people as possible to grow the economy, with more people and more demand. They are right about the demand; there is indeed more of it. When the Bloc Québécois devoted an opposition day to the Century Initiative on May 11, 2023, and said that it did not reflect Quebeckers, the Liberals replied that it was not their policy. However, when you look at their actions, that is exactly their policy and that is exactly the direction they are taking as a government. In fact, it is a bit like someone going to see their doctor and saying, hand on heart, that they no longer smoke, that they have quit and are done with cigarettes, when all the while they are smoking a pack a day in secret. That is more or less it. Basically, the Liberals are saying that it is not their policy, but in reality, that is what they are doing as a policy. Why do we oppose the Century Initiative, the Liberals' secret policy? It might be interesting for people who may be watching us to understand that it is simply because Quebec's current capacity to integrate immigrants has been exceeded. We are in the middle of a housing and inflation crisis, and our schools, day cares and hospitals are overflowing. The pool is overflowing, but the Liberals want to put more water in it. Canada is truly delusional in its ideology, which obviously comes from the Liberal Party. Their vision of the world is one of massive, uncontrolled immigration, and there are absolutely no facts or data that could stop them from moving in that direction. I might try to illustrate this for the people watching our debates. These 100 million people, this direction Canada wants to take and this famous Century Initiative, are they really the cure-all? Will Canada automatically become twice as rich or much richer just because it has a population of 100 million? What are the famous countries that have at least 100 million people on the planet? Among those that have a population of more than 100 million we have China, India, the United States, Indonesia, Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Russia, Mexico, Ethiopia, Japan, the Philippines, Egypt, Vietnam and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Anyone who knows the financial reality or the GDP per capita of these countries will never claim that they will become fabulously rich. In fact, when we look at the GDP per capita of these countries according to the World Bank, we see the following numbers: China, $21,500; India, $8,400; Indonesia, $14,600; Pakistan, $6,400; Brazil, $34,000; Nigeria, $5,800; Bangladesh, $7,400; Russia, $36,600; Mexico, $21,500; Ethiopia, $2,800; Japan, $45,500; the Philippines, $10,000; Egypt, $15,100; Vietnam, $13,400; and the Democratic Republic of Congo, $1,300. We are talking about GDP per capita: in the Democratic Republic of Congo, people live on $1,300. Almost all of the countries that I named, except the the United States, are poorer than we are in terms of GDP per capita. Is having a population of 100 million really an automatic cure-all? I think that the numbers are clear and that the answer is no. We are not going to become wealthier by bringing in more people. We need to bring them in the right way, in the right circumstances. We need to have the infrastructure to support this population increase. Like everyone else, immigrants need to eat and so they go to the grocery store. They need a place to live so they look for a house or an apartment. They need care when they get sick and so they go to the hospital. They need schools and day cares for their children. Every time we add a person, we put more pressure on those services. There comes a time when everything reaches a breaking point, but that is not the villainous immigrant's fault. If everything is reaching a breaking point, that is the fault of the person who let that immigrant in. They knew full well that everything had reached the breaking point. This notorious person—or, in this case, group of people—is the government in power, sitting there on the other side of the House, the Liberal Party. Bringing in people who will not have a roof over their heads and who are going to have to go to food banks to feed themselves is not having a vision for society, at all. In fact, it is deeply irresponsible. I will continue by sharing a few numbers. In 2007, there were 47,000 temporary immigrants in Quebec. Today, there are 470,000, an explosive increase. In Canada, there are 2.5 million temporary immigrants. In 2023, the Canadian population grew by more than 1 million people. However, while the population increased by 1 million, barely 150,000 housing units were built. Clearly, 150,000 housing units for 1 million people is not going to work. People do not need a Ph.D. in mathematics to understand that this does not work. In Quebec, there are about 200,000 new people for approximately 40,000 new homes. That does not work either, and, no matter how hard we try, it is impossible to come to the conclusion that it does work. Yes, we need to increase the number of housing units being constructed, but members will understand that it is impossible to maintain the thresholds that would mean taking in the same number of people that we did last year. The current policy is unsustainable. That is why Premier Legault, from the Quebec government, wrote to the federal government not long ago to let it know that there is a problem. At the beginning of the school year last year, there was a shortage of 8,500 teachers in Quebec schools. We had to run 1,150 new emergency classes to receive new students, integration classes for people who are new to the country. That is the equivalent of 50 elementary schools. That is a lot of people, and it obviously puts a strain on our system. When the Bloc Québécois talks about immigration, the Liberals and some of the other parties like to say that we are talking about immigration because we do not like immigrants. That must be true; I dislike immigrants so much that I am having children with one. My wife is an immigrant. My two daughters are actually immigrant girls, because I had two daughters with my wife, who is an immigrant. The truth is that I am always very happy to learn about the stories of people who arrive here after having travelled all over the world to come and meet us and discover our nation. As a member of Parliament, I organize receptions to welcome these newcomers who are settling here. People who come here need to be properly welcomed in French, but unfortunately, that is not what Canada offers them.

1594 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 278