Illegal migration tearing UK apart, Mahmood says

Will see what today’s announcement and details reveals:

Illegal migration is “tearing the country apart”, the home secretary has said, as she prepares to unveil major plans to overhaul asylum policy.

New measures set to be announced by Shabana Mahmood on Monday will include people granted asylum needing to wait 20 years before they can apply to settle permanently.

The plans will also see those granted asylum have their refugee status regularly reviewed and those whose home countries are then deemed safe told to return.

Mahmood told the BBC’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme she saw tackling illegal migration as a “moral mission”.

Shadow home secretary Chris Philp said the Conservatives would deport illegal migrants “within a week”, while Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey called for asylum seekers to have the right to work.

The changes are aimed at making the UK a less attractive destination for illegal migrants, leading to reduced small boat crossings and asylum claims.

Mahmood is also to announce the UK will stop granting visas to people from Angola, Namibia and the Democratic Republic of Congo if their governments do not rapidly improve co-operation on removals.

A Home Office source said the countries were being targeted “for their unacceptably low co-operation and obstructive returns processes”.

As first reported in the Times the threat of the visa ban for certain countries comes after thousands of illegal migrants and criminals from the three nations were said to be in the UK.

Many specific details and practicalities of the sweeping changes to asylum policy are yet to be made clear, and will be set out by Mahmood on Monday…..

Source: Illegal migration tearing UK apart, Mahmood says

Senate urged to give children adopted from overseas the same citizenship rights as those born in Canada 

Perhaps I am a bit thick, but parents of foreign-born adoptees have to commit to raising their adopted child in Canada and thus would most likely meet the residency requirement of 1,095 days within a five-year period.  

The direct route to citizenship for adoptees was in response to parental pressure to have a faster route than PR sponsorship. But making that choice meant the adopted child was considered the first generation born abroad, like any naturally born child born abroad.

Appears more a matter of identity and convenience rather than fundamental practicalities to me:

….Two lawyers specializing in citizenship have submitted a briefing paper to the Senate committee, which will consider Bill C-3 this week. They argue that the bill should exempt children adopted from abroad from the substantial-connection test. 

The paper’s co-author, Toronto lawyer Sujit Choudhry, who filed the successful constitutional challenge to the Citizenship Act on behalf of Lost Canadian clients, said it is “deeply unfair to the families of these children to treat them differently than children adopted domestically.”

“It also violates Canada’s international treaty obligations and the Charter,” he said in an e-mail. 

Its other author, immigration lawyer Maureen Silcoff, suggested that unless Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada addresses the issue it could face a legal challenge. 

“IRCC is fully aware of the issue. Adoptive parents and MPs have been advocating on their behalf for years. We do not understand their reluctance to address this issue at this moment, when C-3 is before Parliament. Amending C-3 would avoid unnecessary litigation.”

Don Chapman, a leading advocate for Lost Canadians, who is giving evidence to the Senate committee this week, said, “I don’t want to leave any child behind.” 

But he expressed concern that amending the bill in the Senate may lead to it being held up when it returns to the Commons. …

Source: Senate urged to give children adopted from overseas the same citizenship rights as those born in Canada

C-3 Citizenship: My Planned Remarks

It will be a long SOCI meeting, as the Senate is holding all testimony in an over 4 hour session. Given the other witnesses, I will be the only contrarian voice on the need for a five-year limit to meet the residency requirement and the need for annual reporting of citizenship proofs issued under C-3 provisions (which the House immigration committee recommended but the Liberals and NDP reverted to the original bill at third reading).

CBA and CILA submissions focus largely on adoptions, advocating for birth date of adoptees, not the adoption date). CBA argues against requiring a consecutive residency requirement but doesn’t acknowledge that this can be cumulative within a five year period and would likely still be Charter compliant (allowing, to use their example, for Disneyland holidays).

Given the compressed timelines due to the court deadline, and the witness list, unlikely that SOCI will recommend and changes to C-3.

My planned remarks below:

Link to meeting: Agenda

Globe editorial: Canada’s muddled immigration plan won’t bring in the world’s best talent

Sometimes being too cute in presenting numbers attracts more attention….

…The federal government’s claim that the plan “stabilizes targets for permanent resident admissions” is misleading. The nominal target for new permanent residents next year is 380,000, slightly lower than this year’s 395,000. 

But if the 148,000 from the one-off initiatives were included over the next two years, as they should be, the number given permanent resident status would jump to 454,000, assuming an even split. The Liberal government is creating superficial distinctions to blur reality, much as they are doing with “capital” and “operating” spending in the budget. The reality is that the government is increasing permanent resident targets for the next two years.

The federal government should focus on bringing the bulk of economic migrants through its national programs. And Ottawa should resist the urge to micromanage the labour market, and instead focus on restoring the skills-driven approach that will identify people most likely to prosper, and to help Canada prosper.

Source: Canada’s muddled immigration plan won’t bring in the world’s best talent

Canada’s cap on international students helped lower rents. But will it bring colleges and universities down as well?

Some good quotes:

..André Côté, interim executive director of the DAIS think tank at Toronto Metropolitan University, told a Parliamentary committee this fall that it’s clear the international student program had grown “a little out of control.”

There had been a huge increase in the number of foreign students, mainly in college programs, who were unlikely to go on to well-paying jobs, Mr. Côté said. And there was never going to be enough spots for all those who wanted to stay in Canada long-term, he added.

“As much as it stinks to close campuses and to lay off staff, I look at all this and say we had a system that grew far too big for its britches,” he said to the committee. “It was a bit of a reckoning that had to happen.” …

Amir Khajepour, a professor of engineering at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, says he typically has 40 to 50 graduate students and postdocs working in his lab. His research has attracted grants and industry partnerships focused on autonomous vehicles, underground mining, robotics and health care. But he’s struggling to fill available positions.

“We are not looking for just anyone. We are looking for the best students from the best universities with the best credentials,” he said.

In the last year he has accepted about 20 to 30 international applicants, but only four have been able to obtain study permits, as processing times have increased, he said, adding his lab is down to about 30 students.

Prof. Khajepour said he doesn’t understand why the government was previously unable to distinguish between top students coming to attend prestigious universities and people whose primary purpose is immigration.

“You are damaging research. In Canada, you are in a good position to attract the best. You are not even using this opportunity,” he said.

Source: Canada’s cap on international students helped lower rents. But will it bring colleges and universities down as well?

Palestinians living in Gaza lose lawsuits that would force Canada to process crisis travel visas

Of note (inability to leave Gaza for biometrics):

Palestinians in Gaza who applied to join relatives in Canada two years ago under Ottawa’s crisis immigration policy but haven’t received travel visas lost their lawsuits trying to force officials to act despite security problems in the war-torn region.

Four similar court actions asked the Federal Court to order officials with Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to process their temporary resident visa applications.

Justice Henry S. Brown said the stories of applicants in Gaza were “heartbreaking” but he could not issue the orders they sought.

The court cases stem from Ottawa’s announcement of a “temporary public policy to facilitate temporary resident visas for certain extended family affected by the crisis in Gaza,” which took effect on Jan. 9, 2024.

It was supposed to provide quick refuge for Palestinians with relatives who are either Canadian citizens or permanent residents and willing to be an “anchor relative” in Canada.

The Gaza policy was capped at 5,000 visas. Court heard that almost two years later there are about 4,200 unprocessed applicants.

The policy was similar in purpose to emergency policies for Ukrainians fleeing Russia’s invasion, Afghans fleeing the Taliban’s return to power, and those in danger zones after an earthquake in Türkiye and Syria. The policies remove some criteria normally needed to enter Canada to speed things up in a crisis.

…He agreed with the applicants that the government has a legal duty to process visa applications made under the policy. He also agreed with the government that officers did not have a duty to process applications within a particular timeframe.

“I am satisfied the Applicant has a legitimate expectation to his application being dealt with in a timely manner. However, this expectation only arises when the Applicant meets all the conditions of the Policy and provides biometric information (which he is unable to do),” Brown wrote.

Brown found that Canada’s policy did not allow visa officers to override other regulations on immigration, and those regulations require a biometric check. The government argued that Ottawa has a duty to maintain the integrity of Canada’s immigration system and Brown agreed.

“The root cause of the Applicant’s failure to provide his biometric data is of course the changed operational context, namely the closure of the Rafah crossing which made obtaining and submitting biometrics impossible.”

He said because of that, the applicants did not meet the threshold for a court order forcing the government to act because that required all elements of a process to be complete before unreasonable delay can be determined.

All cases were denied.

Source: Palestinians living in Gaza lose lawsuits that would force Canada to process crisis travel visas

Rioux | Les dix ans du Bataclan

More war of civilization commentary but correct that it is internal, not just external:

…Dix ans plus tard, l’idéologie qui a inspiré les assassins du Bataclan n’a cessé de progresser. Tout cela à la faveur d’une naïveté coupable, mais aussi, et c’est nouveau, d’intérêts politiques bien sentis. Certains partis étant prêts, pour rameuter une nouvelle clientèle, à faire l’impasse sur quelques vérités dérangeantes.

Aujourd’hui, constatent les meilleurs analystes, l’islamisme n’est plus un courant venu de l’étranger, comme plusieurs de ces assassins du 13 novembre arrivés par bateau de Syrie pour se mêler aux migrants qui débarquaient sur les côtes grecques. Il est devenu endogène et fleurit dans les banlieues de toutes les grandes villes d’Europe. Nos pays ont beau avoir délocalisé usines et capitaux, ils sont dorénavant capables de produire des djihadistes maison 100 % pure laine. Ce qui faisait dire à un spécialiste des stratégies militaires comme David Betz, du King’s College de Londres, que, face à l’effritement des consensus sociaux et de la confiance envers l’État, les conflits à venir ont de plus en plus de chances de ne pas être des guerres traditionnelles entre pays, mais des guerres civiles.

« Tout le drame, c’est que l’ennemi est devenu endogène et que nous n’avons plus la même capacité à le reconnaître », nous confiait l’ancien président de la commission parlementaire sur les attentats du 13 novembre, Georges Fenech.

Souhaitons que ces commémorations, par ailleurs nécessaires, ne servent pas à blanchir la conscience de ceux qui ont fermé les yeux et n’ont rien vu venir. Il ne faudrait pas que les victimes du Bataclan soient mortes en vain.

Source: Chronique | Les dix ans du Bataclan

… Ten years later, the ideology that inspired the Bataclan’s assassins continued to progress. All this thanks to guilty naivety, but also, and this is new, of well-felt political interests. Some parties are ready, to attract a new clientele, to ignore some disturbing truths.

Today, the best analysts note, Islamism is no longer a current from abroad, like many of these murderers of November 13 who arrived by boat from Syria to mingle with the migrants who landed on the Greek coasts. It has become endogenous and blooms in the suburbs of all major cities in Europe. Our countries may have relocated factories and capital, but they are now capable of producing 100% pure wool homemade jihadists. This made a military strategy specialist like David Betz of King’s College London say that, in the face of the crumbling of social consensus and confidence in the state, future conflicts are increasingly likely to be not traditional wars between countries, but civil wars.

“The whole drama is that the enemy has become endogenous and that we no longer have the same ability to recognize him,” told us the former president of the parliamentary committee on the November 13 attacks, Georges Fenech.

Let us hope that these commemorations, which are also necessary, do not serve to whitewash the conscience of those who closed their eyes and saw nothing coming. The victims of the Bataclan should not have died in vain.

François Legault gonfle les chiffres sur les faux demandeurs d’asile

Quelle surprise:

Pour justifier ses politiques, le premier ministre François Legault a répété jeudi que la moitié des demandeurs d’asile réclamaient le statut de réfugié sous de faux motifs, alors que des données officielles récentes démontrent plutôt que de 22 % à 39 % des dossiers sont rejetés pour cette raison.

« On sait de façon historique que la moitié ne sont pas de vrais demandeurs d’asile », a dit M. Legault lors de la période de questions à l’Assemblée nationale.

Le premier ministre répondait alors à une question de la co-porte-parole de Québec solidaire, Ruba Ghazal, sur le manque de ressources pour les itinérants. « Il y a plusieurs causes à la crise de l’itinérance qu’on vit actuellement », a-t-il répondu avant d’évoquer les problèmes de santé mentale, la crise du logement et l’afflux de demandeurs d’asile.

« On en a fait beaucoup, mais la demande explose », a-t-il dit, avant d’affirmer que « la moitié des demandeurs d’asile ne sont pas de vrais demandeurs d’asile ».

Plus prudent, son ministre de l’Immigration, Jean-François Roberge, avait soutenu en matinée que « de 40 % à 50 % […] ne sont pas de réels demandeurs d’asile »….

Source: François Legault gonfle les chiffres sur les faux demandeurs d’asile

To justify his policies, Prime Minister François Legault repeated on Thursday that half of asylum seekers were claiming refugee status on false grounds, while recent official data show rather that 22% to 39% of applications are rejected for this reason.

“We know historically that half are not real asylum seekers,” said Mr. Legault during the question period in the National Assembly.

The Prime Minister was then answering a question from Québec solidaire’s co-spokeswoman, Ruba Ghazal, on the lack of resources for itinerants. “There are several causes for the homelessness crisis we are currently experiencing,” he replied before mentioning mental health problems, the housing crisis and the influx of asylum seekers.

“We have done a lot, but demand is exploding,” he said, before saying that “half of asylum seekers are not real asylum seekers.”

More cautious, his Minister of Immigration, Jean-François Roberge, had maintained in the morning that “40% to 50% […] are not real asylum seekers”….

McWhorter: ‘The Zorg’ tells a story we all must hear

Another good column, again a reminder that simplistic Manichean dichotomies don’t reflect historical realities and complexities:

…As the African American studies professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. has written and I have experienced, people are often uncomfortable learning that Africans sold one another into this living hell. A common objection is that Africans had no way of knowing what conditions their captives would encounter. But they saw those captives being marched all but to death, sold like animals and penned into a slave castle hold. Black African slave traders had more than enough information to understand the fundamental immorality of the undertaking. If whites had seen even only what the Africans saw, we would not hesitate to judge them as unforgivably complicit in sin.

One lesson of “The Zorg” is that history and people are complex. The recently fashionable view of American (or Western) history as just one extended hit job, with whiteness always the oppressor and people of color always the subaltern, is ultimately a childish temptation, excusing us from engaging detail and nuance. Humans of all shades have quite often been awful to one another. Our job is to work against that tendency, not to pretend it doesn’t exist. And to celebrate those who overcome it, whatever their race. Abolitionism — a Western, Anglophone achievement, which Kara recounts in a final chapter — was a keystone example of that effort, and “The Zorg” is invaluable instruction in what made it so important….

Source: ‘The Zorg’ tells a story we all must hear

StatsCan Study: The contribution of foreign-born mothers to Canadian births from 1997 to 2024

Of interest:

Since 2009, Canada has been experiencing a decline in fertility, which accelerated in 2017. In addition, the country saw unprecedented annual population growth from 2022 to 2024 on account of strong international migration. In this context, the study “The contribution of foreign-born mothers to Canadian births from 1997 to 2024” sheds new light on the contribution of foreign-born women (i.e., those born outside Canada) to births in Canada over the period from 1997 to 2024 using vital statistics data on births.

In 2024, more than two in five newborns (42.3%) had a foreign-born mother, a proportion that nearly doubled in just over 25 years. Also, nearly three in five babies (57.0%) born to mothers over the age of 40 years had a foreign-born mother in 2024. In contrast, among babies born to mothers aged 19 years and younger, just over 1 in 10 (12.8%) had a foreign-born mother.

Among all births in Canada, the proportion attributable to mothers born in India increased nearly fivefold from 1997 to 2024, rising from 2.1% to 10.3%. As a result, India was the leading country of origin for new foreign-born mothers in 2024, followed by the Philippines (3.1% of all births) and China (2.0% of all births).

In 2024, Ontario and British Columbia (48.7% each) had the highest proportion of births to foreign-born mothers, while the lowest proportion was observed in the Atlantic provinces (23.6%).

From 1997 to 2024, the largest increases in the number of births to foreign-born mothers were observed in Saskatchewan (+437%), the Atlantic provinces (+298%), Alberta (+264%) and Manitoba (+206%).

According to the 2021 Census of Population, the adjusted proportion of foreign-born women among women of childbearing age was estimated at 32.3%. This is slightly lower than the proportion of births to foreign-born mothers that year (33.0%), a trend that has been observed in the last five censuses of population. This suggests that foreign-born women are overrepresented among mothers who give birth in Canada compared with their proportion of the Canadian population.

From 2022 to 2024, 96% to 98% of Canada’s annual population growth was due to international migration (new immigrants and non-permanent residents), while the remainder was due to natural increase (births minus deaths). However, without the contribution of foreign-born individuals to births and deaths, the natural increase in Canada would have been negative since 2022.

Source: Study: The contribution of foreign-born mothers to Canadian births from 1997 to 2024