Friday, 17 November 2017 00:59

New Immigration Plan Hailed and Flailed

Canada’s new plan to welcome nearly one million immigrants over the next three years, has been hailed and flailed around the world despite the Liberal government assurances that it will help offset an aging demographic.

“This historic multi-year immigration levels plan will benefit all Canadians because immigrants will contribute their talents to support our economic growth and innovation, helping to keep our country at the forefront of the global economy, said Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship.

The new plan aims to build upon the current projections for 300,000 permanent residents in 2017 by increasing the number of new permanent residents welcomed to Canada over a three-year period, beginning with an increase to 310,000 immigrants in 2018, 330,000 in 2019 and 340,000 in 2020.

“This is an important step in the right direction, which reaffirms Canada’s belief in immigration and citizenship as a principle which has helped to build, and which will continue to build, the country,” said the Institute for Canadian Citizenship

“We, probably in the world, have one of the best immigration programs not only in terms of our selection processes but also in terms of our settlement and integration programs where we work with immigrants,” said Debbie Douglas, Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants.

But not everyone shares the optimism.

The federal government's own Advisory Council on Economic Growth had recommended upping levels to reach 450,000 newcomers annually by 2021. Hussen said the government is taking a more gradual approach to ensure successful integration.

Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel was critical of the plan, suggesting the government needs to do a better job of integrating newcomers.

"It is not enough for this government to table the number of people that they are bringing to this country. Frankly the Liberals need to stop using numbers of refugees, amount of money spent, feel-good tweets and photo ops for metrics of success in Canada's immigration system."

She said the Liberals need to bring Canada's immigration system "back to order" by closing the loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement that has seen migrants cross into Canada at unofficial border crossings only to claim refugee status.

She also said the immigration system should focus on helping immigrants integrate through language efficiency and through mental health support plans for people who are victims of trauma.

Dory Jade, the CEO of the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, welcomed the news although he suggested the numbers should be higher.

"Canada will greatly prosper and grow once the 350,000 threshold has been crossed," he said. "Nevertheless, we are witnessing a very positive trend."

The Canadian Council of Refugees also welcomed the news, but wanted more, saying the share for refugees was only increased slightly from 13 per cent this year to 14 per cent in each of the next three years.

During the government's consultation period, the Canadian Immigrant Settlement Sector Alliance presented "Vision 2020," what it called a "bold" three-year plan to address growing demographic shifts underway in the country, calling for increased numbers in the economic, family and refugee categories.

Chris Friesen, the organization's director of settlement services, said it's time for a white paper or royal commission on immigration to develop a comprehensive approach to future immigration.

"Nothing is going to impact this country [more] besides increased automation and technology than immigration will and this impact will grow in response to [the] declining birth rate, aging population and accelerated retirements," he told CBC News.

Last month, Statistics Canada reported that based on 2016 census data, 21.9 per cent of Canada's population is now foreign-born, reflecting the highest percentage of immigrant population in nearly a century.

Kareem El-Assal, a senior research manager specializing in immigration for the Conference Board of Canada, said it is "absolutely imperative" that Canada ups its intake in order to meet future labour needs.

But the system must become more adept at matching newcomers with local and provincial needs, he said, improving outcomes by selecting more people with pre-arranged jobs, recruiting more international students and giving provinces a greater say in who comes to the country. 

Coming to Canada 

• Immigration has had an immeasurable effect on Canada. In 2017, Canada stands as a country of 36.5 million people and a world leader on various scales. In fact, one in five Canadians is foreign-born, the highest among the G7. 

• The aging of our population and a declining fertility rate will continue to have a significant impact on Canada’s economy. In 1971, there were 6.6 people of working age for each senior. By 2012, the worker-to-retiree ratio had dropped to 4.2 to 1, and projections put the ratio at 2 to 1 by 2036, at which time five million Canadians are set to retire. In recent years, more than 80 per cent of the immigrants we admit have been under 45 years of age. 

• Immigration also helps to spur innovation domestically. For example, while immigrants account for approximately 20 percent of Canada’s population, they are a major source of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) skills, representing around 50 percent of all STEM degree-holders in Canada at the bachelor’s level and above. These skills are important in a knowledge economy. Immigrants also have a higher rate of entrepreneurship than their Canadian-born counterparts.

• Canada is unique among immigrant-receiving countries in placing great emphasis on providing assistance to recently arrived immigrants to weather their migration transition period. Settlement services, such as language training, employment services and newcomer orientation are linked to immigrant success. In 2016-17, more than 412,000 permanent residents accessed at least one settlement service in Canada. When surveyed, 91 percent of Settlement Program clients reported being able to make informed decisions on a wide variety of subjects, including education, health care and housing. And 87 percent of clients who were in Canada for one year or more reported being able to use an official language to function and participate in Canadian society

Republished under arrangement with the Asian Pacific Post. 

Published in Top Stories

Commentary by Will Tao in Vancouver

The Liberal Government finally delivered on their long-standing campaign promise to end conditional permanent residency for spouses on April 28.

Previously introduced in October 2012 by the Conservative government, the conditional permanent residence regulation required those who were in a relationship for two years or less and had no children to live with their sponsors for two years after they became permanent residents. Some exceptions were carved out for individuals who were victims of abuse or neglect. The Toronto Star (Nicholas Keung) reported that only 57 individuals sought an exemption and were successful in 75 per cent of their exemption requests.

The negative consequences of conditional permanent residency were often borne by vulnerable women and their young newly-born children. New to Canada and without a support network, they were victimized by their abusive spouses, but often too scared to seek help.

While the exception provisions allowed for a streamlined process to contact Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) in these circumstances, I had several women subject to conditional permanent residence tell me first-hand stories of being prevented access to computers, phones, even the internet. In one case, I had a woman tell me that she locked herself in a bathroom just to communicate with me as we prepared her case.

Another woman told me about feigning sleep in order to avoid the verbal and psychological abuse of a partner coming home violent and intoxicated. All of this because they were afraid to leave their spouses and put their status in Canada at risk.

I am glad these individuals can now sleep better at night and enjoy the security that all Canadians rightfully enjoy.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]Conditional permanent residence created more harm than good.[/quote]

It is important to note that that these stories did not only come from vulnerable women. They also came from male conditional permanent residents who were abandoned by their spouses, as well as the LGBTQ2+. Many of these relationships broke down foremost as a result of infidelity, leading later to abuse and neglect – a sequence of events that the earlier exceptions policy appears to have overlooked. 

Conditional permanent residence created more harm than good, more uncertainty. For this, I am glad it is a thing of the past and we can move forward.

Immigrant Marriage Breakdowns ≠Marriages of Convenience

Moving forward, in my view, begins by re-framing the two issues of marriage fraud and marriage breakdown. We should not use the end of the conditional permanent residence requirement as a pretext to now second guess or re-scrutinize the genuineness and immigration intent of a majority (85%+) of bona-fide immigrant marriages. The end of conditional permanent residence, I hope, will not lend cover to sponsors trying to remove their sponsored spouses from Canada.

The reality with sponsorship of immigrant spouses is that a significant portion of genuine marriages will end up breaking down. While academic research is limited in this area, my hypothesis is based on the following:

First, I believe economic challenges have a greater negative effective on immigrant marriages and common-law partnership. Piecing together what we do know, recent Canada statistics show that 48% of all marriages are now ending in divorce, with financial issues and adultery among the leading causes. Poverty affects racialized individuals at a rate four times greater than non-racialized families and past studies have found immigrants who have been in Canada less than five years are 11 percentage points more likely to be in poverty than other Canadians. Furthermore, immigrant families, receive less in household income and are less likely to own homes than non-immigrant families. New Canadian immigrants, especially women, are often more likely to face labour market challenges and experiences with precarious work conditions.

Second, I suggest that cultural shock also contributes to marriage breakdown by creating consequences such as the return of the sponsored spouse to their home country, abandonment, and adultery. Carmen Munoz, Program Manager for the Cross-Cultural Peer Support Group Program for Immigrant and Refugee Women (CCPSGP) highlights in a piece she writes the challenges new immigrant women face which include experiencing “intense culture shock, isolation, depression, frustration and an overwhelming sense of confusion, which in turn, not only manifests itself mentally, but through physical reactions as well.”

The cultural pressures, the economic pressures, and often extended family pressures (from both the Sponsor and the Applicant) can coalesce and intersect into major challenges for immigrant marriages and common-law partnerships.

Unfortunately, conditional permanent residence lumped the issue of marriage breakdown unnecessarily into the marriage fraud debate, inputting bad intentions where more often than not none existed. Not only did it punish genuine couples often at their most vulnerable moments, but it also led to not enough focus being placed to eliminating the actual root causes of marriage fraud – unauthorized legal practitioners both in Canada and internationally who set up marriages of convenience for their own financial gain.

Ultimately, I suggest that Parliament should focus on creating conditions that strengthen immigrant marriages and prevent systemic abuse of our sponsorship system, rather than enforcing back-end restrictions that may aggravate the challenges faced by new Canadian families. 

Will Tao is a Canadian immigration lawyer based in Vancouver, B.C., with a practice primary focused on complex immigration applications and refusals on behalf of educational institutions and international students. Tao is a former member of New Canadian Media's board of directors and a current member of the Not-for-profit corporation. He currently sits on the Canadian Bar Association British Columbia’s Equality and Diversity Committee and on the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Communities Advisory Committee.

Published in Policy
Wednesday, 01 February 2017 18:00

Listening to our International Students

Commentary by Will Tao in Vancouver
Canada’s international students, particularly those in major metropolitan cities such as Toronto and Vancouver, have been subject to intense criticism over the last year.
The students – over 363,000 of them – have been blamed directly or indirectly for a range of social problems, such as overheated rental markets, unaffordable housing, burden on public services, cheating, and bizarrely, even driving pricey cars.
The bulk of these criticisms are based on anecdotal accounts, in the absence of any strong statistical evidence. These accounts come from professors who study and interview as part of their work, and anonymous, retired institutional administrators who can now share stories freely, without needing to validate their assertions.  
These accounts also come from journalists looking to report on the latest cross-cultural phenomenon. At the end of the day, while they may capture some of the reality and part of the story, they are ultimately one-sided.  
Outsider narrative
What bothers me, as the Canadian-born son of a 1980’s international student and as someone who is now married to an international student, is that this outsider narrative represents only one side of the story. In drawing many of our conclusions, we have not been good listeners of international students, the true insiders.
In reality, we have generally silenced their perspectives and ignored their challenges, and taken for granted our own privileges while laying blame and assigning motives.
For starters, it is worth noting that an overwhelming majority of international students are bona-fide, meaning they are genuine, immigration law-abiding students.
In 2014, Canadian Bureau of International Education counted 336,000 international students, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (as it was then called) estimated that 20,000 of them were considered “high risk”, that is, likely to violate immigration law.
This accounts for only about six per cent of all international students admitted into Canada.
Jumping hoops
Next, it is important to hear from international students themselves to learn about the challenges and barriers they face, and for often understandable reasons do not feel like sharing them publicly. In my own practice, I have found that there are three major barriers.

Firstly, Canada’s own immigration policies have made it difficult for international students. On the front end, the financial requirements are difficult to meet. International students need to show unreasonably high available funds just to be approved for study permits and seek extensions for their studies.  The prohibitive cost of international tuition forces many students to take a break from their studies or resort to extreme measures (like taking up jobs in violation of their study permits or taking out private loans) to keep with the payments.

Once a student is here, Canada currently has a restrictive requirement that students ‘actively-pursue studies.’ Educational institutions now have two-tiered policies, under which international students are subject to excessive monitoring and reporting requirements. Depending on the institution, international students have to take a certain number of courses and maintain a certain attendance rate, while domestic students do not. Students with family emergencies, mental health episodes, poor grades, or who simply want to explore a different area, are often hamstrung.
On the back end, once they are ready to graduate, these same international students have difficulty obtaining post-graduate work permits based on their study history. Without the work experience from these permits, the already difficult pathway to permanent residence is mostly closed.
Societal barriers
Secondly, there are major societal barriers against international students. I have worked with many international student advisors at universities and colleges who recount anecdotal stories of students breaking down as a result of mental health issues. Without family and often inadequate knowledge or language ability to seek professional help, these students are particularly vulnerable.
Institutions, I am told by these students, have not always done the best to accommodate their cultural differences or to eliminate discriminative practices or advise without implicit biases. These issues are almost never reported in the media.
Finally, there is an underbelly of inadequate (often unethical) third-party services being offered and provided to international students. Many of these purported advisors are untrained and unqualified educational consultants and agents. Inevitably, if not sooner rather than later, students advised by these individuals find themselves personally liable in situations akin to fraud or misrepresentation, for which there are severe criminal and immigration consequences.
Seat at the table
Regardless of the economic and political questions raised by student immigration, we must not forget that international students need to have a seat at the policy-making table. We have seen the example from down south about what happens when immigration law is mandated by public opinion, fear, and top-down orders.
If we continue down this path of blaming and not understanding, I foresee only increased fracturing within our already increasingly fragile mosaic.
Ultimately, international students can only become an important asset when we as a society stop viewing them solely as cash cows or visitors. We should be viewing as prospective future citizens.
Will Tao is a Canadian immigration lawyer based in Vancouver, B.C., with a practice primary focused on complex immigration applications and refusals on behalf of educational institutions and international students. Tao is a former New Canadian Media Board Member. He currently sits on the Canadian Bar Association British Columbia’s Equality and Diversity Committee and on the City of Vancouver’s Cultural Communities Advisory Committee.
Published in Education
Friday, 28 October 2016 16:42

A Canada of 100 million? Are they Insane?

Commentary by Howard Anglin

There are some ideas so daft that it takes a very smart person to think of them. Or, in the case of a new proposal to triple Canada’s population to 100 million by the end of the century, it takes an entire committee of smart people.

The authors of this particular idea are the fourteen members of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Advisory Council on Economic Growth, who issued their first report last week. To most Canadians, the idea is so preposterous as not to bear analyzing. Crumple it up and start again. But, as these are supposed to be serious thinkers — selected, according to a government press release, “because they are recognized, forward-thinking individuals in their respective fields” — it’s worth taking their proposal at face value.

Dominic Barton, the global managing partner of management consulting giant McKinsey & Co and the committee’s chief advocate of “a Canada of 100 million,” worries that without significant population growth, Canada’s international “relevance” will suffer. This is an odd thing to say, and an even odder thing to care about. How many Canadians, waking in the dark this morning, bundling their children into winter jackets and out the door to school, give two pucks for Canada’s “relevance”?

The disconnect between Mr. Barton, who lives in London, and the concerns of most Canadians was described in a recent column by Peggy Noonan as “something we are seeing all over, the top detaching itself from the bottom, feeling little loyalty to it or affiliation with it.”

“In Manhattan,” she says, “I see the children of the global business elite marry each other and settle in London or New York or Mumbai.” Having lived in London, New York, Washington DC and Ottawa (though not Mumbai), I’ve seen this phenomenon up close. Mr. Barton and his transnationalist peers think of Canada in terms of personal convenience and corporate expediency; to most Canadians, it means their home and community.

According to the Canadian Press, Mr. Barton believes “the world would benefit from a larger version of Canada’s stable, diversified democracy and economy” — but in the same breath he admits that 100 million “is a big number” that “would obviously change the country considerably.”

He fails to explain why we should believe Canada would remain the peaceful, pluralist society we currently enjoy after we added 65 million new people. Or why we would risk our remarkable and (looking around the world) extremely rare security and prosperity for … for what? “Relevance?”

There is no reason to think a Canada of 100 million would be a better place to live and good reasons to think it wouldn’t. Of the twenty countries with the highest per capita GDP, only the United States has more than 100 million people. Most have fewer than 10 million.

The bias against size carries across other national virtues. Happiness? Denmark, Switzerland, Iceland. Income equality? Sweden, Hungary, Norway. Reputation? Sweden, Canada, Switzerland. See a pattern?

The Trudeau government’s own immigration policy belies the Advisory Council’s assumption that more immigration will result in net economic benefits. Under the previous government, economic immigration as a percentage of overall immigration approached 67 per cent; under the new government, it has fallen to 53 per cent. In other words, there is a lot that can be done by better selecting immigrants within existing levels before we consider increasing intake.

It’s true we are a large country, with plenty of open space, but recent immigration has not filled that emptiness and future immigration is likely to follow the established paths to our cities and suburbs. Even at current, historically high immigration levels, Canada’s population is projected to grow by more than 20 million in the next 35 years. Are you ready for a Toronto of 20 million and a Vancouver of 10 million?

None of this will affect the members of Trudeau’s Advisory Council. For them, immigration is something that happens elsewhere. The acres of tract housing sprawling into farmland and greenbelts around our major cities are glimpsed by these people only in the minutes before takeoff and landing. Hopping between leafy downtown enclaves and luxury hotels, they won’t feel the strain on our roads, hospitals and schools, or the deterioration of our built and natural environments.

Industry Minister Navdeep Bains has already cautioned that he is hearing pushback from Canadians. This isn’t surprising. The government’s own polling shows only 8 per cent of Canadians think immigration should increase, while three times as many believe it is already too high. And that was before the Trudeau government increased annual levels to 300,000 already this year.

A government ignores clear public opinion at its peril — and at the nation’s. Significantly increasing immigration levels in defiance of the clear preference of Canadians, including recent immigrants, invites a sharp public backlash of the kind we’ve seen in the United States, the U.K. and Europe. Those who decry Trumpism should be the most vocal opponents of this proposal.

Unlike management consultants, citizens ask questions that are beyond the Advisory Council’s remit. Questions like: What will it mean to be Canadian after we’ve added 65 million new people? What holds our society together when immigration is so rapid that integration becomes impossible?

However smart the Advisory Council members may be, it’s average Canadians who are displaying common sense. They know that size is not a meaningful measure of national success. And they have seen from experience that when immigration is accelerated too quickly, multiculturalism becomes a centrifugal force — no longer holding successive waves of immigrants in a stable tension but driving us apart.

Howard Anglin was the chief of staff to Canada’s minister of Citizenship and Immigration from 2011 to 2013.

By arrangement with

Published in Policy
Monday, 11 July 2016 14:38

Consultation Overlooks Citizenship

Commentary by Andrew Griffith in Ottawa

Some things never change. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) launches consultations on immigration and leaves out any questions on the related issues of citizenship policy.

Sigh … Immigration consultations are welcome and needed. They can and should help better inform future level plans and I would hope that there will be widespread participation with diversity of views.

It may well be that the Government believes that having passed Bill C-6 (to amend the Citizenship Act) it has no need to consult on citizenship. It is hard to believe that this is a mere oversight.

But consulting on immigration while being silent on where and how citizenship is part of the picture is, at best, a missed opportunity.

Values and tradition

Also interesting to note the question of “Canadian values and traditions” which should provoke some interesting discussion, and which is related to immigration, citizenship and multiculturalism.

Were there to be citizenship-related consultation questions, my initial suggestions would be -

  1. What percentage of newcomers should we expect to become Canadian citizens? In what time frame?
  2. Does citizenship play an important role in integrating and participating in the Canadian economy and society? In which way?
  3. Do we have the balance right between facilitating and encouraging citizenship and ensuring a meaningful connection to Canada?

Here is a preview of the questions available under Submit your views of immigration -

Opening Questions

  1. How many newcomers should we welcome to Canada in 2017 and beyond?
  2. How can we best support newcomers to ensure they become successful members of our communities?
  3. Do we have the balance right among the immigration programs or streams? If not, what priorities should form the foundation of Canada’s immigration planning?
  4. How should we balance encouraging mobile global talent to become citizens with physical presence residency requirements?

Questions: Unlocking Canada’s diverse needs

  1. How can immigration play a role in supporting economic growth and innovation in Canada?
  2. Should there be more programs for businesses to permanently hire foreign workers if they can’t find Canadians to fill the job?
  3. What is the right balance between attracting global talent for high-growth sectors, on the one hand, and ensuring affordable labour for businesses that have historically seen lower growth, on the other?
  4. How can immigration fill in the gaps in our demographics and economy?
  5. What Canadian values and traditions are important to share with newcomers to help them integrate into Canadian society?

Questions: Modernizing our immigration system

  1. Currently, immigration levels are planned yearly.  Do you agree with the thinking that planning should be multi-year?
  2. What modernization techniques should Canada invest in for processing of applications?
  3. What should Canada do to ensure its immigration system is modern and efficient?
  4. Is there any rationale for providing options to those willing to pay higher fees for an expedited process?

Questions: Leadership in global migration and immigration

  1. Is it important for Canada to continue to show leadership in global migration? If so, how can we best do that?
  2. How can Canada attract the best global talent and international students?
  3. In what ways can Canada be a model to the world on refugees, migration and immigration?

Andrew Griffith is the author of Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism and is a regular media commentator and blogger (Multiculturalism Meanderings). He is the former Director General for Citizenship and Multiculturalism and has worked for a variety of government departments in Canada and abroad.

Published in Policy
Wednesday, 24 February 2016 03:34

Migrant Myths Influence Immigration Policies

by Tazeen Inam in Mississauga

At a time when Canada has seen a shift in immigration policy, particularly when it comes to resettling Syrian refugees, a study reveals that myths and imaginaries created around migrants can influence a country’s immigration policies. 

Based on a discussions held among researchers and practitioners during a one-day symposium organized at the University of Ottawa in May 2014, the policy brief defines myths and imaginaries as “symbolic collective representations of individuals’ aspirations, hopes and dreams.” 

This can refer to the perceptions and imaginaries of migrants themselves and of policymakers who are concerned with their movements.

The report recommends policymakers examine the diversity of myths created around migrants and adopt a rational approach to deal with the reproduction of these imaginaries rather than take them at face value.

The creation of myths and imaginaries

Luisa Veronis, one of the three authors of the research paper, explains to New Canadian Media that the policy brief applies to the individuals suffering from the processes of “globalization” and who are considered economic immigrants, as their livelihoods in their countries are very limited.

She believes that with technology, we’re much more aware of the conditions and quality of life in other parts of the world. Because of this, we might have preconceived notions of what immigrants and refugees are like, just as they might have preconceptions of Canada and its people.

Veronis says, “What is important to look at are imaginaries — how are they produced [and how they] circulate and influence migrants’ entire journey, from movement decisions to their settlement process. Either they want to travel illegally or wait, as we are seeing in Mediterranean right now.”

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]We might have preconceived notions of what immigrants and refugees are like, just as they might have preconceptions of Canada.[/quote]

However, in case of the Syrian refugees, experts believe that “myth” has not significantly influenced their initial movement, as it is necessity-driven. 

As the report suggests that, more research is required to document the vast diversity of myths that exist.

“We want to go a little bit broader and show how cultural production and collective values, understanding and notions shape decisions,” she explains.

Perceptions of immigrants influence policy

John Shields, a political science professor from Ryerson University, says that the creation of these myths is not a one-way street.

“The Conservatives’ imaginary about Muslim immigrants from Syria had a particular kind of political imaginary, and some of it is manufactured or propagated for political reasons,” he explains.

Unlike Conservatives, Shields says that Liberals see immigration in broader terms; accepting them is an act of nation-building and they see them as new citizens who can contribute to Canadian nation as a whole.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]"Some of it is manufactured or propagated for political reasons."[/quote]

Veronis sees the initial welcoming of Syrian refugees as an easy move, but is curious about what the Liberals will do to the changes the previous government made to the country’s immigration policy.

“I think the most difficult [thing] to do is to address the immigration policy, which basically will tell us [whether] they also believe the immigration is mainly [an] economic driving force,” she says.

Refugee and immigrant perceptions of Canada

While comparing migrant imaginaries of US and Europe with those of Canada, Shields says that the perceptions are positive overall. 

“What defines Canada as a distinct society, the most common answer is diversity and multicultural instead of hockey players or maple syrup,” he says.

However, Shields thinks that by focusing on the economic benefits of immigrants in their policies, Conservatives might have created an inaccurate perception of the country as a place of economic opportunities.

Criticizing the “point system”, Shields says that it conveys the message to immigrants that they will be offered an automatic job, which is not helping the system.

“I think policy makers need to be aware of what [ideas] immigrants have in terms of coming here,” he says. “We obviously need a lot of shifts in the policies and [to] modify the point system.”

[quote align="center" color="#999999"][Shields says] Conservatives might have created an inaccurate perception of the country.[/quote]

When comparing refugees with skilled immigrants, Shields explains that refugees have a tougher set of challenges to overcome which are far from imaginary. Still, they are driven by certain aspirations.

“They come with some kind of dreams and hopes that help to sustain them along inhumane times of transition,” he says.

Ratna Omidvar, head of Ryerson's Global Diversity Exchange and an adjunct professor, adds that Canada opens the door of safety and security for them, but they still have to work to get an education, find work and integrate themselves in Canadian society.

“[The refugees] come with little knowledge. What [they] are not prepared for is to open doors of integration and inclusion. People are not prepared for that at all,” she says.

Commenting on the report, Omidvar says that it’s important to deconstruct truth from fiction in order to create policies that are both realistic and to some idealistic.

She saw this blend of reality and idealism following the 2015 election. Before then, Omidvar says “It was a myth that Canada is always a welcoming country to refugees, as our response to refugee crisis was muted.”

Then things changed, and the imagination of the nation caught up in reality. 

Omidvar is pleased with the new government’s handling of the resettlement process and calls it a “romantic narrative”.

“We are going to welcome refugees and immigrants with a smile,” she says. 

{module NCM Blurb} 

Published in Policy
Saturday, 05 December 2015 22:07

Brampton Mulls Curbs on Diwali Fireworks

by Surjit Singh Flora in Brampton, Ontario

A Brampton city councillor has persuaded colleagues on the city's community services committee to recommend a ban on the sale of fireworks — including storing them in homes — in the wake of a fire that engulfed a home during the Diwali celebrations last month.

On the evening of November 11th, two homes in Brampton were gutted by a fire that may have been sparked by Diwali firework celebrations, the South Asian festival of light.

According to Brampton fire officials, the blaze spread to two adjacent homes, forcing the evacuation of the adjoining residences. Damage from the fire is conservatively estimated to be $1 million according to the fire department.

The cause of the fire

Brampton Fire and Emergency Services (BFES) was called to scene on Binder Twine Trail, near Williams Parkway and Chinguacousy Road, just before 11 p.m. By the time they arrived, they found the house at 190 Binder Twine Trail fully enveloped in flames.

The fire apparently started in the garage and quickly spread throughout the house. It then also spread to the neighbouring home, 192 Binder Twine, which at the time was occupied by its residents.

All six members of the neighbouring Mangat family were forced to leave the house. The family of eight at 190 Binder Twine Trail also escaped unharmed. Out of the three homes that suffered damage, one is completely gutted and another is badly damaged.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]The city received 281 complaint calls about Diwali fireworks in 2013 — up 86 per cent from 2012 — while it only received 46 on Canada Day.[/quote]

Peel Police and the Brampton Fire Department say they are still trying to determine what caused the blaze, but indications are that it's connected to the "improper disposal of fireworks.”

The homeowner at 192 Binder Twine Trail, Inderjit Mangat, told fire and police officials that the neighbours discarded their used fireworks in a black garbage bag and stored them in the garage, which most likely sparked the blaze.

Celebrating safely

Brampton Mayor Linda Jeffrey said in a statement that the City of Brampton takes public safety and the safe use of fireworks in the city “very seriously.” 

She added that city staff continues to work closely with BFES to ensure that City of Brampton By-Laws, policies and enforcement keep residents safe while allowing them to “express their enjoyment on holidays and culturally significant events.”

One in three Brampton residents identify themselves as either Sikh or Hindu, according to the 2011 National Household Survey. As a result, celebrations during Diwali are quite extensive throughout the community.

The city received 281 complaint calls about Diwali fireworks in 2013 — up 86 per cent from 2012 — while it only received 46 on Canada Day.

While Brampton has previously allowed individuals who live on wide lots to set off personal fireworks, they introduced a new system in 2014 that requires individuals to apply for permits. In 2014, the city only gave out 88 permits despite receiving over 675 applications.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]One in three Brampton residents identify themselves as either Sikh or Hindu.[/quote]

According to Jeffrey, City Council will continue to discuss this issue with local authorities in an attempt to find a safe and fair way forward.

“Our Communications team is working closely with BFES and Enforcement to further emphasize to all Brampton residents the Fireworks By-Law, permit process as well as the potential dangers of fireworks use in a residential or park setting.

“I strongly urge all residents to make sure they fully understand all safety measures required to safely use fireworks and ask that all Brampton residents exercise extreme caution when using, storing or disposing of any fireworks,” she concluded.

Potential ban on fireworks

For one Brampton city councillor, education is simply not enough. Shortly after the fires, Councillor Grant Gibson proposed a citywide ban on fireworks at the community services committee.

Gibson said, citing the failure to educate individuals on the danger of fireworks, “This (Binder Twine Trail) is a perfect example of people being careless.”

“I don’t (want to be) the councillor that turned his back on safety,” he said. Gibson’s motion passed, and now the city must consider how to effectively ban the sale of fireworks along with their use on residential properties.

Staff has been directed to look at further methods of enforcement as well as what it would cost for the city to host their own fireworks displays. This would expand the current municipally-sponsored events from Canada Day and New Year’s Day to include Victoria Day and Diwali.

“Fireworks aren't like what they used to be. They are now basically explosives and there’s been a lot of mishandling of them across the city and that’s a major concern for our constituents,” said Gibson.

Journalist Jagdeesh Mann mentored the writer of this article, through the New Canadian Media mentorship program.

{module NCM Blurb}

Published in Top Stories

by Rosanna Haroutounian in Quebec City

Twenty years after voting in Quebec’s referendum on sovereignty, immigrants in the province say cultural relations are improving, but more progress is still needed.

In October 1995, 2,362,648 Quebecers voted against the provincial government’s move to make Quebec an independent state. The ‘no’ side won in Quebec’s second referendum on the issue, with 50.58 per cent of the vote.

For many immigrants, the result represented a challenge to the old notion of Quebecois identity.

“What we were hearing before ’95, which we don’t hear anymore, is pure laine,” says Simon Jacobs, who immigrated to Canada from England in 1989.

Pure laine, or pure wool, is used to refer to Quebecers whose ancestry can be traced to the original French settlers of the province.

Jacobs says that everything Quebec wanted, in terms of maintaining its identity and creating its own laws, already existed, but that important questions about Quebec’s monetary policy remained unanswered.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]“People were saying, ‘I’m American. I’m Syrian. I’m Italian,’ but I didn’t hear, ‘I’m Canadian.’”[/quote]

He says he voted against separation, though he wasn’t sure if he would remain in Quebec at the time.

“I did not feel this was home,” he adds. “I think after the referendum, I had a change of attitude, and that change of attitude was, ‘Damn it, this is where I live. This is my home.’”

Voting in favour

But not all immigrants felt that federalism was the answer to the question of what constitutes Quebecois identity.

“I didn’t feel pride,” says Abdallah Ghazal about his arrival in Montreal from Syria in 1968. “People were saying, ‘I’m American. I’m Syrian. I’m Italian,’ but I didn’t hear, ‘I’m Canadian.’”

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]“Anything that’s divisive to harmonious relationships is not good for multiculturalism.”[/quote]

Ghazal, an agronomist, went on to teach high school science and biology in Victoriaville, QC. In 1995, he voted in favour of sovereignty, and says the decision was largely influenced by the ideas of René Lévesque, founder of the Parti Québécois and defender of Quebec’s independence.

“I admired him because he talked about separation, but also an association with Canada,” says Ghazal. “We would stay a unit of Canada with our own culture and way of life. That’s why I voted ‘yes.’”

Effects of divisive politics

The Parti Québécois, led by then premier of Quebec, Jacques Parizeau, orchestrated the referendum and promoted the 'yes' campaign. As the results were revealed on the night of the referendum, Parizeau proclaimed that the 'yes' side had lost due to “money and ethnic votes.”

“From the standpoint of harmonious relationships between communities in Quebec, I think it was very divisive,” says Jack Jedwab, Executive Vice-President of the Association for Canadian Studies and the Canadian Institute for Identities and Migration. “Anything that’s divisive to harmonious relationships is not good for multiculturalism.”

He adds that the effects were not as “devastating” as they could have been because Quebec society is more interested in harmony than in division.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]“[T]here’s not that big of a difference between Toronto and Montreal in terms of how immigration and integration are managed.”[/quote]

Ghazal says he was encouraged by efforts of the provincial government that followed to secure rights over Quebec’s immigration policies and preserve the French language.

“I’m for the preservation of Quebecois identity,” he explains.

Jedwab says that while most Quebecers value diversity, Quebec decision-makers often associate multiculturalism policies with the federal government.

“It’s been suggested to Quebecers that multiculturalism is associated with ghettoization, or preserving one culture at the expense of the culture of the majority of the province,” he says. “The reality on the ground is there’s not that big of a difference between Toronto and Montreal in terms of how immigration and integration are managed.”

Jacobs says it’s wrong to underestimate the degree to which policies from the federal government can be manipulated on the part of separatists to cause “a rift,” and points to the niqab debate of the 2015 federal election as a recent example.

“I compare it to a marriage,” says Jedwab of Quebec’s relationship with Canada. “You’ve got to work all the time to make it vital. If you don’t do that, it breaks up.”

He says that for him, and the majority of Quebecers, divorce is not a desirable option.

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]“The lack of exposure of the general population outside Montreal to different religions and cultures is the biggest problem here in Quebec.”[/quote]

Challenges faced by today’s immigrants

Jacobs, now president of the Quebec Anglophone Heritage Network, teaches history and works in tourism in Quebec City. He notes that as an oral minority, he faced different challenges than visible minorities face in Quebec.

“The lack of exposure of the general population outside Montreal to different religions and cultures is the biggest problem here in Quebec,” he says.

Ghazal says that he too did not face the same challenges as many immigrants in Quebec experience today.

“I was raised in a private French college,” Ghazal shares of his upbringing in Syria. He says he arrived in Quebec with several of his peers who went on to become engineers and doctors.

Ghazal married and raised two children in Victoriaville, where he worked as a teacher until his retirement 15 years ago.

“Today, many who arrive with diplomas like me find it more difficult to find employment,” he says. “A lot of engineers and doctors come here and are not recognized.”

{module NCM Blurb}

Published in Arts & Culture
Tuesday, 29 September 2015 00:56

Policy Advice for the Next Minister - Part 2

by Nick Noorani and Kareem El-Assal 

It is perhaps a good thing that immigration is not a major federal campaign issue, although the issue does surface in certain immigrant-rich ridings. And, of course, it was one facet of the Globe debate in Calgary, during which the leaders of the three major federal parties spoke to their own platforms
However, anecdotally, we know that lots of Canadians vote for a party based on their approach to immigration: the age-old question, how many is too many? among them. 
New Canadian Media reached out to immigration experts across Canada to help inform any incoming government's future policy direction. We have put together six key questions and requested short, pithy responses. Part 1 of this series can be found here. Here is the take of two more experts -

1. What advice would you give an incoming minister of immigration and multiculturalism?

Noorani: The past five years have seen a substantial change in the immigration system. From a system that was inherited that created huge backlogs as a result of a law passed by former Government forcing every single application to be processed even if they did not meet the requirements. This led to an inefficient system creating backlogs of six to seven years that saw many candidates coming to Canada in their late forties and fifties! The former point system rewarded education and work experience at the cost of language skills. This has resulted in us having the best educated taxi drivers in the world.

I believe that the new immigration system is a more modern humane way of getting immigrants into Canada. The Express Entry system is an online application process that factors in Canada’s labor market requirements and selects immigrants who have the language proficiency required for employment as well as the education needs to contribute to Canada’s economy. Additionally, we have the ability to bring in younger candidates who can contribute positively to the Canadian economy. This is a scalable and sustainable program and I do not believe this system should be tampered with.

I would like to see Multiculturalism as being harmonious with being Canadian.

Louis LaFontaine, the great co-founder of the union that would eventually lead to our Confederation, had this to say about being Canadian when addressing his electors at Terrebonne in 1848:

[quote align="center" color="#999999"]Canada is the land of our ancestors. It is our country as it must be the adopted country of the different peoples which come from around the globe, to make their way into its vast forests to build their homes and place their hopes. Like us, their paramount desire must be the happiness and prosperity of Canada. This is the heritage which they should endeavour to transmit to their descendants in this young and hospitable country. Above all, their children must be like us, Canadians.[/quote]

El-Assal: The Conference Board of Canada is a non-partisan organization.

2. Would you change the relative proportion of economic, family unification and humanitarian (refugee) migrants arriving in Canada every year?

El-Assal: While Canada’s immigration system has always been driven primarily by demographic and economic objectives, family-class immigrants and refugees remain essential elements of the country’s immigration system. As such, adequate supports should continue to be in place to enable the effective attraction, settlement, integration and retention of all three classes of immigrants.

Noorani: Economic category: According to the Conference Board of Canada, our fertility rate stands at 1.6 which is well below our replacement rate of 2.1. This means a big gap and the report calls for numbers to rise to 350,000 per annum. The largest proportion should be economic class so that we have the population growth additionally, being high skilled professionals, we can expect an economic boost as well.

3. What's the ideal number of newcomers (including refugees) that Canada should take in every year (compared to the current average)?

Noorani: Answered above.

El-Assal: According to the Conference Board’s Canadian Outlook Long-Term Economic Forecast, Canada requires 350,000 immigrants arriving annually by 2035 to sustain healthy economic growth. Of course, this depends on Canada’s absorptive capacity (i.e. being able to effectively settle and integrate immigrants and provide essential supports and services to the newcomers), while also ensuring that Canada’s safety and security is upheld.

4. Should multiculturalism be official policy? What needs to change?

El-Assal: Multiculturalism is an official Canadian government policy, expressed in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. Canada’s multiculturalism policy, and approach to settlement and integration, encourages immigrants to become full participants in all aspects of Canadian life. This process, which is commonly referred to as nation building, helps promote social harmony in the country. As a result, there is widespread acceptance of immigration in Canada as illustrated by a recent Environics Institute survey which also found that Canadians see multiculturalism as one of the nation’s most important symbols.

Noorani: Good, bad or ugly, multiculturalism is the glue that holds us all together as a country and I would be averse to changing anything because it works! 

5. Should provinces and municipalities have a greater role in immigration? What role should that be?

Noorani: Absolutely! Their roles as so critical to positive outcomes for newcomers. Municipalities are the micro level and Mayors need to take a leadership role in helping immigrants beyond song, dance and ethnic food!

El-Assal: Federal, provincial and municipal governments are all critical actors in Canada’s immigration system, and work together to foster an approach towards immigration that allows the three levels of government to achieve mutual objectives. Inter-government collaboration between the senior levels of government has strengthened in recent decades as a result of increased dialogue and formal Federal/Provincial/Territorial agreements. More progress on collaboration will be needed to ensure that immigrants reach their full economic potential – credential recognition, bridge training, settlement services, language training, housing, and access to transportation are among the issues that will require expanded effort by all three levels of government.

6. What can a new government do differently to enable "foreign credential recognition?

El-Assal: FCR has been a challenge in Canada that governments have been trying to address for decades. To make further progress, governments, and key stakeholders including business, regulatory bodies, post-secondary educational institutions, and immigrant-serving organizations will need to invest more resources to ensure viable solutions are attained nationally and regionally on the scale required to increase national productivity and innovation performance and close the income gap currently experienced by immigrants. 

Noorani: The FCR program along with the Pan-Canadian Framework for the Assessment and Recognition of Foreign Qualifications are great initiatives and need to be brought to the logical conclusion. Additionally the single pan-Canadian standard should be complemented by a single point of contact and Web portal, which would streamline and simplify the licensing process and better align it to the new labour market demand-driven immigration system (i.e. Express Entry). To increase efficiency and transparency, the assessment and recognition process should be accessible pre-arrival and online to the fullest extent possible. Governments should collaborate with regulators and other stakeholders so that prospective immigrants are required to begin the credential recognition process as part of their immigration application. 

Related reading: Policy advice for the next/new #cdnimm minister

Kareem El-Assal is a Research Associate at the Conference Board of Canada. He plays a key role in the Conference Board’s National Immigration Centre, a five-year research intensive initiative that will culminate in a National Immigration Action Plan for Canada. He is developing the agenda for the Conference Board’s Canadian Immigration Summit 2016, a major two-day event that will be hosted in Ottawa on April 4-5, 2016. 

A social entrepreneur and an immigrant advocate, Nick Noorani is the founding publisher of Canadian Immigrant magazine and Immigrant Networks, and author of the best-selling book Arrival Survival Canada,  published by Oxford University Press.


Published in Policy
Tuesday, 22 September 2015 13:32

Policy Advice for the Next Minister

by Andrew Griffith, Robert Vineberg & Richard Kurland

It is perhaps a good thing that immigration is not a major federal campaign issue, although the issue does surface in certain immigrant-rich ridings. And, of course, it was one facet of last week's Globe debate in Calgary, during which the leaders of the three major federal parties spoke to their own platforms
However, anecdotally, we know that lots of Canadians vote for a party based on their approach to immigration: the age-old question, how many is too many? among them. 
It is in this context that New Canadian Media reached out to immigration experts across Canada to help inform any incoming government's future policy direction. We have put together six key questions and requested short, pithy responses. Here is the take of three experts -

1. What advice would you give an incoming minister of immigration and multiculturalism?

Griffith: Dont neglect citizenship.

If a change in government, maintain increased integrity measures but reduce fees, drop knowledge and language testing for 14-17 year olds (and restore discretion for all), stop revocation for dual citizens for treason or terror, implement oral hearings for misrepresentation, prepare a new and more inclusive citizenship study guide (Discover Canada), set in place an all-party or broad consultative group to recommend changes to the 2014 Citizenship Act.

If no change in government, implement service standards with automatic publishing of results, provide reduced citizenship fees for low-income applicants (e.g., refugees), fully abide by any court decisions regarding citizenship admissibility and revocation and simplify the language in Discover Canada.

Vineberg: We need to return humanity to immigration. Building a nation is not simply bringing workers chosen by employers.  Our immigration officers abroad need to be authorized to choose nation builders in addition to employees. 

A pool of potential immigrants is a good idea but Express Entry is far too complicated.

Kurland: Get good advisors who know the facts and who don’t have an agenda. 

2. Would you change the relative proportion of economic, family unification and humanitarian (refugee) migrants arriving in Canada every year?

Vineberg: Canada’s refugees dropped from 36,000 in 2005 to 23,000 in 2014. Canada can do better than that.  Family Class is steady at about 60,000 or 25% of immigration over the past decade but is not meeting demand. If levels were increased to 320,000 the Family Class could grow to 80,000.

Kurland: That depends on the Minister’s needs.

Griffith: No strong views.

3. What's the ideal number of newcomers (including refugees) that Canada should take in every year (compared to the current average)?

Vineberg: One of the reasons we need more temporary foreign workers is that immigration has not kept pace with the growing population and economy.  Whereas 250,000 represented .9% of population in 1993, it only represents 0.7% today.  Immigration levels need to be raised to at least 0.9% or 320,000 per year.

Griffith: Set in place an advisory body, broadly-based, that would review the social and economic integration data, nationally and regionally, to provide recommendations to government for longer-term targets and assess whether current levels and mix are appropriate.

Kurland: No such thing as an ideal number.

4. Should multiculturalism be official policy? What needs to change?

Griffith: It already is (i.e., Multiculturalism Act, Charter s 27, employment equity and human rights legislation).

Consideration of whether a Multiculturalism Commissioner reporting to Parliament is needed to provide focus for reasonable accommodation discussions, equity and other related multiculturalism issues given lack of attention within CIC. Rebalance settlement funding to provide small additional program (G&C) resources for second generation integration issues. Maintain funding for police-reported hate crimes Statistics Canada annual report. Restore the mandatory Census and for the 2021 Census year, add a supplementary Ethnic Diversity Survey (last done in 2001).

Vineberg: The Multiculturalism policy is fine. The politically motivated multicultural grants undermine the program and ought to be eliminated.

Kurland: Don't know.

5. Should provinces and municipalities have a greater role in immigration? What role should that be?

Vineberg: Provinces have a Constitutional right to be involved in immigration and should be allowed to bring in more immigrants. Raising immigration levels to 320,000 would provide lots of room to do so.

As most immigrants settle in cities, municipalities need to be part of the settlement and integration planning process.

Kurland: No, there is no greater role required. The provinces and the feds both have jurisdictional responsibility. 

Griffith: No strong views.

6. What can a new government do differently to enable "foreign credential recognition?

Kurland: Go transnational. What is good in one country may be good in another country. So if Australia has accredited a person, see if that accreditation would be valid in Canada.

Griffith: Provide frameworks and tools to increase mindfulness of implicit bias and discrimination within certifying bodies regarding standards and qualifications to ensure that the criteria used are objective.

Vineberg: The federal government needs to create better incentives for the provinces and territories to create national standards for credential recognition and if they do not, as with the national securities regulator, the federal government should create national bodies to do so and encourage provinces to join.

Andrew Griffith is the author of Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism and is a regular media commentator and blogger (Multiculturalism Meanderings). He is the former Director General for Citizenship and Multiculturalism and has worked for a variety of government departments in Canada and abroad. His latest book is Multiculturalism in Canada: Evidence and Anecdote. He is also an advisor on NCM's board of directors.

Robert Vineberg’s career in the Canadian Federal Public Service spanned over 35 years, most of which were with the immigration program, serving abroad, in policy positions at national headquarters in Ottawa and, most recently, as Director General of Citizenship and Immigration Canada’s Prairies and Northern Territories Region, based in Winnipeg.  He retired from the public service in 2008 and is now volunteering with immigration and cultural organizations and researching the history of immigration policy. 

Richard Kurland is a Vancouver-based immigration lawyer and the Editor-in-Chief of Lexbase, Canada's largest immigration periodical.


Published in Policy
Page 1 of 2

New Canadian Media provides nonpartisan news and views representing all Canadian immigrant communities. As part of this endeavour, we re-publish aggregated content from various ethnic media publishers in Canada in an effort to raise the profile of news and commentary from an immigrant perspective. New Canadian Media, however, does not guarantee the accuracy of or endorse the views and opinions contained in content from such other sites. The views expressed on this site are those of the individual writers and commentators, and not necessarily those of New Canadian Media. Copyright © 2019 All rights reserved