When "perfect" is used as a verb, it means to complete the development of something. I guess the original meaning is "to make perfect", but in practice it's used to mean more like "to develop to a high level". So you might say, for example, "Dr Jones built the first prototype of this machine but Dr Smith perfected it."
In this case, the writer is saying that he is going to fully develop his character.
In context, that's a very odd choice of words. A person's "character" is normally understood to mean the ethical side of his personality. Like, "Fred is a man of great personal character" or "When he claimed that I lied he deprecated my character" (i.e. he insulted me) or "One of the primary goals of our school is to guide children to develop strong character". It seems unlikely that knowledge of Canadian culture and science would improve one's ethical standards.
To "assimilate" is to absorb something into a whole. You assimilate the food you eat. An immigrant might be assimilated into the culture of his new home. So if he is assimilating what is useful from Canadian culture, etc, he is absorbing this knowledge into his own mind or personality.
The phrase "Canadian culture, science and distinct approach toward problems" is a little ambiguous. Does he mean Canadian culture, Canadian science, and a distinct Canadian approach toward problems? Or does he mean Canadian culture, and then science in general, and his own personal distinct approach toward problems?
So a simpler way to say this would be, "I will be able to make myself a better and more ethical person by absorbing knowledge of Canadian culture, science and distinct approach toward problems."
In my humble opinion, the wording is unnecessarily sophisticated. It sounds like he's trying to impress the reader by using big words.