“We are focusing on bringing in skilled trades workers like carpenters, plumbers, and machinists. I have met with union leaders across the country, and we are working with them.”

“Mr. Chair, we continue to prioritize trades workers, as I said, such as carpenters, plumbers and machinists. I have personally met with union leaders right here in the House of Commons building, and also in provinces that I have actually visited. We continue to work with them, and we will ensure that our—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 25 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Our plan is working. We have reduced the number of temporary workers and made the rules stricter. We will keep checking on them.”

“Mr. Chair, as I have indicated, we have a plan. The plan is working. There has been a considerable reduction in the number of temporary workers. We have tightened integrity measures. We will continue to look at those. There are members of Parliament from the opposition who are advocating—”

“Canada protects temporary foreign workers under the same job rules as everyone else. Both workers and businesses must follow strict rules, and our departments work together to run the immigration system responsibly.”

“Mr. Chair, there is worker compliance protection in Canada. Temporary foreign workers have the same employment standards, but there are also rules they have to follow. Businesses also must adhere to strict conditions. These are managed not just by IRCC but also by the employment and workforce department. We work across government to ensure that we manage our immigration system accordingly, appropriately, responsibly and efficiently.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 47 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Employers who bring in temporary foreign workers must follow strict rules. They have to prove they tried hard to hire Canadian workers first.”

“Mr. Chair, employers bringing in people under the temporary foreign worker program have strict requirements they have to comply with. They have to show that they have taken considerable measures to find Canadian workers. The ministry of employment and workforce—”

“We have strict rules for employers who hire temporary foreign workers. This program is only meant to be temporary, but it helps fill jobs when there are no Canadians to do them.”

“Mr. Chair, we have implemented strict requirements for all employers, which they have to adhere to. The temporary foreign worker program is meant to be exactly that: temporary. However, it is also to ensure that we fill those labour gaps that Canadians cannot fill.”

• Answered
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 100 of 100

  Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

  See full analysis →

“Our immigration system must balance order with compassion. We are helping 115,000 protected people who face danger back home stay here as permanent residents. I want the minister to explain how the budget will keep supporting refugees while keeping Canadians' trust.”

“Mr. Chair, I rise today to speak about Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s 2026-27 main estimates as a member of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Canadians have asked us to bring balance to the immigration system while upholding the values of compassion and respect. To that effect, our committee has examined several important themes this parliamentary session. We have heard from government officials on the concrete progress they have made to bring balance and transparency to our immigration system and from frontline workers across our beautiful country about the unique regional challenges they are facing. We have heard from academics about ways to improve our immigration system and from deeply vulnerable communities that have come to Canada seeking safety and protection. We are living through a period of significant global change and, dare I say, turmoil. Presently, 120 million people are displaced from their homes because of climate change, conflict and persecution. Canada has a strong and proud humanitarian tradition. This reflects our values and our international obligations. We believe that everyone in need of protection deserves to be treated with dignity and respect. They deserve a chance to rebuild their lives. They deserve a chance to work, to study and to contribute to the Canadian family while here. In line with our latest humanitarian commitments regarding protected persons, we have announced a new initiative aimed at facilitating the transition to permanent residence. This initiative affects approximately 115,000 protected persons in Canada. These are particularly vulnerable individuals who have been recognized as needing protection. They have met very strict legal criteria. They cannot return to their countries of origin. If they were to return, it would mean persecution and a potential threat to their lives. These people are already contributing to communities across Canada. They are becoming neighbours, workers, students, volunteers, business leaders and members of the community—our community. They are helping to build the country we share. This initiative involving protected persons is also a matter of compassion. Many constituents in my riding, Pierrefonds—Dollard, have told me of the pain caused by family separation and the difficulty of reuniting with their loved ones. This measure will help to remedy these difficult situations. It is a good example of the necessary balance between compassion and the system’s capacity. We are restoring order to the system while continuing to protect those who need it most. We have seen in the last years how quickly humanitarian situations can evolve or devolve. We have been responding to a range of international crises and displacement situations; however, behind every crisis are countless human stories. Take the case of Sudan. The humanitarian crisis in Sudan is the largest crisis in the world, with an estimated 13.6 million people uprooted by fighting and extreme violence. Community advocates have testified at the immigration committee about the Sudan family reunification program. Sudanese Canadians have sought to bring their family members to safety. They have also worked closely with IRCC and the international crisis response team to help restart biometric collection in Sudan, in partnership with the International Organization for Migration, the IOM. This is an example of what collaboration between government and advocates can achieve. Take the crisis in Gaza. It continues to be a nightmare, with staggering humanitarian needs. Palestinian Canadians who have loved ones in Gaza continue to endure heartache while trying to bring their family members to safety. Those who have found safety in Canada are deeply grateful. They have started to rebuild their lives but are still worrying about loved ones they have left behind. Canada’s humanitarian tradition is built on partnerships. We do not go at it alone; we rely on international partners, such as UNHCR and others, to help identify people in need of protection. One such example is the partnership in the special immigration program of motion M-62. It was created to resettle vulnerable Uyghur refugees here in Canada. The Uyghur people are facing mass arbitrary detention, forced separation of children from their parents, forced sterilization and forced labour. At the immigration committee, we have heard from officials about the progress made through the resettlement program. Advocates have also testified about the value of the program and the need for it to continue at an increased scale. I have met with vulnerable people who are Uyghur, Palestinian, Rohingya or Ukrainian, and many others, people who have been welcomed here to Canada with open hearts and compassion. They are deeply grateful to all Canadians for providing them with refuge and safety. Their stories are human stories that remind us about our best selves, of our duty to protect people in need and of what it means to be Canadian and to be a humanitarian. In our immigration system, we work in partnership with the provinces and territories, municipalities and local communities. This collaboration is essential to welcoming newcomers. We rely on settlement organizations that provide essential integration services, including language training, employment assistance and housing supports. We also rely on civil society organizations and volunteers. They help make Canada’s humanitarian tradition a daily reality for everyone. This collective effort is one of our strengths as Canadians. It is also important to remember the positive contributions made by newcomers to our communities. Immigrants contribute to our economy and help address labour shortages. They set up businesses. They build homes. They care for our sick and elderly. They also enrich our communities through their diverse backgrounds. Every generation of Canadians has been shaped by people from other places. These are people who arrived here with little to their names, people who worked hard to build a better life for their families. This story continues today. It continues in Pierrefonds—Dollard and across the country. Our government is committed to continuing to build an immigration system that is fair, sustainable and true to Canadian values. I thank the minister for being here today; for responding to the questions of all members, from both the governing party and the opposition parties, with respect to our immigration system; and for taking the time to provide thorough and accurate answers. With that, I will ask my own question. Can the Minister of Immigration share with us how these main estimates will continue to support our refugee and humanitarian immigration system while making sure that it reflects our values as Canadians, respects our international obligations and inspires confidence among Canadians for years to come?”

“I want the House to approve this spending plan. It funds our immigration and refugee system so we can protect people fleeing danger, while making sure we have the resources to help them settle here successfully.”

“Mr. Chair, I actually have a lot to say to respond to this particular member, the member for Pierrefonds—Dollard, because he has been a tremendous advocate and has worked very hard for the people in his community but also for vulnerable communities throughout. He has been a real champion on humanitarian issues. What really struck me is that he brought his youth council into his office when they visited Ottawa, and they stopped in at my office. They were incredibly thoughtful and engaged young people. Through them, I got to see the real work this member is doing in his community, as well as what I have seen since being here, since 2021. Canada has long been recognized as a country that offers protection to people fleeing conflict, persecution and instability. This tradition remains an important part of who we are. Canadians also expect humanitarian commitments to be delivered through a system that is fair, sustainable and responsibly managed. That is exactly what the 2026-27 main estimates will help to do. I said earlier, and the fact is, that around the world, displacement is increasing. Humanitarian crises are becoming more frequent and more complex, and immigration systems globally are under growing pressure. Canada cannot respond to every crisis in the same way, but we can ensure that our response is principled, coordinated and aligned with our capacity to support people properly once they arrive. That means balancing compassion with responsible planning. The main estimates support the people, partnerships and operational tools needed to maintain that balance. They include support for protected persons already in Canada who are transitioning to permanent residence. These individuals have already been recognized as needing Canada’s protection. The estimates also reflect an important principle: Humanitarian protection is not only about offering safety in a moment of crisis; it is about helping people build their lives for the long term. That requires more than immigration pathways alone. It requires coordination, as I said earlier, with provinces and territories, municipalities, settlement organizations and community partners to help newcomers integrate successfully. It requires a lot of work. That is why our government continues to focus on building a controlled and sustainable system, a system that allows Canada to continue to offer protection over time while maintaining public confidence. Recent years have shown how quickly global crises can emerge and evolve. Canada has responded to a number of international displacement situations, each requiring a different set of tools and different operational responses. Those experiences have reinforced the importance of preparation and coordination. That is why IRCC has strengthened its crisis response framework, which helps guide how the department assesses emerging international crises and determines whether immigration measures may be part of Canada’s response. It also helps ensure that decisions are thoughtful, consistent and sustainable. It considers humanitarian need alongside operational capacity, settlement supports, available space within the immigration levels plan and the ability of communities to support newcomers successfully. That matters because humanitarian responses cannot rely on improvising alone. They must be credible, they must be coordinated, and they must be built to endure. Canada’s humanitarian tradition has always depended on partnerships. We rely on these groups, as I said earlier, and together with those partnerships, it allows Canada to remain a country that offers safety and stability to vulnerable people while maintaining confidence in the integrity of the system itself. The 2026-27 main estimates support that work. They support a refugee and humanitarian system that reflects Canadian values while recognizing the importance of responsible management, sustainability and long-term success. Canada will always continue to protect people in need. We will continue building an immigration system capable of upholding those commitments fairly, responsibly and sustainably into the future.”

“I thank the minister for coming here and answering our questions fully.”

“Mr. Chair, I just want to thank the minister again for taking the time to be here and responding to the questions in a very fulsome manner.”

“I thank the members here tonight and anyone watching this late.”

“Mr. Chair, I want to thank my colleague again. I also thank all members who are spending their time here this evening. Just looking at my watch, I see it is maybe 10 o’clock Nova Scotia time, so I thank anybody who is watching this for being up—”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 0 of 100

  Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

  See full analysis →

“Our government listed the IRGC as a terrorist group and banned its members from Canada.”

“Mr. Chair, the Liberal government has recognized and registered the IRGC as a terrorist organization, and it is inadmissible to Canada.”

“Members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard cannot enter Canada. That ban has been in place for a long time, and we are still enforcing it.”

“Mr. Chair, as I said, IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada. There is a long-standing ban, and that ban continues to be enforced.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Our main goal is to keep Canadians safe. Officials from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps are not allowed to enter Canada.”

“Mr. Chair, our priority is the safety and security of Canadians, and IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Our officials check every application carefully. Members of Iran's Revolutionary Guard are not allowed into Canada.”

“Mr. Chair, the IRCC and Public Safety Canada review each and every application at multiple stages. As I have said, IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Keeping Canadians safe is our top priority. We work with border agents, police, and security officials to protect people.”

“Mr. Chair, the safety and security of Canadians is our priority. We work with CBSA, policing partners, the public safety minister and others to ensure we protect Canadians.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Echo ×5

  A repeated line

  “Ensuring the safety and security of Canadians is our top priority.”

  Said 5 times by 2 members since April 30.

  Every time it was said →

“Iranian Revolutionary Guard officials are not allowed into Canada. We have reviewed 17,800 applications to stop them, and we have cancelled 239 visas.”

“Mr. Chair, I will repeat again that IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada. There have been 17,800 applications reviewed for potential inadmissibility, and 239 visas have been cancelled by the IRCC.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Officials from Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps are banned from entering Canada. Our border agency has opened 176 investigations into them.”

“Mr. Chair, IRGC officials are inadmissible to Canada. There is a ban in place. It continues to be there. There are 176 investigations that have been opened by the CBSA.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →
• Echo ×4

  A repeated line

  “IRGC members are inadmissible to Canada.”

  Said 4 times by 2 members since April 30.

  Every time it was said →

“Some travellers are never allowed to travel to Canada, some have their travel permission cancelled, and others are sent back from airports.”

“Mr. Chair, when it comes to inadmissibility, some travellers are never issued permission to travel. Some travellers have their authority revoked before they travel. Other travellers are deported from airports. There are multiple—”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“Some people linked to the regime were already in Canada before the new rules. We are investigating all of them, and they could be kicked out of the country.”

“Mr. Chair, it is important to know that some people with ties to the regime had already been in Canada before these rules took place. Those people are all being investigated and could be removed from Canada.”

“We reviewed 17,800 applications to see if people should be barred from coming to Canada. We cancelled or suspended 239 visas, and border services are still investigating 176 cases.”

“Mr. Chair, as I said, 17,800 applications have been reviewed for potential inadmissibility. The IRCC suspended or cancelled 239 visas, and 176 investigations are ongoing with the CBSA.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 49 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →

“I have already answered this question many times.”

“Mr. Chair, I have answered the question a number of times. The member may not like the response, but I have already provided those answers.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 0 of 100

  None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

  See full analysis →