TFWP reforms a success as applications plummet, says Kenney

A remarkable change from making it too easy to engage Temporary Foreign Workers to the current restrictions, with a 75 percent drop in applications. Lesson learned by the Government on how to use incentives and disincentives:

A year ago, the Conservatives implemented a $275 fee. In June, that fee was hiked to $1,000 for each worker, an expense that essentially placed the temporary foreign worker program out of reach for many small businesses.

Some employers have complained that the new rules are too onerous and make it difficult for them to operate in areas of the country with low unemployment.

Western premiers have also raised concerns about the overhaul, saying their provinces have a pressing need for skilled labour.

Jinny Sims, the NDP’s employment and immigration critic, mocked Kenney’s defence of the overhaul, pointing to the case of 58 electricians in Saskatchewan who said they were laid off from Alliance Energy in May while the company’s temporary foreign workers were kept on.

“The rule of asking employers if they think a Canadian will lose his or her job ‘now or in the foreseeable future’ gives huge wiggle room to employers,” Sims said. “When will the government make real changes and have real penalties?”

Kenney told Sims to bring those allegations to Service Canada “or to the Canada Border Services Agency so that a formal inquiry can be launched.”

TFWP reforms a success as applications plummet, says Kenney (pay wall)

Report offers rare peek into Canadian gang life and high-risk youth

Good study on motivations behind joining gangs. Sheema Khan has looked at anti-gang initiatives as a way to reduce “honour crimes (Canada looks to Chicago to reduce ‘honour’ crimes) and there are some similarities with attraction to extremist and fighting abroad:

That’s when the unassuming Hieu Ngo would go to work. He would tell them his story, how he went from being a Vietnamese refugee tempted by street life to a University of Calgary associate professor whose research on gangs and their behaviour has produced a pivotal study entitled The Unravelling of Identities and Belonging: Criminal Gang Involvement of Youth from Immigrant Families.

It’s a unique report driven by Prof. Ngo’s life experiences. He conducted interviews with more than 30 gangsters or former gangsters; some of whom were born abroad, others who were first-generation Canadians. Prof. Ngo chose this demographic as his subject matter because their numbers are increasing nationally and because not enough research has been done on what pulls these youth into gangs.

“It’s about the unravelling of who they are,” Prof. Ngo said. “In extreme cases, young people I talked to had people chasing them with a baseball bat. And for a 12-year-old who just came from a refugee camp, had traumatic experiences in Burundi where people were being killed, then comes to Canada thinking we have a safe place and he gets chased by other teenagers because he’s a black kid? That takes away their sense of identity and a chance to be a Canadian.”

The youth in that story ended up joining a gang for safety. Prof. Ngo’s approach is based on preventative action. He wants immigrant youth to stay clear of gangs and to choose other options. He arrived in Calgary at the age of 18 after being sponsored by a local church. He attended high school, learned to skate and cleaned downtown office buildings to make money. It not only helped him assimilate to Canadian culture, it kept him off the streets where his vulnerability and stature – he’s five-foot-six, 125 pounds – would have attracted gang recruiters.

Report offers rare peek into Canadian gang life and high-risk youth – The Globe and Mail.

‘Birth tourism’ crackdown gets frosty reception from B.C.

More on birth tourism and appears British Columbia, while softer in tone, shares Ontario’s concerns.

Minister Alexander is reverting to a more hardline script than his messaging in the February announcement of changes to the Citizenship Act and his comments to Chinese Canadian media about it “not being a priority:”

But federal Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said Monday that Ottawa is forging ahead.

“This is opportunism. It is people taking advantage of our system,” Alexander said.

“We will find a way to try to prevent it.”

B.C. Jobs Minister Shirley Bond told The Vancouver Sun in an email that her office has written to the federal government seeking greater “clarity” about the proposal, which was first floated in 2012 by former Immigration Minister Jason Kenney.

The B.C. letter was intended to “express concern about any financial and administrative costs that may result from this policy shift,” according to Bond, who added that she expects Ottawa to provide “adequate notice” of any changes.

The federal government is concerned about the phenomenon that has resulted in maternity clinics in Toronto and Vancouver telling Chinese nationals that birth in Canada could make the child eligible for Canadian education and heath care.

‘Birth tourism’ crackdown gets frosty reception from B.C..

Canadians fighting with Islamic State could lose citizenship | Toronto Star

Minister Alexander’s standard talking points on revocation:

Canadians with dual citizenship fighting with Islamic extremists in Iraq and Syria could have their citizenship revoked under newly passed legislation, Immigration Minister Chris Alexander says.

Alexander says revoking the citizenship of those convicted of terrorism offences — allowed now under new citizenship legislation that became law earlier this year — is an important tool to help stem the tide of foreign fighters flocking to join Islamic State also known as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

“We will do it in every case we can, in the case of dual nationals,” Alexander told reporters Monday.

“Terrorism, espionage, treason are the most serious acts of disloyalty that you can commit. Terrorism is incompatible with citizenship.”

Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati is challenging the legislation, saying Parliament does not have the constitutional power to strip a Canadian-born citizen of his or her citizenship.

But Alexander said that revocation would happen only with “clear safeguards,” such as a court conviction for terrorism.

“Only when we have that conviction will revocation become a possibility,” the immigration minister told reporters on Parliament Hill.

The inconvenient truth is the number of Canadian-born with single nationality (e.g., Damian Clairmont, André Poulin, the Gordon brothers, John Maguire) would not be subject to revocation (those still alive), thus different punishments for the same crime.

Another likely defeat for the Government when the first cases come before the courts.

Canadians fighting with Islamic State could lose citizenship | Toronto Star.

Immigrants to Canada not sold on new express entry system – Politics – CBC News

Not particularly surprising result given some of the ongoing issues related to foreign credential recognition and the abuse of the Temporary Foreign Workers program by employers:

But the Ipsos Reid study, commissioned by Citizenship and Immigration earlier this year, suggests newcomers in 14 focus groups located in seven communities across the country weren’t sold on the new system.

“A number of participants in all sessions wondered why the government was focusing on those who have yet to immigrate to Canada rather than those who have already immigrated,” the study states.

The respondents, from a mix of ages and socio-economic backgrounds, also questioned the integrity of the process.

They were “quick to caution that the potential for fraudulent behaviour” was real, whether on the part of applicant or the prospective employer.

“Participants expect that certain steps would be taken to guard against such behaviour,” the study says.

Immigrants to Canada not sold on new express entry system – Politics – CBC News.

Unindicted co-conspirator in 1993 World Trade Centre bombing deported to Canada

Understand why not welcome in many places:

Mr. Philips did not respond to requests for comment. But in an “official statement” on Facebook, he wrote that, “I have never had any links nor have I ever been accused of having links to any terrorist group.”

He said there was nothing to the U.S. allegations against him. “In normal language, ‘unindicted’ simply means ‘no charges have been filed against me due to lack of evidence,’ and ‘co-conspirator’ means ‘guilty by association,’ that someone who the authorities arrested had my name in their telephone book, or they were seen shaking hands with me, or they prayed next to me in a mosque, etc…”

He vowed to clear his name and return to the Philippines. “In banning and demonizing us, they have created a vacuum of information which continues to be exploited and filled by extremist elements who easily recruit youthful impressionable followers with emotional messages to their savage, violent and merciless unIslamic methodologies and ideologies.”

Unindicted co-conspirator in 1993 World Trade Centre bombing deported to Canada

From the Globe, not a model of integration:

However, Mr. Philips is seen with suspicion by authorities because he advocates a staunchly orthodox, literal form of Islam.

“If Salafi means that you’re a traditionalist that follows the scripture according to the early traditions, then yeah. I’m not a modernist. I’m not a person who makes his own individual interpretations according to the times,” he said.

He has in the past been accused of inciting hatred for saying that, under sharia law, homosexuality is punishable by death. And he believes Muslims owe allegiance to their religion first, before their country. “My message … really is for Muslims to be Muslims first, and then nationalist after, whatever their nationality is. So you’re a Muslim first and you are a Canadian second. You’re a Muslim first and an American second,” he said.

“This is looked at as some kind of fifth-column movement; we’re creating a group of people whose first allegiance is not to their country.”

Controversial imam Bilal Philips says banning him won’t stop his message

Canadian Museum of Human Rights: Letter Regarding Portrayal of World War 1 Internment

The ongoing challenge in satisfying (or not) everyone at the Canadian Museum for Human Rights as seen in this campaign:

We will be asking our affected communities to refrain from partaking in the opening ceremonies or any subsequent activities at the CMHR until this matter is resolved fairly.

While we welcome the development of a national museum outside the capital region, it is regrettable that the CMHR’s exhibits were developed without sufficient attention being given to key Canadian stories. An enlarged photograph and one short film clip buried in a documentary film does not, in our view, constitute an acceptable treatment of Canada’s first national internment operations.

If your goal is to have a truly inclusive national museum then you must reflect the nation’s multicultural history. The insignificant attention given to First World War era internment operations represents a slight to all of the internees, enemy aliens and their descendants, including Canadians of Ukrainian, Hungarian, Croatian, German, Austrian, Polish, Slovak, Czech, Serbian, Slovene, Bulgarian, and other origins.

Earlier controversies, spearheaded by some of the same people, included the relative portrayal of the Holocaust compared to the Holodomor (starvation of Ukraine under Stalin) – see Discontent remains on CMHR, Holodomor.

As to the portrayal of the internment camps, the Museum has to balance this against other Canadian stories such as the Chinese Head Tax, the “continuous journey” and other immigration restrictions, Japanese Canadian internment and dispersal, and other groups affected during World War II.

I don’t envy the Museum in the choices and decisions it must make.

The Government endowed $10 million to the World War I Internment Fund (more than any other group under the Community Historical Recognition Program) along with a Parks Canada $3-4 million project at Banff (Cave and Basin) to educate visitors about the or one of the first internment camps in Canada.

Picking on one aspect while not acknowledging the broader picture, while legitimate, seems a bit excessive.

Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias one year later: What I heard

My reflections on my book one year later, and what I heard from others:

In promoting my book, I spoke with a variety of groups, including former deputies, policy analysts, students, academics and journalists.

The limited feedback I received from the political level indicated that I had achieved my goal of balancing government and public servant perspectives.

From these discussions, particularly with more senior officials, it was clear that there was a relationship issue, for which both sides shared responsibility. But it was striking that the theme of mutual distrust and suspicion permeated most levels with direct experience in working with the political level.

Equally striking to some was that the relationship, and the overall approach did not change once the government obtained a majority in 2011.

Some pointed out that I over-simplified the ideological divide, as public servants in economic departments have more conservative views than those in social departments. Others questioned whether it was values, rather than ideology, but did not disagree on the divide.

Others acknowledged that the public service had not adequately prepared for the transition by not understanding the ideological and values roots of the government.

Some expressed frustration at providing advice that was routinely discounted or viewed as disloyal, and questioned how it was possible to provide advice when the government’s world view was so at odds with their best, professional advice, even acknowledging their implicit biases.

Most were pessimistic that a change of government would necessarily change things for the better, as the success of the Harper government in implementing its agenda and controlling the message was not lost on the other parties.

Those with longer memories warned against nostalgia for “the good old days,” noting that they were not as good as portrayed.

It was unclear the degree of which the relationship issue was being discussed within and among departments, or whether the Destination 2020 initiative, a more comfortable process discussion, overshadowed a more fundamental re-examination.

Policy arrogance and innocent bias | hilltimes.com. (pay wall)

“Immigrant Vote” to Gain Strength in 2015 – New Canadian Media

Good interview with Prof. Triadafilopoulos of UofT on immigrant voting patterns and trends. Looking at this in context of my upcoming book on multiculturalism. Following two observations of interest:

6. Given your findings, what does your study suggest on the subject of immigration generally being a non-partisan issue in Canada?

It will likely remain the case. There’s no political pay-off for populist anti-immigrant rhetoric at the federal level.

Canada is unique among major immigration countries in the degree to which immigration policy is de-politicized, and immigration itself is enthusiastically embraced by federal political parties. Quebec’s provincial politics since 2007 may be a partial exception to this pattern, but this has not had a discernible impact on Quebec voices in federal policy debates over immigration.

7. Do you have any further thoughts on the “immigrant vote” in the 2011 federal elections you said it was inconclusive at the time of writing?

We have not done the necessary analysis to move beyond what we have.  We hope to do so soon.  The key point is that all parties in Canada support a relatively liberal immigration policy, as reflected in annual admissions.  There is also consensus on the utility of an official multiculturalism policy – our Conservative Party is rather different than similar parties in other countries.

“Immigrant Vote” to Gain Strength in 2015 – New Canadian Media – NCM.

At a landmark Berlin rally, Merkel vows to fight anti-Semitism

Given the history of the Holocaust, resurgence of antisemitism in Germany worrisome, with political leaders responding with appropriate strong messaging:

“That people in Germany are threatened and abused because of their Jewish appearance or their support for Israel is an outrageous scandal that we wont accept,” Merkel said. “It’s our national and civic duty to fight anti-Semitism.”

Merkel only rarely attends demonstrations, but she joined German President Joachim Gauck and Jewish community leaders for the rally at the Brandenburg Gate in central Berlin.

“Anyone who hits someone wearing a skullcap is hitting us all. Anyone who damages a Jewish gravestone is disgracing our culture. Anyone who attacks a synagogue is attacking the foundations of our free society.”

The rally itself, organized by the Central Council of Jews in Germany, was extraordinary. Jews in Germany generally keep a low profile, but community leaders have said Jews were feeling threatened by anti-Semitism after the Gaza conflict.

More than half a million Jews lived in Germany when the Nazis took power in 1933. That number was reduced to about 30,000 by the Holocaust. The population has since grown to about 200,000 – a source of pride for Merkel and many Germans.

At a landmark Berlin rally, Merkel vows to fight anti-Semitism | Reuters.