Here’s what really happened when Canada shut down Roxham Road

A possible fallacy to arguments made by advocates that the change affected the “most vulnerable people without the money, without the wherewithal, without the ability to get a visa, who are now excluded from Canada’s protection” is that it appears that many of the Roxham Road crossers had arrived in the USA by air, and, who, in many cases, had US entry visas.

So perhaps more of a shift between source countries than greater impact on the more vulnerable and a shared “class privilege”:

New rules brought in this year to stem the tide of irregular migrants at spots such as Quebec’s Roxham Road have changed who is coming to Canada to seek asylum and how they are getting here, a Star analysis reveals.

The shift in patterns, critics contend, means that some of the most vulnerable refugees are being excluded from Canada’s asylum protection.

In March, Washington and Ottawa expanded the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement across their entire shared border — not just at the official ports of entry.

In doing so, they closed a loophole that had been used by irregular migrants to sneak from one country into the other to seek asylum, something that had drawn significant political and media scrutiny.

The updated accord meant that any foreign national who attempted to cross into Canada at any point of the 8,891-kilometre shared border without authorization would be denied access to asylum and turned back to the U.S., unless one of the exceptions to the rule applied.

Since new rules took effect in late March, the foot traffic of asylum seekers crossing Quebec’s Roxham Road has dwindled to a trickle or nothing. Yet there hasn’t been a major drop-off in those coming to Canada to seek asylum.

Data obtained by the Star offers an explanation.

Between January and July of this year, the total number of by-air and by-land asylum claimants to Canada was 39,295 — an increase of 29 per cent over the same period last year. (This year’s number also surpassed by a huge margin the 14,820 recorded by the end of July in 2019, the year before the pandemic hit.)

After the new border rules were put into place in March, the number of land claimants dropped significantly — from more than 5,000 a month in the first three months of 2023 to just under 1,500 a month.

However, that decline was offset by the surge in the number of people seeking protection upon arrival by air.

Although there were 9,490 fewer people making claims at the land ports of entry between March and July, the number of migrants seeking asylum at airports grew by 8,425 over the same time in 2022. It’s gone from 1,500 a month at the start of the year to 3,350 a month since April.

Critics say the new border measures simply make the presence of refugees less visible and their arrival less dramatic.

“In order to erase the images of people crossing with luggage in hand at Roxham Road and quiet the noise of a political backlash, the government has created a new problem, but it’s a less visible problem,” said refugee lawyer Maureen Silcoff. She added that the would-be asylum seekers who are in the most jeopardy might be the hardest hit by the policy change.

“My concern is the government has now put in place a system with dire consequences, because the more vulnerable people are now at high risk of harm in their country of origin because the land border is closed and the airports are not available to them … It’s the most vulnerable people without the money, without the wherewithal, without the ability to get a visa, who are now excluded from Canada’s protection.”

Unlike some migrants arriving by land, claimants who come by air must have some forms of travel documents such as a passport and visa or electronic travel authorization (eTA) to board a flight to get here. The new border rules have seemingly had an impact on what nation’s would-be asylum seekers reach Canada.

Turkey remains the main source of land-border claimants, with 3,545 claims lodged between January and July, followed by Colombians (3,005), Haitians (2,205), Venezuelans (2,010) and Afghans (1,685) among the top five.

The source countries are drastically different for those coming by air. Mexicans top the list with 7,885 claims in the first seven months of this year, followed by Indians (1,985), Kenyans (975), Senegalese (745) and Ethiopians (475).

Experts can’t explain the surge of by-air claims in Canada since April because there have not been any dramatic world events that prompted the spike in claims from those countries, though there are generally increased arrivals of claimants by air in summer months.

“People who are fleeing as refugees come from a whole range of backgrounds. You’re going to have to do country-specific research in order to identify the migration corridors they use,” said Prof. Sharry Aiken, who teaches immigration law at Queen’s University.

“Data sets don’t coalesce because people were coming as irregular migrants and that was the only way they could come, and people who are still coming on planes are able to get documents.”

What’s clear to Aiken is that these top refugee source countries, whether their asylum seekers come by air or land, all have a history of human rights violations. Canada does not require visas from Mexican travellers, she said, which explains the high volume of air claims from Mexico. (The U.S. requires Mexicans coming by air or land to have a visa or another document called a Border Control Card.)

“Every attempt by governments to seal borders is not going to be effective in reducing the numbers of people arriving. They will temporarily reduce some asylum seekers from taking particular routes, but others will be taking different routes,” Aiken said.

“People are still getting here, but not the same people who would have otherwise been able to come here, at least in some cases. My guess is that we’re getting asylum seekers with a degree of class privilege who are arriving by plane.”

Source: Here’s what really happened when Canada shut down Roxham Road

‘I’m frozen out’: Canadians question immigration department’s approach to parent, grandparent sponsorship

No easy way to manage the demand, which of course grows with immigration levels:

The federal government is inviting thousands of Canadians to apply to sponsor their parents and grandparents starting Oct. 10 — but many say its recent approach is leaving qualified Canadians behind, and could be making the immigration department vulnerable to ineligible applications.

Under the parents and grandparents program (PGP), the department only invites people to apply if they’ve formally submitted an interest in entering their names into the lottery system.

The problem for many, is the immigration department has not accepted new interest-to-sponsor (ITS) forms since 2020. Usually, there’s an opportunity to do that each year.

“It is good for those who were lucky enough to get their names into the hats, basically in 2020,” said Jatin Shory, a refugee and immigration lawyer in Calgary.

“But our biggest issue definitely, definitely, definitely comes for those who would qualify now if a brand new intake cycle opened up, but who are now just being left behind.”

Harpreet Singh is one of those people. The 29-year-old living in Langley, B.C., didn’t express interest in 2020 because his income was a little short.

He became financially eligible less than three months after the department stopped accepting ITS forms. That month, the federal government said there would be another opportunity to sign up in 2021, so he wasn’t too worried.

But years later, he’s still waiting for a fair chance to bring his mom from the United Kingdom to Canada.

“I listened to what the government was saying and now it’s like, oh, OK, the pool is closed and I’m frozen out and I don’t really know what’s going on,” said Singh.

Shory says out of desperation, some of his clients are filing applications for their families under humanitarian and compassionate considerations, which he says is risky, stressful and much more expensive.

Risk of ineligible applications

Between Oct. 10-23, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) says it will invite 24,000 eligible Canadians to apply to reunite with their families, with the goal of receiving up to 15,000 complete applications.

People across the country have been raising concerns about the PGP for years. At least two petitions have been filed in the House of Commons to address the shortcomings of the immigration system.

Singh launched one of those petitions last year.

His biggest concern, raised in his petition to former immigration minister Sean Fraser, is that this approach could leave the immigration department vulnerable to ineligible applications.

“There’s people in the pool who weren’t actually eligible in 2020, but they submitted anyway, and now they continue to get chances to sponsor their parents because they might be eligible now,” said Singh.

That’s because IRCC only assesses people’s income from the three years previous to their application being considered, not when they entered the pool.

“What are they doing to counteract that?”

Immigration lawyer Shory says that’s a real risk, and it could explain why IRCC is only accepting up to 15,000 complete applications.

“If you can issue 24,000 invitations, why are you not accepting up to 24,000 [applications]? I believe the idea is not all 24,000 will qualify,” said Shory.

“I wonder if the government is going to go back and say, ‘Well listen, you didn’t qualify in 2020, so therefore we’re not going to qualify you for this, even though you may qualify now.'”

IRCC received 200,000 entries in 2020

Department spokesperson Isabelle Dubois says IRCC is catching up on a list of 200,000 potential sponsors who expressed interest in 2020. Approximately 132,000 people remain in the pool.

“Given the volume of interest-to-sponsor forms received in 2020 that remain, IRCC will continue to use this pool of submissions for the 2023 intake,” said Dubois in an emailed statement.

She also confirmed that IRCC will only be assessing the income of potential sponsors for the 2020-2022 tax years.

“No potential sponsor randomly selected from the 2020 pool, who does not meet the necessary eligibility requirements, is eligible for parent and grandparent sponsorship,” she said.

“IRCC takes program integrity very seriously and is committed to ensuring our programs are fair and equally accessible.”

Five-year wait to process application

Vikramjit Brar says he wants IRCC to catch up on its backlog before accepting more applications.

According to the most recent data, 802,600 immigrant applications are backlogged — including 54 per cent of permanent residency applications, though Dubois says IRCC has been making good progress with processing applications.

Still, Brar has been waiting five years for IRCC to process his application to sponsor his parents.

Vikramjit Brar (middle) has lived in Canada for over 15 years and sponsored his parents to become permanent residents of Canada five years ago. He says he’s desperate for answers. (Submitted by Vikramjit Brar)

The Airdrie, Alta., resident says the worst part of the delay is the emotional distress. It’s weighing on his relationship with his parents, and affecting the mental health of them all, he says.

“This is frustrating. This is disappointing. Sometimes I don’t pick up their call because I can’t give them false hope,” said Brar.

“Each year, [the government is] taking hundreds and thousands of applications. They’re getting a lot of money from people… But there’s no service, there’s no outcome.”

Brar’s next and final step is to hire a lawyer to file a writ of mandamus — an order for government officials to fulfil their duties and process applications — with a quoted legal cost of up to $10,000.

Source: ‘I’m frozen out’: Canadians question immigration department’s approach to parent, grandparent sponsorship – CBC.ca

He spoke no English, had no lawyer. An Afghan man’s case offers a glimpse into US immigration court – Miami Herald

Always a mistake to represent oneself:

The Afghan man speaks only Farsi, but he wasn’t worried about representing himself in U.S. immigration court. He believed the details of his asylum claim spoke for themselves.

Mohammad was a university professor, teaching human rights courses in Afghanistan before he fled for the United States. Mohammad is also Hazara, an ethnic minority long persecuted in his country, and he said he was receiving death threats under the Taliban, who reimposed their harsh interpretation of Sunni Islam after taking power in 2021.

He crossed the Texas border in April 2022, surrendered to Border Patrol agents and was detained. A year later, a hearing was held via video conference. His words were translated by a court interpreter in another location, and he said he struggled to express himself — including fear for his life since he was injured in a 2016 suicide bombing.

At the conclusion of the nearly three-hour hearing, the judge denied him asylum. Mohammad said he was later shocked to learn that he had waived his right to appeal the decision.

“I feel alone and that the law wasn’t applied,” said Mohammad, who spoke to The Associated Press on condition that only his first name be used, over fears for the safety of his wife and children, who are still in Afghanistan.

Mohammad’s case offers a rare look inside an opaque and overwhelmed immigration court system where hearings are often closed, transcripts are not available to the public and judges are under pressure to move quickly with ample discretion. Amid a major influx of migrants at the border with Mexico, the courts — with a backlog of 2 million cases -– may be the most overwhelmed and least understood link in the system.

AP reviewed a hearing transcript provided by Mona Iman, an attorney with Human Rights First now representing Mohammad. Iman also translated Mohammad’s comments to AP in a phone interview from Prairieland Detention Center in Alvarado, Texas.

The case reflects an asylum seeker who was ill-equipped to represent himself and clearly didn’t understand what was happening, according to experts who reviewed the transcript. But at least one former judge disagreed and said the ruling was fair.

Now Mohammad’s attorney has won him a new hearing, before a different judge — a rare second chance for asylum cases. Also giving Iman hope is a decision this week by the Biden administration to give temporary legal status to Afghan migrants living in the country for more than a year. Iman believes he qualifies and said he will apply.

But Mohammed has been in detention for about 18 months, and he fears he could remain in custody and still be considered for deportation.

AP sought details and comment from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The agency didn’t address questions on Mohammad’s case but said noncitizens can pursue all due process and appeals and, once that’s exhausted, judges’ orders must be carried out.

For his April 27 hearing, Mohammad submitted photos of his injuries from the 2016 suicide bombing that killed hundreds at a peaceful demonstration of mostly Hazaras. He also gave the court threatening letters from the Taliban and medical documents from treatment for head wounds in 2021. He said militants beat him with sticks as he left the university and shot at him but missed.

In court, the government argued that Mohammad encouraged migration to the U.S. on social media, changed dates and details related to his history, and had relatives in Europe, South America and other places where he could have settled.

In ruling, Judge Allan John-Baptiste said the threats didn’t indicate Mohammad would still be at risk, and that his wife and children hadn’t been harmed since he left.

Mohammad tried to keep arguing his case, but the judge told him the evidentiary period was closed. He asked Mohammad whether he planned to appeal or would waive his right to do so.

Mohammad kept describing his claim, but John-Baptiste reminded him he’d already ruled. Mohammad said if the judge was going to ignore the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan, he wouldn’t ask for an appeal. John-Baptiste indicated he had considered it.

“You were not hit by the gunshot or the suicide bomber,” John-Baptiste said. “The harm that you received does not rise to the level of persecution.”

Mohammad continued, explaining how his family lives in hiding, his wife concealing her identity with a burqa.

“OK, are you going to appeal my decision or not?” John-Baptiste ultimately asked.

“No, I don’t,” Mohammad said.

“And we don’t want you to make the decision now that you can’t come back later and say you want to appeal. This is final, OK, sir?” John-Baptiste said.

“Yes. OK, I accept that,” Mohammad said.

He later asked whether he could try to come back legally. The judge started to explain voluntary departure, which would allow him to return in less than a decade, but corrected himself and said Mohammad didn’t qualify.

“I’m sorry about that, but, you know, I’m just going to have to order you removed,” John-Baptiste said. “I wish you the best of luck.”

Mohammad later told AP he couldn’t comprehend what was happening in court. He’d heard from others in detention that he had a month to appeal.

“I didn’t understand in that moment that the right would be taken from me if I said no,” he said.

Former immigration judge Jeffrey Chase, who reviewed the transcript, said he was surprised John-Baptiste waived Mohammad’s right to appeal and that the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld that decision. Case law supports granting protection for people who belong to a group long persecuted in their homelands even if an individual cannot prove specific threats, said Chase, an adviser to the appeals board.

But Andrew Arthur, another former immigration judge, said John-Baptiste ruled properly.

“The respondent knew what he was filing, understood all of the questions that were asked of him at the hearing, understood the decision, and freely waived his right to appeal,” Arthur, a fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, which advocates for immigration restrictions, said via email.

Chase said the hearing appeared rushed, and he believes the case backlog played a role.

“Immigration judges hear death-penalty cases in traffic-court conditions,” said Chase, quoting a colleague. “This is a perfect example.”

Overall, the 600 immigration judges nationwide denied 63% of asylum cases last year, according to Syracuse University’s Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse.Individual rates vary wildly, from a Houston judge who denied all 105 asylum requests to a San Francisco one denying only 1% of 108 cases. John-Baptiste, a career prosecutor appointed during the Trump administration’s final months, denied 72% of his 114 cases.

Before Mohammad decided to flee, his wife applied for a special immigrant visa, which grants permanent residency to Afghans who worked for the U.S. government or military, along with their families. But that and other legal pathways can take years.

While they waited, Mohammad said, the Taliban came looking for him but instead detained and beat his nephew. Mohammad described making the devastating decision to leave his family, who had no passports.

He opted for a treacherous route through multiple countries to cross the U.S.-Mexico border, which has seen the number of Afghans jump from 300 to 5,000 in a year. Mohammad said he crossed into Pakistan, flew to Brazil and headed north. He slept on buses and trekked through Panama’s notorious Darien Gap jungle, where he said he saw bodies of migrants who didn’t make it. Mohammad planned to live with a niece in North Carolina. Now he fears if he’s sent home and his wife gets her visa, they’ll be separated again.

Deportations to Afghanistan are extremely rare, with a handful each year. Attorney Iman said they’re grateful Mohammad’s case has been reopened, with a hearing scheduled for Oct. 4.

She is fighting for his immediate release. “I have no doubt that his case would have turned out differently had he been represented,” Iman said. “This is exactly the type of vulnerable individual that the U.S. government has promised, has committed to protect, since it withdrew from the country.”

Source: He spoke no English, had no lawyer. An Afghan man’s case offers a glimpse into US immigration court – Miami Herald

Perez: Canada’s welcoming attitude toward immigrants is at risk of fraying

Part of the “denialist” narratives that state or imply that any questioning of immigration levels, permanent or temporary, is xenophobic or worse, and that the only solution is to build more housing, improve healthcare and infrastructure. Supply side narrative that willingly disregards or discounts the demand side of an increase in population, driven by immigration. 

I haven’t seen any credible commentary comparing the very different dynamics in France with the Canadian reality.

But fundamentally, current and planned high levels are far more risky to public consensus on immigration, by immigrants and non-immigrants alike, than fretting about discussing these issues. The vast majority of commentary has been thoughtful, respective and by no means xenophobic.

If “Our decision makers must confront the stark domestic policy challenges we face today to ensure we remain the envy of the world when it comes to welcoming immigration policies,” discussing more reasonable levels of permanent and temporary migration is essential to maintaining public confidence and support:

In June, violent riots overtook more than a dozen French cities after a police officer shot and killed Nahel Merzouk, a French teen of Algerian and Moroccan descent who had driven through a red light while escaping police.

The reaction in Canada was as predictable as it was self-assured. Many commentators said the destructive events unfolding in France could never take place in a country like Canada.

But could they?

What transpired in France is a reflection of that country’s unwillingness to integrate its substantial North African population into broader French society more than 60 years after its colonial era came to a grinding halt in the North African Maghreb.

Unlike France, Canada is arguably the most welcoming country to new citizens globally. In 1971, prime minister Pierre Trudeau announced a first-of-its kind official government policy – multiculturalism – designed to recognize the contribution of cultural diversity and multicultural citizenship to Canada’s greater social fabric.

Multiculturalism has become a cornerstone of Canadian identity and has been accompanied by an equally popular policy: that of high immigration.

I’m the beneficiary of these dual policies. My father left France for Canada 50 years ago, arriving in Quebec’s Eastern Townships to start a new life just two years after Pierre Trudeau made official multiculturalism a reality.

But an Abacus Data poll released in July reveals a marked shift in public opinion on Canadian immigration policy. The poll found 61 per cent of Canadians believe the federal government’s target to welcome 500,000 planned permanent residents in 2025 is “too high,” including 37 per cent who feel it’s “way too high.”

While Conservative Party supporters are most likely to feel the immigration target of 500,000 is too high (with 52 per cent feeling it’s way too high), half of Liberal Party and NDP supporters feel the target is too high as well.

These numbers demonstrate a growing gap between how Canada’s economic and political leaders view immigration when compared with the broader public. If we don’t address the sentiments underlying this poll, what happened in France in June might not be so unimaginable in our own backyard.

Until now, immigration policy has been the third rail of Canadian politics. No mainstream politician has dared touch the issue for fear of public backlash. Maxime Bernier’s upstart People’s Party of Canada briefly flirted with anti-immigration rhetoric during the 2019 federal election only to receive a pitiful 1.6-per-cent support on election day.

The leaders of Canada’s three largest parties continue to speak out strongly in favour of generous immigration levels – and I believe they mean it.

At the political level, we continue to benefit from a consensus on immigration policy in this country – a consensus that cuts across parties, levels of government and regions. For example, Pierre Poilievre won the Conservative Party’s leadership one year ago this month, in part by appealing to ethnocultural communities and new Canadians. Canadian conservatism has never been synonymous with nativism, unlike in many other Western countries.

Meanwhile, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is the first non-white, turban-wearing national political leader in Canada. Since assuming the party’s leadership in 2017, Mr. Singh has used his platform to speak candidly about his experience as a racialized Canadian and major party leader.

To its credit, the Trudeau government continues to double down on economic immigration as a means to addressing Canada’s declining birth rate and widening labour shortage. In June, the government announced a “digital nomad strategy” that will empower workers with a foreign employer to stay and work in Canada for up to six months. Another recently announced program will introduce an immigration stream specifically targeted at technology workers, allowing them to enter the country whether they have a job or not.

Despite our cross-party consensus on economic immigration, we’re not immune to a scenario that could see some political leaders peddle anti-immigration rhetoric in exchange for votes. In fact, this is the norm in most of the Western world where nativist parties enjoy sizable support.

If we are to remain the most welcoming country in the world, our political leaders must do a much better job securing the social license needed to maintain high immigration levels, including addressing the housing affordability and health care crises.

The Abacus poll found that 63 per cent of Canadians feel high immigration levels are having a harmful impact on housing, while 49 per cent feel our immigration policies are negatively affecting the country’s stretched health care system.

Research shows that Canada must build 5.3 million homes over the next decade if we’re to credibly address the housing affordability crisis. But recent figures show Canada is on track to build less than half that number. Our most populous province, Ontario, built just 72,000 new units of housing last year while welcoming more than 184,000 permanent residents.

Part of securing social license for generous immigration policies requires our leaders to address the deplorable conditions experienced by refugees and asylum seekers in many parts of the country. Earlier this summer, news reports revealed that large numbers of asylum seekers were left to sleep on the streets of Toronto because of an overburdened shelter system.

Meanwhile, Canada’s public health care system is still reeling from the ravages of COVID-19 and is suffering from a shortage of doctors, nurses and hospital beds. Canadians of all backgrounds increasingly face lengthy wait times for elective surgeries, procedures, appointments, tests and imaging. Finding a family physician has become a herculean task; emergency rooms are at a breaking point.

The blunt reality is that our current health care system isn’t equipped to adequately serve the existing population, let alone vulnerable newcomers.

High immigration levels and official multiculturalism are inextricably linked to Canada’s immense economic and social success over the past 50 years. They’re the reason my father chose Canada in 1973. They’re also the reason he was successful building an extremely rewarding life here.

But the decidedly pro-immigration sentiments that marked my father’s formative years in this country are now at risk of disappearing. This ought to be a siren call for our political leaders at every level of government. Now isn’t the time for Canada to rest on its laurels from a bygone era. Our decision makers must confront the stark domestic policy challenges we face today to ensure we remain the envy of the world when it comes to welcoming immigration policies.

Andrew Perez is a Toronto-based freelance writer, media commentator and political activist.

Source: Opinion: Canada’s welcoming attitude toward immigrants is at risk of fraying

Woolley: Stop seeing immigration as a get-rich-quick scheme for Canada’s economy 

Indeed. Acknowledge the trade offs and both negative and positive impact:

Immigration is neither as good for Canada as recent federal government pronouncements would suggest nor as bad as some critics might claim. The best economic evidence suggests that, in the long run, immigration has limited impact on the average Canadian’s wages or job prospects. Immigration boosts the economy, but it increases our population, too, leaving the average Canadian’s living standards more or less unchanged.

Yet these long-run averages mask the fact that specific policies create winners and losers. A government that ignores the fact that immigration can have costs risks making two mistakes. First, it might uncritically accept the arguments made by those who stand to benefit from immigration. Second, if it does not take the downside risks of specific immigration policies seriously, it might not act to mitigate them.

Temporary foreign worker programs, for example, are a win for employers. In theory these programs are necessary because employers struggle to find qualified Canadian workers. Yet economists Ian O’Donnell and Mikal Skuterud have found that a significant number of jobs filled by temporary foreign workers do not require any qualifications or skills other than the ability to do hard physical labour. The jobs are hard to fill because the wages are low and the work is unpleasant; for example, $15.80 per hourto do physically demanding, fast-paced, dangerous work in a meat packing plant – at night, if needed.

People will take hard, badly paid jobs if they have no better alternatives (or if the jobs provide a route to citizenship). In Canada, those with the fewest alternatives are temporary foreign workers. My colleagues Pierre Brochu, Till Gross and Christopher Worswick have found that such workers, especially those from low-income countries, have less absenteeism and work longer hours than other workers. This is why no amount of immigration will eliminate firms’ claims that they must hire temporary foreign workers: People are more likely to show up to work if being fired jeopardizes their right to live and work here.

It’s not so much a labour shortage that fuels employers’ support for temporary foreign worker programs as a zest for profit – specifically a desire for a plentiful supply of low-wage workers to fill unattractive positions. But more people competing for low-wage jobs makes it harder for less qualified workers to find employment and dampens upward pressure on wages.

Immigration policy, as with all policy, involves trade-offs – in this case, between higher profits for companies and higher pay for employees. Economist Armine Yalnizyan has long argued for replacing temporary foreign worker programs with higher levels of permanent immigration: If people are good enough to work here, they are good enough to stay and build their lives here. But permanent residents have options that temporary foreign workers lack. They can work as many or as few hours as they choose and are free to work for any employer. This means that, to attract permanent residents, employers have to make workers an offer that is competitive with their other options – and that means improving wages or working conditions or both. Different policy, different trade-offs.

The federal government, in announcing its new immigration plans last year, introduced both enhanced temporary foreign worker programs and increased permanent immigration. If it was trying to make everyone happy, it failed.

Newcomers increase the supply of workers, but they also increase demand – for food and shelter, for example. In the long run, these two effects usually more or less cancel each other outIn the short run, they do not.

The government hoped to avoid worsening the housing crisis by attracting newcomers to small towns and rural communities. But such a strategy forgets that immigrants are people, too. Like people born in Canada, they are pulled by economic gravity to urban centres where there are jobs, social networks and cultural supports.

Yet Canada’s big cities have no more room to sprawl – and it would be bad policy to let them. Most of this country’s population lives in a few concentrated areas such as the Quebec City-Windsor corridor and B.C.’s Fraser Valley. Most of the rest of Canada has a harsh climate or would be very expensive to develop or both. We are not a vast, underpopulated country; we are a densely populated, highly urban, diverse country. We need immigration, housing and transportation policies that reflect that reality.

Most of all, we need to stop viewing immigration as a get-rich-quick scheme. Immigration policy involves trade-offs. We need to be honest about the fact that immigration creates winners and losers, at least in the short run, and figure out ways of preserving the benefits of immigration, both for established Canadians and newcomers, while protecting those who stand to lose out.

Frances Woolley is a professor of economics at Carleton University.

Source: Stop seeing immigration as a get-rich-quick scheme for Canada’s economy

Rioux: Un parfum de colonialisme

Good column on the questionable morality of recruiting skilled healthcare workers from developing countries. Of course, individuals from this countries naturally seek better opportunities:

Il y a des nouvelles qui tombent à plat. Sitôt apparues, elles disparaissent comme par enchantement dans le grand trou noir de l’information. C’est comme si tout le monde, les politiques, les médias et même le public, se donnait le mot pour regarder ailleurs en attendant qu’on parle d’autre chose.

C’est un peu ce qui s’est passé la semaine dernière avec cette information révélant que les campagnes de recrutement de personnel de la santé que mène régulièrement le Québec en Afrique contribuent à fragiliser encore plus des pays africains dont la situation sanitaire est déjà précaire.

À l’encontre de toutes les politiques de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS), le Québec mène depuis longtemps des campagnes de recrutement dans des pays comme le Bénin, le Cameroun, la Côte d’Ivoire et le Togo. L’an dernier, il annonçait vouloir recruter 1000 infirmières étrangères, pour la plupart africaines. Souvent des infirmières expérimentées. Dans quelques jours débuteront d’ailleurs des entretiens d’embauche avec des candidats du Cameroun, de la Côte d’Ivoire et du Togo, sélectionnés dans le cadre des Journées Québec Afrique subsahariennes. Depuis 2017, le Québec aurait ainsi recruté plus de 1900 travailleurs de la santé, dont de nombreuses infirmières, provenant de 24 pays d’Afrique, d’Amérique du Sud et d’Europe.

Faut-il en conclure que le Québec ne se gêne pas pour participer sans retenue au pillage des cerveaux de ces pays pauvres ? À titre d’exemple, le Cameroun et le Bénin possèdent respectivement moins de 2 et 3 infirmières pour 10 000 habitants alors que, pour la même population, le Québec n’en compte pas moins de 77 ! L’OMS n’est pas seule à penser que ce pillage organisé est indigne du Québec. L’Association des infirmières et infirmiers marocains avait déjà accusé le Canada d’« épuiser les ressources infirmières des autres pays dans lesquels il y a également une pénurie ».

En guise de réponse, nos responsables se contentent généralement de regarder la pointe de leurs souliers en balbutiant du bout des lèvres qu’ils font un recrutement… éthique ! Personne n’aime se faire dire ses quatre vérités, surtout pas les partisans de l’immigration de masse, qui prétendent chaque fois se porter ainsi au secours de l’humanité souffrante. Et si cet « immigrationisme » vertueux n’était au fond que le nouveau visage du bon vieux colonialisme affublé d’un beau tampon humanitaire ?

Il y a longtemps que des chercheurs comme le démographe Emmanuel Todd ont expliqué le fait que, dans un monde où la communication mène le bal, le pillage des cerveaux avait remplacé celui des ressources naturelles. Cette « véritable prédation démographique », écrit-il, serait même plus grave que celle des ressources naturelles, car elle met aujourd’hui « en péril le développement de pays qui décollent ».

Parmi les milliers de migrants qui ont littéralement envahi l’île de Lampedusa la semaine dernière, personne ne s’est demandé — pas même le pape — combien il y avait de mécaniciens, de boulangers ou d’aides-infirmières qui désertent ainsi leurs pays. L’ancien journaliste de Libération Stephen Smith, professeur d’études africaines à l’Université Duke, en Caroline du Nord, a montré dans ses études que, contrairement à ce que sérine la presse, ce ne sont pas les plus pauvres qui émigrent. Ceux-là, en général, n’en ont pas les moyens. En cas de nécessité, ils se déplacent dans un pays voisin. Ceux qui se retrouvent chez nous sont ceux qui peuvent se le payer et qui pourraient donc au mieux contribuer à consolider la classe moyenne de leur pays.

Dans notre vision misérabiliste de l’Afrique — une vision encore aggravée par le catastrophisme climatique —, il ne nous viendrait pas à l’idée que les pays africains qui progressent, et il y en a, ont un urgent besoin de ces travailleurs pour se sortir de la misère. À Madagascar, en 2016, alors qu’il distribuait des bourses d’études, Philippe Couillard s’était ainsi fait rappeler à l’ordre par la ministre de l’Enseignement supérieur de Madagascar, qui lui dit que la plupart de ces boursiers ne revenaient jamais au pays. Et qu’ils étaient donc une perte sèche pour l’île. Belle charité que celle qui ne sert que le bienfaiteur. Ce jour-là, Philippe Couillard avait lui aussi longuement regardé ses souliers.

Dans ce que le politologue Pierre-André Taguieff appelle « l’utopie messianique du salut par l’immigration » — un mal très répandu au Canada —, il y a un mépris profond pour les peuples de nos pays, qui n’auraient d’avenir démographique, économique et culturel qu’en accueillant le plus d’étrangers possible.

Il y a aussi un mépris pour l’Afrique, car il sera toujours plus valorisant de s’épandre en larmes sur la misère africaine que d’appeler ces pays à se prendre en main et de les y aider à le faire. Ce qui me frappe toujours chez ceux qui ne jurent que par cette immigration providentielle, c’est leur désintérêt à peu près complet pour les pays pauvres. Comme si le seul avenir des Africains était de se déverser en nombre toujours plus grand dans nos beaux et grands pays riches et démocratiques. Ne sentez-vous pas là un étrange parfum de colonialisme ?

Source: Un parfum de colonialisme

MPs call for House study after UN report slams Canada’s efforts to combat contemporary slavery, forced labour

Of note:

A recent report from the United Nations’ special rapporteur on contemporary forms of slavery has raised alarm over Canada’s handling of the issue at home, including particular criticism for the Temporary Foreign Workers Program. With Parliament now back from its summer recess, NDP, Liberal, and Conservative MPs say they want to see a House committee undertake a study in response. 

Following a two-week visit, UN Special Rapporteur Tomoya Obokata released a 12-page statement of preliminary findings on Sept. 6, within which he highlighted Canada’s Temporary Foreign Workers Program (TFWP) as a top source of concern, saying the program’s low-wage and agricultural streams in particular “constitute a breeding ground for contemporary forms of slavery,” and that he is “perturbed by reports” that the number of workers entering Canada through this program is “sharply on the rise.”

“The Special Rapporteur is disturbed by the fact that certain categories of migrant workers are made vulnerable to contemporary forms of slavery in Canada, by the policies that regulate their immigration status, employment, and housing in Canada, and he is particularly concerned that this workforce is disproportionately racialized, attesting to deep-rooted racism and xenophobia entrenched in Canada’s immigration system,” reads the statement.

Obokata was in Canada between Aug. 23 and Sept. 6 to assess Canada’s efforts to prevent and address contemporary forms of slavery, including forced and child labour. He’s set to present a full report, which will expand on his initial findings and cover additional issues, to the UN Human Rights Council in September 2024. 

NDP MP Heather McPherson (Edmonton Strathcona, Alta.) said the rapporteur’s initial findings need to be raised in the House of Commons.

McPherson is a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Subcommittee on International Human Rights, which studied the human rights situation of the Uyghurs, and the role of the Canadian Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprise in 2021. In light of the rapporteur’s findings, she said she’d like the “subcommittee to be looking at this again.” 

“We’ll be bringing that forward at that point [when the House returns], that they examine this and that we do get testimony on this report,” and look at the issue “from a larger frame,” beyond the ombudsperson, to also include examination of due diligence and human rights legislation, McPherson told The Hill Times on Sept. 15. 

She pointed to the Special Committee on Canada-China Relations and the House Foreign Affairs Committee itself—she is a member of both groups—as other potential arenas to pursue a study, noting, for example, the issue of Uyghur forced labour in Canada’s supply chains. 

“We have an awful lot to study within those committees, and so it’ll be a situation of trying to find the right place for it to land, and whether there’s bandwidth to do that,” said McPherson, adding she thinks the House International Trade Committee should also pick up the issue.

Conservative MP Arnold Viersen (Peace River–Westlock, Alta.), a member of the Subcommittee on International Human Rights and of the All-Party Parliamentary Group to End Modern Slavery and Human Trafficking, said he’s in favour of “studying the issue of human trafficking and how Canada can better fight it at any and every turn, so I would welcome a study in that respect.” 

Liberal MP John McKay (Scarborough–Guildwood, Ont.), another member of the all-party group, agreed the rapporteur’s findings bear “an examination by a House of Commons committee.” 

“We are bringing in a lot of people under particular policies, and it’s always worthwhile to examine the efficacy of those policies. Canada has a labour shortage … but we simply cannot be a nation that exploits other human beings in labour conditions that are such as the rapporteur has described. He used very strong language,” said McKay.

As noted by Obokata, use of the TFWP is on the rise in Canada. Between 2021 and 2022, the number of TFW permit holders increased by 31.5 per cent to reach 135,625 individuals. It’s on track to surpass that total in 2023, with 130,155 such permits already having come into effect in the first three quarters of the year, according to federal data

“It is a fact that temporary foreign workers make vital contributions to Canada’s national economy and possess valuable skills for which there is consistent demand, and yet paths for long-term or permanent residency is extremely limited or non-existent for most workers working in agriculture and other low-skills sectors,” reads the rapporteur’s report.

Obokata said while in Canada, he “received first-hand information from a large number of stakeholders, notably migrant workers themselves, pointing to the appalling working and living conditions in reality,” including excessive work hours, “extra-contractual tasks, physically dangerous tasks, low wages, no overtime pay,” access being denied to health care, limited access to social services, overcrowded and unsanitary employer-provided housing, “as well as sexual harassment, intimidation, and violence at the hands of their employers and their family.”

Such issues could be prevented through “effective labour and health and safety inspections,” but Obokata said from what he heard, those being done by federal, provincial, and territorial inspectors “are grossly ineffective,” don’t happen regularly, can be done remotely, and allow for advance notice to employers when done in person, enabling them to “make necessary preparations on the day of inspection.” Moreover, he said “most migrant workers are unaware” of the existence of existing federal, provincial, and territorial complaint mechanisms, or are afraid to report labour law violations “due to the fear of unemployment or deportation.”

While acknowledging “important developments” in the effort to protect the human rights of workers, and eradicate forced and child labour in the country’s supply chains—like the 2022 release of the Responsible Business Conduct Strategy and the 2021 update to the Code of Conduct for Procurement—Obokata said he still has “some concerns over Canada’s current approach to human rights due diligence for Canadian companies.”

He noted, for example, that Bill S-211’s reliance on self-reporting, lack of monitoring mechanism, and lack of requirements to implement “human rights due diligence” or measures to “prevent, address, and remedy abuses once identified,” risks it “becoming a box ticking exercise where companies simply submit the same statement every year, as has been reported in other jurisdictions.” The Fighting Against Forced Labour and Child Labour in Supply Chains Act, which comes into force in January 2024, requires companies that check two of three boxes—having at least $20-million in assets, $40-million in revenue, or 250 employees—to report on measures taken to “prevent and reduce the risk” of forced or child labour in their operations and supply chains.

Obokata said in raising concerns with the federal government, he was told draft legislation on due diligence to complement Bill S-211 is “currently” being considered. He urged the government to do so “expeditiously,” and for clear guidance on reporting requirements under S-211, and monitoring and oversight mechanisms to be established in the interim. 

McKay, Viersen, and Independent Senator Julie Miville-Dechêne (Inkerman, Que.) were among those who met with Obokata virtually on Aug. 15 just before his visit in their capacity as members of the all-party parliamentary group, with talk focused on S-211, which was sponsored by McKay and Miville-Dechêne in the House and Senate, respectively. 

McKay and Miville-Dechêne told The Hill Times they disagree with Obokata’s assessment of S-211 as a mere “box-ticking exercise,” with McKay saying he takes “strong exception to anyone who says this legislation will not be effective.” 

There’s an “immense amount of work that entities are going to have to do in order to be able to comply with the legislation,” argued McKay, with potential “enormous” consequences, including the fact that “the regulatory filing signed by a senior officer and approved by the board of the entity” will be “looked at by other regulators,” and “by those who do financing,” consumers, and NGOs. McKay said in discussions with lawyers and others “who work in this area” in Toronto last week alongside Miville-Dechêne, the pair heard serious concerns “about the work that’s going to be required in order to make sure that they comply.” 

“Our model is a stronger model than the U.K. model,” said Miville-Dechêne of S-211, noting the bill includes fines for non-compliance, and transmitting information that’s knowingly false. “I would say it’s a step, but a very important step and the first step, too, for a country that has … talked, politically, a lot about our respect for human rights, and by implementing this law, it is a step in the right direction.” 

McKay, Miville-Dechêne, and Viersen all said they expect clear guidance on reporting requirements under S-211 to come through its enacting regulations, which are still being awaited from the minister responsible, Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, N.B.). Asked when those regulations would be tabled, LeBlanc’s office did not respond by filing deadline. 

McKay and Miville-Dechêne urged the government to table its draft regulations as soon as possible, with the Senator noting there are only three-and-a-half months left before S-211 comes into force, “which is not, in political terms, that long to give clear guidance to companies.”

Viersen called the wait on regulations “quite frustrating.” 

As for a parliamentary study, Miville-Dechêne said while the rapporteur’s preliminary findings must be listened to—and that she, too, is “very worried” about the potential for exploitation through Canada’s TFW program—she noted “he’s going to have more to say” when the full report is released next year. She highlighted that the Senate Social Affairs Committee is already in the midst of a study on Canada’s temporary and migrant labour force. 

“I find on this particular issue [the TFWP], Mr. Obokata is right on,” she said. 

Among other things, the rapporteur’s report also raised concern over the effectiveness of the federal Ombudsperson for Responsible Enterprisesestablished in 2019, which Obokata noted didn’t release its first initial assessment reports on complaints until this year—nearly four years after its creation. He highlighted that its mandate covers “only a limited number of sectors,” and excludes a number “where labour exploitation is rife, like agriculture, fishery, manufacturing, and construction,” which the rapporteur said should be “core” to the office’s mandate. He called for the ombudsperson to be given statutory powers to compel witnesses and documents, “with clear consequences” for companies that don’t comply, and for its independence to be ensured.  

McPherson said the rapporteur’s report has “echoed all of the concerns that the NDP has raised for some time,” including its criticisms of Bill S-211, which her party voted against in the House, and the effectiveness of the ombudsperson.

“We’ve got a government right now who is saying that they care about human rights, they’re talking about the need to ensure that Canadian companies working abroad are acting effectively, but every chance they have to bring forward good, strong legislation, they fail,” she said.

On the TFWP, McPherson said the NDP, “from the very get-go,” has said “the program needs to be revamped” and “that any individual who comes to Canada to be a worker needs to have a path to become a Canadian citizen.” 

“This program has been flawed” from the very beginning, she said, starting under the previous Conservative government, and continuing under the Liberals, despite its pledge to fix it.

The Hill Times reached out to Trade Minister Mary Ng (Markham–Thornhill, Ont.) and Immigration Minister Marc Miller (Ville-Marie–Le Sud-Ouest–Île-des-Soeurs, Que.) for comment and reaction to the rapporteur’s report. 

An emailed response from Global Affairs Canada confirmed Ng’s office has “reviewed the rapporteur’s statement.”

“We are taking into consideration the findings in the statement and how we can reflect on them moving forward as we work to eradicate forced labour from Canadian supply chains and ensure that Canadian businesses operating abroad do not contribute to human rights abuses,” reads GAC’s response. 

In its emailed response, Miller’s office highlighted “several permanent immigration pathways available for workers,” including through an Agri-Food pilot launched in May 2020 and recently extended until May 2025; the Provincial Nominee Program; the Atlantic Immigration Program; and express entry eligibility for agricultural supervisors and managers, among other things. 

“In Canada, the rights of all workers—including temporary foreign workers—are protected by law. Temporary foreign workers have the same rights and workplace protections as Canadians and permanent residents,” reads the response from Miller’s office, noting that new regulations aimed at increasing protections for foreign workers were implemented federally in September 2022.

“We will continue engaging all levels of government, provinces, and territories—to ensure all workers are safe and protected wherever they are in the country.”

Source: MPs call for House study after UN report slams Canada’s efforts to combat contemporary slavery, forced labour

Ottawa forecasts 1.4 million international student applications a year by 2027, document shows

Hard to deny the impact such numbers would have on housing, healthcare and infrastructure pressures and the increased numbers of disillusioned students given worse economic outcomes and likely frustration for the majority who will not transition to permanent residency.

But unlikely to convince the denialisms among the various interest groups that favour higher numbers.

Good that IRCC officials are carrying out this analysis:

The number of foreign students applying to come to Canada each year is forecast by the federal immigration department to rise to 1.4 million by 2027, an internal policy document says, which also raises concerns that such growth is “unsustainable.”

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada forecast the rapid rise in the number of foreign students in a paper last month about establishing a class of “trusted” universities and colleges, which would qualify for faster processing of international student study permits.

The document, obtained by The Globe and Mail, says that from 2019 to 2022 study permit applications for overseas students have increased by nearly 300,000 a year.

“By 2027, volumes are forecasted to nearly double to 1.4 million applications per year,” it says.

The federal document was sent to a select group of universities and colleges taking part in a pilot to establish the proposed trusted-institutions framework.

The IRCC paper forecasts that applications from foreign students will reach 949,000 this year, and just over one million next year. The number is projected to rise to 1.1 million in 2025, 1.28 million in 2026 and 1.4 million in 2027.

It says a recent strategic immigration review – and a continuing review of the international students program – has raised a number of concerns including “unsustainable growth in application volumes, impacting education quality, community infrastructure, and IRCC processing capacity.”

The paper says that the rapid growth in the intake of foreign students “has disrupted processing times” for study permits to enter the country. Meanwhile universities and colleges have become “increasingly dependent” on international students for revenue, in some cases not providing international students with “a positive education experience in Canada.”

It is currently piloting metrics to determine which universities and colleges are eligible to be counted as trusted institutions. To qualify they would have to share data annually with the immigration department, including the number and percentage of international students living in university housing.

Alex Usher, founder of Higher Education Strategy Associates, said on-campus housing is often not the cheapest option and this measure could reward universities attracting the wealthiest international students

Housing Minister Sean Fraser – the former immigration minister – floated the prospect of a cap on international student numbers at the cabinet retreat in Charlottetown last month, saying the number of foreign students is putting pressure on rental markets and driving up costs. Immigration Minister Marc Miller said at the retreat that around 900,000 students are expected to enter Canada this year.

A Senate report on Canada’s international student program, published Wednesday, said that many international students are forced to live in crowded, sub-standard housing, with universities failing to provide them with accommodation, even though they pay far higher tuition fees than Canadian students and inject around $22-billion into the economy each year.

One of the report’s authors, Senator Hassan Yussuff, questioned assertions that international students are to blame for the shortage of affordable housing, saying that many are living in cramped and overpriced accommodation with little protection from avaricious landlords.

The Senate report quoted findings by Statistics Canada that 40 per cent of study permit holders live in unsuitable accommodation compared with 9 per cent of the rest of Canada’s population.

Housing supply and affordability are a decades-old problem that cannot be solved by putting the burden principally on international students,” the report said.

It said that reducing international student numbers will reduce housing demand although the benefits would vary in different parts of the country and depend on the “tenancy preferences of Canadians.”

The Senate report said 51 per cent of international students settle in Ontario, with 20 per cent in B.C., and 12 per cent in Quebec.

The report added that the number of foreign students coming to Canada could be affected by diplomatic disputes with India and China, the “top international source countries.”

The IRCC, in assessing whether universities and colleges qualify as trusted, will gather information from government of Canada databases, such as on the “rate of adverse outcomes for study permit holders” –including convictions of international students for crimes in Canada. Ottawa will also check the approval rate of study permits to attend an institution.

It will also assess the “average teacher-student ratio” for the most popular courses taken by international students, retention and completion rates, foreign students’ ability to speak English or French, and the proportion of students who transition to permanent residency in Canada.

It says following the pilot, universities and colleges would be able to apply and the trusted institutions system could be up and running by spring next year. Foreign students applying to attend colleges and universities on the approved list could “receive expedited processing for the 2024 academic session.”

Source: Ottawa forecasts 1.4 million international student applications a year by 2027, document shows

Tensions with India raise concerns fewer international students will choose to study in Canada

Could be a good thing given the stories of fraud and exploitation and failed expectations. But not good for the institutions that rely on the revenues:

Diplomatic tensions between New Delhi and Ottawa threaten to curtail a relationship that funds a significant portion of Canada’s postsecondary education system.

The government of India issued a statement Wednesday warning Indian students in Canada about “growing anti-India activities and politically-condoned hate crimes and criminal violence.”

The statement urged students and other Indian nationals to exercise caution, but did not recommend against travel to Canada entirely. Instead it warned students of a “deteriorating security environment” and advised against visiting regions or venues targeted by those with what it called an “anti-India agenda.”

It’s the latest salvo in a growing diplomatic crisis between the two countries. On Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in the House of Commons that Canadian security agencies had been pursuing credible allegations of links between agents of the government of India and the killing of a Canadian citizen, Hardeep Singh Najjar, who supported the movement for an independent Khalistan.

Canada expelled an Indian diplomat earlier this week and India responded by doing the same to a member of Canada’s High Commission in New Delhi.

There is some concern that the Indian government could continue to stir fears about conditions in Canada, which might diminish demand for Canadian postsecondary education.

India issued a similar warning for students in Canada last year, however, and it had little, if any, impact. At the time Canadian police services could not point to any rise in anti-Indian violence.

Students from India make up about 40 per cent of the more than 800,000 international students in Canada, according to the Canadian Bureau for International Education. They are by far the largest single group at Canadian schools, followed by China at about 12 per cent and the Philippines at 4 per cent. At least six Ontario colleges have more students from India than from Canada.

International student tuition, which is several times higher than for Canadian students, has become essential to the finances of many postsecondary schools.

Roopa Desai Trilokekar, a professor of education at York University, said there is some risk that if this diplomatic fight escalates, the government of India could use its platform to discourage Indian students from applying to Canada. Something similar occurred more than 10 years ago with respect to Australia, after incidents that targeted Indian students in that country, she said. Study applications to Australia subsequently dropped.

Canada was already getting negative press in India because of difficulties with housing and work conditions that many students face when they arrive, she said. The diplomatic feud will only heighten the publicity around some of these issues, she said.

“I would imagine that we’re going to see a dip. But I don’t know how large the dip will be. And it will depend whether any official stances will be taken by either of the governments,” Prof. Trilokekar said.

She said the Canadian government, which is reviewing its international education policies, should reconsider the role of education in its geopolitical strategy.

“It’s going to require rethinking. There’s a lot of dependence on students from India.”

Gautham Kolluri, an international student recruiter based in Ontario, said he has already heard from students concerned that supporters of an independent Khalistan would attack Indian students in Canada.

But Mr. Kolluri said he doesn’t believe this diplomatic dispute will seriously reduce the number of students interested in coming to Canada. Demand from India is very high, he said. And unlike Saudi Arabia, which recalled students on government-funded scholarships during a diplomatic dispute with Canada in 2018, India does not have a ready mechanism to alter student migration, he said.

Jaspreet Singh, founder of the International Sikh Students Association, said he doesn’t think the political tensions will affect Sikh international students in Canada. He said India is unlikely to shut off a migration path that offers opportunity to young people who might otherwise have difficulty finding work or a spot in a university.

“If they tried to do something like this, there would be a huge backlash,” he said.

Source: Tensions with India raise concerns fewer international students will choose to study in Canada

Une voie rapide d’immigration seulement critiquée par l’Université McGill

Not surprising, as McGill would be most affected

Une voie rapide d’immigration permanente applicable uniquement aux étudiants étrangers ayant étudié en français préoccupe fortement l’Université McGill, qui estime qu’il s’agit d’un système à deux vitesses qui exclura des étudiants.

« Étant donné que ces personnes possèdent un diplôme québécois, qu’elles sont jeunes et qu’elles vivent déjà ici, en français, depuis plusieurs années, elles constituent un bassin exceptionnel où recruter de nouveaux Québécois et de nouvelles Québécoises », écrit le premier ministre du Québec, François Legault, dans le cahier de consultations sur la planification pluriannuelle de l’immigration, en les décrivant comme « des candidats idéaux ».

Cela fait réagir l’Université McGill, qui enseigne et fait de la recherche principalement en anglais, et qui pense que cette approche pénalisera les étudiants étrangers « même s’ils peuvent démontrer une excellente connaissance orale et écrite du français ».

« Nos étudiants risquent de sortir perdants de cet exercice », a déclaré Fabrice Labeau, premier vice-principal exécutif adjoint (études et vie étudiante) de l’Université McGill, lors de son passage aux consultations mercredi après-midi. À la suite de la réforme proposée au volet « diplômés » du Programme de l’expérience québécoise (PEQ), un diplômé du Québec pourra déposer une demande de résidence permanente dès la fin de ses études au lieu d’attendre les 12 ou 18 mois d’expérience de travail actuellement exigés.

Une voie rapide qui crée un système « à deux vitesses » et qui exclura des étudiants, croit-il. Il cite en exemple un étudiant de McGill originaire de Chine qui l’a contacté récemment. Celui-ci suit des cours de français tout en étudiant dans son programme à temps plein en anglais afin de « s’intégrer à la société québécoise ». « Cet étudiant s’inquiète maintenant pour son projet de vie au Québec, qu’il a patiemment construit au cours des dernières années », souligne-t-il.

Une bonne part de l’effectif étudiant songera à d’autres options que l’Université McGill, refroidie par les difficultés de s’établir au Québec par la suite, appréhende Fabrice Labeau. « Si on peut assouplir les règles, nous, on peut travailler fort sur la francisation », assure-t-il. L’établissement accueille présentement 12 000 étudiants étrangers, ce qui représente 30 % de sa population étudiante.

« Ne serait-il pas préférable d’évaluer chaque candidat à l’immigration individuellement plutôt que d’indiquer d’emblée une préférence pour ceux ayant suivi un programme francophone ? » demande l’université dans son mémoire.

Une voie de passage existe, dit Fréchette

Une voie de passage existe, a tenu à préciser la ministre de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration, Christine Fréchette, en réponse aux préoccupations de l’université.

« Les étudiants qui auront obtenu un diplôme dans un programme en anglais auront tout de même la possibilité d’appliquer pour le PEQ “diplômés”, s’il advenait qu’ils ont fait trois ans d’études en français au niveau secondaire ou postsecondaire », a-t-elle dit. Il est également possible pour eux de déposer leur candidature à la résidence permanente après une année d’expérience de travail s’ils maîtrisent le français au niveau requis.

Une réponse qui n’a pas semblé convaincre Fabrice Labeau, qui a, de son côté, invoqué l’attractivité des universités. « Leur fermer la porte à la voie rapide, c’est une difficulté », dit-il.

Source: Une voie rapide d’immigration seulement critiquée par l’Université McGill