“We are following our agreement with Quebec. We are working closely with the province and its immigration minister.”

“Mr. Chair, I very much appreciate that question. Absolutely, we are honouring the accord. Absolutely, we are working very hard with the Province of Quebec and its immigration minister.”

“I did not hear the whole question. But we are working with Quebec to protect its interests.”

“Mr. Chair, unfortunately, I did not quite hear the question. However, I can tell the member that we are working with the province of Quebec and with the members of the House who represent Quebec to maintain—”

• 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 →

“This issue is the responsibility of the provinces. Even so, the federal government is working closely with Quebec on it.”

“Mr. Chair, this matter falls under provincial jurisdiction. At the federal level, as I said, we are working closely with the Province of Quebec, with the Quebec minister, and with the members here.”

• Didn't answer
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Relevance 48 of 100

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

  See full analysis →
• Vague
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Clarity 47 of 100

  Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

  See full analysis →

“Our agreement with Quebec lets the province choose all of its own immigrants. We respect that.”

“Mr. Chair, the Canada-Quebec accord addresses these issues. As Minister of Immigration, I believe the agreement allows Quebec to select all of its immigrants, and we respect that.”

• 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 →

“We recognize Quebec's work to welcome asylum seekers. We have cut the number of asylum seekers by 71 percent.”

“Mr. Chair, first of all, we recognize Quebec’s role in welcoming asylum seekers. The good news is that we have reduced the number by 71% compared to—”

“We worked very hard on this bill and made changes.”

“Mr. Chair, we worked very hard. There was Bill C-12, and we also made changes with things—”

“The department is working hard to process all claims.”

“Mr. Chair, the department is working very hard to process all claims. I can tell him that between now and the end—”

• 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 plan to control immigration is working. We cut immigration spending by 15 percent because fewer temporary residents, students, and asylum seekers are coming to Canada. Our budget keeps the system secure, stops fraud, and focuses on bringing in skilled workers we need, like doctors.”

“Mr. Chair, I am very pleased to be here this evening. I welcome the opportunity to highlight how the government is investing, through the main estimates, to support a strong and sustainable immigration system. Canadian communities benefit from immigration, and Canada also benefits from the talent that our system attracts from around the world. Immigration supports our economy. It helps our communities grow, reunites families, addresses labour needs in key sectors and reflects our long-standing commitment to protecting people fleeing violence, persecution and forced displacement. To achieve this, for immigration to continue to work for Canada, it must be well managed, which means a system Canadians can trust that is controlled, sustainable, fair and secure. That is the work that we have been doing, and the results are clear. Permanent resident admissions are stabilized at less than 1% of Canada’s population beyond 2027. The temporary resident population is on track to fall below 5% of Canada’s population by the end of 2027, a target that the Parliamentary Budget Officer has independently projected Canada is on track to meet. Temporary resident arrivals are already down significantly. They are down 75% between January and March of this year compared to the same period in 2024, which includes international students. New arrivals were down 79% over the same period following measures such as the annual cap, stronger verification of letters of acceptance, higher financial requirements and the end of the student direct stream. We are making more deliberate choices on temporary workers, with new worker arrivals down 74% over the same period and pathways better targeted to high-skill and high-demand jobs, including through limits on low-wage hiring, reforms to the post-graduation work permit program and pathways for select skilled workers already contributing in Canada. Asylum claims have also dropped. Between January and March of this year, 59% fewer people submitted a claim compared to the same period in 2024. This reflects stronger front-end screening, enhanced tools to detect fraud, reforms to the international student and temporary worker programs and the passing of Bill C-12, the Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act. These are not isolated measures; they are part of a clear plan to bring immigration back to a sustainable path, lessen pressures on our communities and keep the system focused on Canada’s needs. Canadians can trust that the plan is working. This work continues under the 2026‑2028 immigration levels plan and our main estimates. Together, they demonstrate that the government’s immigration plan and its fiscal plan are aligned, with lower levels, strengthened integrity and funding allocated to where it will have the greatest impact. For fiscal year 2026‑27, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada’s main estimates total $4.42 billion, a decrease of 15% from the previous year. These main estimates reflect a disciplined approach to immigration spending. They align resources with lower immigration levels, the phasing out of temporary measures and the government’s broader commitment to reduce spending, improve productivity, and focus on core priorities. Fiscal discipline does not mean stepping away from the department’s core responsibilities. These estimates continue to fund the essential work of managing migration, supporting newcomers, strengthening system integrity and improving service. They also support the planning and partnership that keep immigration organized and sustainable, including the implementation of Canada’s multi-year immigration level plan and the Canada–Québec Accord. They include limited temporary health care coverage to eligible people and help for provinces and municipalities responding to temporary housing pressures linked to asylum claims. These supports help Canada meet its humanitarian obligations, support partners on the ground and help newcomers settle, contribute and reach their full potential in Canada. They help maintain the asylum system in Canada, including work to strengthen system integrity and maintain processing capacity. They improve service through modernized digital tools. The lower funding profile reflects our responsible approach, reducing where volumes are lower, where temporary measures are ending and where programs can be delivered more efficiently. At the same time, this budget maintains targeted support where the system needs capacity, stability and integrity. That includes support for the asylum system, for protected persons who are already in Canada and are in the process of acquiring permanent residency and for workers who are already here and already contributing, who can help meet labour market needs in communities across the country. Integrity is crucial to fairness. A fair system protects genuine applicants, prevents fraud and misrepresentation and includes rigorous screening, identity verification and secure processing. That is why my department is strengthening the integrity of the asylum system, improving compliance, using biometrics and modernizing the tools officers need. A secure, sustainable system also needs modern services. Let me turn to Canada’s leadership in a changing world. Migration has always been part of the human story. People move to build safer lives, to find opportunity, to reunite with family and to contribute to something larger than themselves. Around the world, migration systems are under pressure. Countries are facing the same challenge of how to respond to movement that is more complex while keeping confidence in the systems that manage it. When I was at the United Nations earlier this month, it was clear that partners are looking to Canada because we are choosing a responsible path. We are protecting the value of immigration by making the system more controlled, more sustainable and more focused on the people and skills that Canada needs. That is how we keep immigration as a strength. That is the system we are building: lower volume, higher integrity, more targeted choices and a clear focus on Canada’s capacity and economic needs. That does not mean we are straying from our priorities and values. It means we are focusing immigration where it can have the greatest impact. Canada will continue to attract qualified workers and top talent in sectors that matter to our economy, such as health care, construction and emerging industries. That includes physicians already here and contributing to our health care system. Through the measure I announced in December, 391 physicians have already been invited to apply for permanent residency. These are people in Canada already. We will continue working with provinces, territories and partners to respond to labour market needs, and we will continue to uphold Canada’s humanitarian tradition while building a system that can endure. These are main estimates that work. We need a system that is controlled, sustainable, fair, secure, fiscally responsible and focused on keeping immigration working for Canada. That is the system Canadians expect. That is the system we are delivering.”

“Our government promised to stabilize immigration, and the minister is doing a great job at it. Past policies and the pandemic created big challenges with temporary workers and asylum seekers. The Conservatives slowed down our work to fix these problems, but we still passed laws to address them.”

“Mr. Chair, I have a number of things that I would like to say, leaving maybe 15 seconds for the minister to respond. I will try to get everything in in the next four minutes. We need to put things into the proper perspective. First of all, I would recognize that we had an election just over a year ago, when the Prime Minister made a commitment to Canadians that we were going to stabilize immigration here in Canada. That was then followed with the appointment of the minister we have today. I believe, as I know my colleagues believe, she has done an outstanding job at stabilizing our immigration system here in Canada. I do not say that lightly. Let me give a bit of history as to what led to the issues that we had to face. In 2014, I happened to be the immigration critic for the Liberal Party of Canada. I was sitting in the opposition benches when Stephen Harper made the commitment to increase the number of temporary students. He wanted to increase it to numbers in excess of 400,000. There was a time when the Conservative Party recognized the value of immigration. That is long past, I must say, but there was a time when Conservatives did believe in it, and that was when Stephen Harper recognized the value of that contribution by increasing the numbers to over 400,000. Let us go back to the pandemic. We were able to achieve the goal, and go a little further than that by a few thousand, going into the pandemic. The pandemic is not something that was unique to Canada. It happened around the world. There were concerns regarding people not being able to work in certain sectors. There were concerns around people leaving the country. Back then, even the Conservatives recognized that that was an issue. I do not recall any Conservatives standing up during the pandemic to say we should get rid of temporary workers. I do not remember that at all. Shortly after the pandemic, there was still a high demand, and those temporary workers were given extensions. Now, a number of factors occurred, which led us to the last federal election. There was a serious issue that was caused by things such as policy announcements back in the previous administration regarding the pandemic and the consequences of the pandemic, including having to address the workforce. Fortunately for Canada, we elected the right Prime Minister at the right time, and he recognized that we had to stabilize the immigration file. That is exactly what we have done. There have been some issues. We have seen many of the people here on a temporary basis apply for asylum. That is the reason why, prior to the summer, we introduced Bill C-2, which would have helped deal with issues like immigration. The Conservatives, at the time, chose to filibuster that legislation to prevent us from being able to stabilize immigration even earlier. We had to bring in Bill C-12, which we were finally able to get passed towards the end of the year. We recognized the importance of dealing with the asylum issue, and Bill C-12 did that. After a lot of nudging, we finally got the Conservatives to agree to pass it. Do not get me wrong, I am grateful that they saw a sense of urgency on this issue. Throughout this period of time, the current minister, a few weeks or maybe a month afterward, came to my home province of Manitoba and met with the minister responsible for immigration. Meeting with the minister of immigration demonstrated that the federal government has a role in working collaboratively with provinces and territories in good faith. I sat at the table with both ministers and listened to the dialogue that was exchanged. A month or two afterwards, the minister came back to meet with some of the individuals who were being impacted by the immigration policy. What I saw—”

“Things were very different when I became a provincial minister in 2013.”

“Mr. Chair, I want to thank my hon. colleague for his passion but also for his experience and for bringing us back to 2014. Again, as I said, I became minister provincially in 2013. The times were very, very different back—”

• Little substance
  ?

  Reply to a debate question

  Signal 22 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 →