Canadian Immigration Blawg

Updated: Segregation/Balkanization vs. The Canadian Mosaic

Just read a great article in the Toronto Star discussing Trevor Phillips, the 'controversial' leader of Britain's Commission on Equality and Human Rights - who believes 'too much tolerance of diversity' could lead to the [diasaster] of segregation:

Phillips thinks it's [multiculturalism] become a counterproductive ideology, at least in the UK. If the aim was to soften differences and promote shared views and values, that's not how multiculturalism has played out. "What started as a straightforward recognition of diversity," he says, "has become a system which prizes racial and ethnic difference above all other values, and there lies the problem."

I must say that I'm quite intrigued with Phillips' view of integration vs. multiculturalism.

Another interesting article by Scott Young.

He argues that the official policy of multiculturalism - that immigrants/minorities can retain their cultural heritage is coming at the expense of integration, resulting in the 'balkanization' of Canada:

Unfortunately, attempting to reveal the perils of segregation is usually buried in simplistic accusations of racism (Remember Bruce Allen?) Canadians revel in the romanticism of Trudeau's multiculturalism, but fail to realize its role in creating ethnic ghettoes.

Jack Granatstein stated: "The [Canadian] state should spend its limited funds on helping newcomers adapt to Canadian society by teaching them the basic knowledge, the symbols, and the ideas that literate, culturally aware Canadians understand . . . . To do anything else condemns immigrants to isolation, to low-paying jobs, to the expanding ghetto of the ill-paid and uneducated."

Robert Putnam, author of Bowling Alone, recently lamented that social capital is weakest where diversity is strongest. He noted that while "the task of becoming comfortable with diversity will not be easy or quick . . . it will be speeded by our collective efforts and in the end well worth the effort."

Putnam cited real benefits of diversity, including higher creative capacities and more rapid economic growth. Diversity is a good thing, but immigrants and Canadians naively fear that integration equals the loss of their individual heritages.

That fear has paralysed Canadian social growth.

Until we acknowledge that our self-imposed mosaic is not a perfect system, we'll never construct a mature, cohesive national identity.

Without a national identity, it remains extraordinarily presumptuous for us to claim to be the world's first modern multicultural society.

Another article, on MSNBC, indicates similar concerns regarding the lack of singular identity and resultant vulnerability to Islamic fundamentalism in the multicultural United Kingdom:

...multicultural Britain is an easy target for attacks by militant Islamists because its aims, values and political identity are divided.

...

The [July 2005] attacks sparked a debate on whether Britain’s policy of avoiding imposing a single British identity and instead promoting a multicultural society had led to segregation of ethnic minorities.

...

“Islamist terrorism is where people tend to begin. The United Kingdom presents itself as a target, as a fragmenting, post-Christian society, increasingly divided about interpretations of its history, about its national aims, its values and in its political identity,” the RUSI report said.

“That fragmentation is worsened by the firm self-image of those elements within it who refuse to integrate.”

Are the concerns voiced 'across the pond' a foreshadow of strife in Canada?

Is Canada vulnerable to Islamic (or other) implacable fundamentalist ideology because of our weak (or nonexistent) national identity. Are we a greater or more susceptible target to such radical groups because of our official policy of multiculturalism? What role has or will Canada's immigration policy play in this developing issue?

These difficult questions need to be address given our similarities to the United Kingdom; our reliance on immigration; and the fact that we are importing hatred and conflict along with our new citizens and permanent residents.   

Sigh...Canada tackles immigration reform

Canada's Conservative government will introduce a measure to address the massive immigration backlog (currently at 850,000+ and resulting in an average processing time of 4 years):

National Post article.

The article also excerpts a Fraser Institute 2005 report indicating that immigrants are essentially a drain on the economy:

A report by the Fraser Institute in 2005 suggested that only 23% of immigrants are net fiscal contributors to Canada at a cost to the taxpayer every year of more than $18-billion (although 60% of immigrants are from the "economic class," fewer than half that number pass the points test -- the remainder are spouses and children).

Also - see this Canadian Press Report.

Attempts to reform Canada's immigration system is usually something that I applaud - and the Conservatives do have a point - the immigrant backlog is something they largely inherited from the Liberals who utterly failed to address the widening cracks already visible in the system. However, rather than cause hardship to Canadian families, why not apply triage principles to current files? There are a number of applicants that are either clearly qualified (or clearly not qualified) to immigrate to Canada - a determination should be made on these applications quickly, and at an earlier stage. Also ... the immigration fees paid by immigrants are actually bringing in more revenue than it costs to administer the program - if that's the case, it makes sense to use the funds to provide for more resources (more visa officers) to serve the immigrants. Given the state of technology and CIC's case management system, it should be entirely possible for CIC to coordinate resources to assist the beleagured visa posts of India, China and the Philippines (given the reality of scanning, email and the internet, there should be no problem for a visa officer sitting in a High Commision in a country in Europe to render a decision on a poor immigrant's file that has been gathering dust in New Delhi for 60+ months).

Bill Gates on US immigration reform

Interesting article discussing Bill Gates' recent appearance before the Congressional House Science Committee:

The toughest sell was the position of Gates, and others in high tech industries, that Congress raise the current cap of 65,000 H-1B visas, nonimmigrant visas that allow employers to hire foreign nationals with specific skills. The program also allows another 20,000 visas for foreign nationals receiving masters or doctoral degrees from U.S. universities.

Current limits, he said have led to a “serious disruption” in the flow of talented science, technology, engineering and math graduates to U.S. companies. Gates said Microsoft and other firms have been forced to locate staff in countries more open to skilled foreign workers . Last year, Microsoft was unable to obtain H-1B visas for one-third of the qualified foreign-born job candidates it wanted to hire.

Indeed, Canada was one of the countries "more open to skilled foreign workers" as indicated in this Global News Article:

Microsoft Corp. said on Thursday it will open a software development center in Vancouver, giving it a place to employ skilled workers snagged by U.S. immigration quotas.

It may signal the start of a new hiring trend, with other U.S. high-tech firms following in Microsoft's footsteps to Canada, where lawyers say it is easier for foreign nationals to obtain work credentials.

U.S. businesses want Congress to lift quotas on the number of visas the government issues to skilled professionals such as the software engineers that Microsoft employs. But as recently as last week lawmakers rejected legislation that would have addressed their concerns. Canada doesn't impose quotas on the number of visas it issues each year.

Microsoft said it plans to open the Vancouver facility by the end of the year. It will initially have about 200 workers, and employ about 900 within a couple years.

'Canada's luster lost' (for Europeans anyway)

Interesting article from the Warsaw Business Journal that discusses the drop in European immigration to Canada, and the loss of Canada's 'luster':

...

During the past five years, European immigration to Canada has dwindled, even as overall immigration to Canada has been on the rise. According to a Statistics Canada survey, Canada is now home to its largest population of new Canadians in 75 years, with 1.1 million newcomers arriving between 2001 and 2006.

Of these, Europeans accounted for just 16.1 percent of newcomers, far fewer than those from Asian and Middle Eastern countries and down from 60 percent 30 years ago. The decline in the number of Poles relocating to Canada reflects the steady decline in European immigration to the country.

...

Canada's luster lost

...

...

A second factor affecting the trend is the increasing pull from within Europe. Following the European Union's enlargement in 2004, the United Kingdom, Sweden and Ireland have all opened their borders to Polish workers.

A third factor is migrants' desires to remain close to their families. Since Canada is such a great distance from Poland, many find it too far to travel. By contrast, travel within Europe has become cheap and convenient. Poles no longer need to go halfway around the globe when they can fly to the UK and find a job that fits their skills.

Canadian Live in Caregivers - Also known as Nannies...

Great article in the National Post on the trials and tribulations for Filipina nannies who leave their own families 10,000 km behind to care for someone else children.

Excerpt:

It's a bleak January morning in a Don Mills cafe when Elena Bautista explains why she left her husband and young daughters in the Philippines five years ago to look after someone else's children in Canada.

"I came here for the future of my kids," says Bautista. "It's for a greener pasture."

Bautista is one of tens of thousands of Filipina nannies who have come to Canada in search of a decent salary and a better life. Like many of the nannies, she hopes her family will one day be able to follow her to Canada. But there's a deep personal cost to her plans.

...Eight million Filipinos work overseas today, lured from home by developed world wages. Ten per cent of the country's population is abroad. They send back an estimated US$16-billion each year -- remittances are one of the most fruitful sectors of the Filipino economy and account for about 10% of the national gross domestic product.

More than 6,000 Filipinas arrive in Canada under the federal government's live-in caregiver program. They make up more than one in five female immigrants to Canada and more than nine out of 10 of the live-in caregiver program's participants.

...

Pratt's research suggests there is a very high school drop-out rate among Filipino kids who come to Canada. There is a "profound sense of family dislocation" because of the length of time mothers are separated from their children -- as long as eight years in some cases. When the children arrive, the mothers frequently work long hours or have multiple jobs, making it more difficult to re-establish family connections. Their children also feel obligated to leave school and get out into the workforce as early as possible to help make ends meet.

Unfortunately, Arcelie Laoagan's quest for a greener pasture ended with her murder in this city; hopefully her dream to bring her family to Canada will not die with her.

Low Income Cut Off

Effective until December 31, 2008

1 person (the sponsor) $21,202

2 persons $26,396

3 persons $32,450

4 persons $39,399

5 persons $44,686

6 persons $50,397

7 persons $56,110

More than 7 persons, for each additional person, add $5,713

Canada - "A haven for villains"????

A critical article in the Economist regarding Canada and its 'lax' and 'dysfunctional' immigration and refugee policy. The article points at Canadian refugee claimant Ahmed Ressam and the current backlog of 50,000 individuals against whom removal orders are pending:

...all kinds of undesirables are getting into Canada under the country's dysfunctional “refugee” system. While doing little to save genuine refugees in camps abroad, it has opened the door to queue-jumping economic migrants, big-time crooks and terrorists, as documented in numerous reports (notably from the federal government's security service and auditor-general) over more than 20 years.

...

Canada is the easiest country in the developed world in which to obtain refugee status. Most countries accept no more than around 15% of all applicants, whereas Canada accepts more than half. Attracted by an entitlement to the same legal rights and social benefits as for Canadian citizens, some 25,000 asylum-seekers make their way to Canada every year.

...

Once in Canada, they know they will be able to stay—and work—there for at least four years, while pursuing their appeals through the courts.

...

The article blames the problems on Canada's national political parties - which need to pander to the immigrant heavy votes in key cities such as Vancouver, Montreal and Toronto..and then  ends on an ominous note:

... Although the polls suggest that ordinary Canadians want the abuse to end, there is no political will. As James Bissett, former head of the Canadian immigration service, says: “It might take a bomb going off here to change this system.”

Deep seated problems in immigration...

Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis, using information obtained through the Access to Information Act, has revealed great disparities in how immigrants are processed from country to country. While he naturally criticizes the Conservative government, it should be noted that it was under the Liberal aegis that the immigrant backlog increased from 50,000 to 800,000.

Link here.

These are however, not good signs for a country that needs to attract the best and the brightest - and of course expeditiously and fairly reunite Canadian families.

Time for an Amnesty for Illegal Immigrants in Canada?

Is it time to allow those individuals who have been residing illegally in Canada to become legal residents - or to allow them some pathway to legal status? At present, other than a limited recourse under ‘humanitarian and compassionate’ considerations – an application that takes over 2 years, there is no amnesty provision for anyone in Canada.

Remember, there are thousands of failed refugee claimants, thousands of ‘visitors’ that have overstayed and many other illegal denizens of Canada (remember the hundreds of Portuguese deported from Canada in 2006?). I would imagine that, among many (if not the majority) of the thousands of temporary foreign workers that have arrived in the last months there would be a great reluctance to return to their countries of origin at the end of their contractual/indentured obligation (indeed another emerging issue is the widespread exploitation of these temporary foreign workers touted as the panacea to our labour woes - and what, if any, our obligation to them is).

I know that Canadians of all stripes view illegal immigrants that have jumped the queue with disfavor, but lets face facts. As long as there are global wealth disparities, Canada will continue to attract immigrants - both legal and illegal. As it stands, current Canadian citizenship policy is encouraging illegal immigration because legal immigration to Canada is simply too difficult - many highly skilled workers have to wait 5 years or more to come to Canada. Even when an immigrant (illegal or not) already in Canada has a Canadian spouse, a 'in-Canada' sponsorship exceeds 18 months.

Everyone knows there is a severe labour shortage in Canada which is especially acute in Alberta. What sense does it make to deport law abiding individuals who may not be refugees in the strictest sense of the definition, but have been contributing members of society nonetheless? Why would we turn away welders, electricians, other skilled trades and valuable labour? Why go to the difficulty and expense of recruiting individuals from abroad when we have a pool of workers (albeit without status) in our backyard?

Obviously we would target those 'illegals' who are healthy, have demonstrated positive employment history, proficiency in an official language, community involvement, ties to the country (such as children) and no criminal record. Safeguards such as: background checks in Canada and their home countries'; an increased period of time before eligibility for citizenship; higher administrative fees and a requirement to pay back any outstanding taxes on income earned in Canada will ensure that 'legal' immigrants continue to enjoy certain advantages over this new queue jumping/'amnesty immigrant class'.

The limited amnesty I propose however, should be combined with significant reforms to our current immigration regime, so that the requirement for amnesty is reduced over time. Legal immigration should be easier and faster, with a clear path to legal status for foreign students. Refugee reform should be a priority – with fair and quick decisions -- a failed refugee should not be in Canada for close to a decade before he or she is removed. And the provinces should have more say over immigration because it’s clear that the federal government has clearly dropped the ball.

I'm sure that critics will continue to argue that such a proposal rewards lawbreakers. They would be correct in such a characterization. However, that characterization does not negate the necessity to address the dual problems of our labour shortage and the issue of fairness to the poor souls that have come here for a better life and want to live here so very much.

Violent Refugee Released

Paula Simons writes on a violent refugee, Samuel Martin Luin, who after completing his sentence for raping a woman in Edmonton, was released from detention by Immigration Division Member Paul Kyba. It would appear that the CBSA failed to apply for a danger opinion which would have allowed his removal from Canada:

This July, the Immigration and Refugee Board convened a deportation hearing, where Luin was ordered deported. But deporting a refugee isn't simple. Ethically, it's tricky to send someone who's been granted asylum back into a war zone. And most of Luin's family are now in Ethiopia. To deport Luin, the minister of immigration,Diane Finley, would have to sign a document called a danger opinion, effectively ruling that the danger Luin poses to the Canadian public outweighs the danger he'd face in Sudan.

The process of getting a danger opinion is long and cumbersome. First, Canada Border Services has to complete the research and paperwork to support deportation. Then, the person facing deportation has the chance to put together a legal rebuttal. Then, the paperwork goes to Ottawa for ministerial consideration. It can take anywhere from six months to two years to get a ministerial decision.

Yet even though Luin was due to be released on Nov. 23, Canada Border Services didn't file an application for a danger opinion until Nov. 13, 10 days before Luin was to hit the streets.

And so, on Dec. 3, the Immigration and Refugee Board released Luin from detention, ruling he was neither a flight risk nor a public danger.

It was unfair and unconstitutional to hold him indefinitely, said the IRB, just because Stockwell Day's Department of Public Safety failed to do its job.

"The minister is about 16 months behind in doing what the minister ought to have started ... a year and four months ago," said Paul Kyba of the Immigration and Refugee Board. "... I see no excuse, I see no valid reason why the minister chose to delay this process. This is not vigilance by the minister."

However, even given the failure on the part of the CBSA to act on the necessary paperwork to remove Samuel Martin Luin, it is somewhat disturbing that the ID released Luin without even the posting of a cash bond. Luin was subject to report to immigration once a month -- perhaps not surprisingly, Luin failed to report and went underground.

Here's an article that discusses his guilty plea - defence counsel had argued that Luin's past - growing up in war ravaged Sudan should be taken into account for sentencing.

Luin has now been taken into custody by the Edmonton police acting on tips from the public.

** Update - it appears that the long awaited danger opinion has been prepared. Article here. Excerpt:

Citizenship and Immigration Canada has signed a "danger opinion" order on convicted rapist Samuel Martin Luin, which means he is thought to pose more of a danger to the Canadian public than he would face in Sudan.

The notice effectively gives the Canadian Border Services Agency permission to deport Luin. As soon as his travel documents are arranged, Luin, 23, will be put on plane back home. "We basically have a green light to go ahead with his removal," said Lisa White, spokeswoman for the Canadian Border Services Agency. "We will make every effort to remove him from Canada as soon as possible."