Andrew Potter: Trudeau is risking our pro-immigration consensus

Indeed. Encouraging to see more articles focusses on the impact (my first article questioning the government’s approach and Canada’s ability to address these and other externalities dates from May 2021):

Justin Trudeau’s strong desire to push his unique brand of progressive cosmopolitanism onto audiences domestic and foreign has always stood uneasily beside his equally strong obsession with keeping the peace with Quebec, which is led by the increasingly nationalistic François Legault. Indeed, when these two goals have come in conflict, his tendency has been to either take Quebec’s side (such as the application of Bill 101 to companies under federal jurisdiction) or largely ignore it (Bill 21). But things are coming to a head now over immigration, and this is one area where it is hard not to think that Legault has a point. 

Last month, the federal government announced that Canada would be trying to bring in 500,000 immigrants a year by 2025, an almost 25 per cent increase over last year’s target. Thanks to current immigration levels, Canada’s population growth rate is already considerably higher than that of the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. As Statistics Canada reported this fall, immigrants currently make up almost a quarter of the population, the highest level since Confederation, and one of the highest levels in the world. 

Quebec seems to think things have gone just about far enough. The recent provincial election, which saw Legault’s CAQ re-elected in a landslide, was fought largely over questions of Quebec identity and the status of the French language, with the debate over appropriate levels of immigration serving as a flashpoint. The Liberals bid highest,  suggesting the province could accommodate 70,000 newcomers a year, while the PQ came in with a lowball pledge of a maximum of 35,000. The governing CAQ set the limit at 50,000, with Legault saying anything higher would be “suicidal” for the province. 

Given this all-party Quebec consensus around relatively low levels of immigration, it was surprising to see Trudeau assert in a year-end interview that Quebec has “all the tools” it needs to bring in as many as 112 000 immigrants a year, which would be its per-capita share of the 500,000 national target. In response, Legault’s immigration minister Christine Fréchette called Trudeau “insensitive” and said that Canada could bring in as many people as it likes but no more than 50,000 are coming to Quebec. 

The fact is, Quebec’s concerns over its ability to successfully integrate tens of thousands of newcomers are not frivolous, and it would be helpful if the federal government would recognize that these concerns apply as much in the rest of the country as they do in Quebec, if for different reasons. 

Ottawa’s rationale for ever-increasing levels of immigration is overwhelmingly economic. We are told that immigration leads to higher economic growth, will help alleviate labour shortages, and will mitigate the effects of an aging population. But even if this were true (the evidence is mixed on all of these), it is striking how little attention is paid to our capacity to successfully integrate a steadily increasing number of new Canadians. 

For starters, where are they all going to live? Housing in Canada is notoriously expensive, especially in the major cities where the majority of newcomers tend to settle. And we’re not adding anywhere close to the number of new houses that we need; as a recent Globe and Mail featureabout the challenges of immigration noted, the basic mismatch between the demand for housing and its supply is getting worse, not better. 

Then there is health care. The system, as anyone paying attention can see, is in a major crisis. There is a widespread shortage of nurses, and somewhere around six million Canadians can’t even find a family doctor. Ottawa will argue that the solution is to bring in more foreign-trained medical professionals, but the problems they have getting their credentials recognized in Canada are long-standing. 

And all of this assumes the prospective immigrants can even get into the country in the first place: The federal government is currently facing a surge of lawsuits over the backlog of 1.2 million unprocessed immigration applications, with some applicants waiting years for a decision. 

In short: We make people wait an unconscionable long time while we decide if we will admit them; once they are here we have no plan for providing them with affordable housing or accessible health care; and then we make it exceedingly difficult for them to practice the professions for which they are trained. And all of this comes at a time when the wave of right-wing populism that has swept across the West over the past half decade has made itself at home in Canada. 

It is easy to forget just how recent it was that Canadians became comfortable with high levels of immigration. When Brian Mulroney basically doubled Canada’s immigration targets overnight in the late 1980s, it sparked a substantial backlash, and was in part responsible for the rise of the Reform Party. The late 1980s and early 1990s saw a great deal of national anxiety over immigration, with many critics worried that growing numbers of “hyphenated Canadians” would lead to cultural balkanization and social disintegration. It was only at the end of the 1990s that popular opinion switched from being predominantly anti-immigration to generally in favour. 

Canada’s great multicultural experiment over the past quarter century is largely a success story, with a healthy majority of Canadians continuing to support current levels of immigration. Most of us probably have personal stories about how and why immigration has made our lives better, and, thankfully, there aren’t yet loud calls for less immigration. 

But it wasn’t always this way, and it is important to remember that the current consensus around immigration (and multiculturalism more generally) was a hard-won achievement. With what appears to be a single-minded push to get immigration levels up to half a million a year, with no plan for dealing with the increasing number of obstacles to successfully integrating them, one worries if the Liberals are taking that achievement for granted.

Source: Andrew Potter: Trudeau is risking our pro-immigration consensus

Federal changes could make it impossible for private groups to sponsor refugees, say faith leaders

Really hard to know what the specific issues are from this op-ed:

Last year, footage of Afghans desperately clinging to departing planes following the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan shocked the world. The images told a clear story: those holding onto the plane were so desperate to escape they would risk their lives. Since then, conflicts have escalated across the world, leading to the highest number of refugees in years, according to the UN High Commission on Refugees. The need to welcome refugees has never been greater.

On Vancouver Island, a wide variety of people have worked together to offer a haven to refugees and protect the persecuted. As faith leaders, we have watched worshippers, communities, and student groups come together to sponsor and welcome refugees to this part of the world.

The work of bringing a family to safety brings people together regardless of faith or race. The bonds that are created over the sponsorship process can last decades and are transformative for all involved. Those who come here as refugees begin to build a new life and are welcomed by a community invested in their success and happiness. It’s a win-win.

Organizations like the Anglican Diocese of British Columbia have been involved in privately sponsoring refugees from dozens of countries – including Ethiopia, Syria and the Democratic Republic of Congo – through the federal government’s Sponsorship Agreement Holder (SAH) program. The program allows for a certain number of refugees to be sponsored by organizations every year and places significant legal and financial liability on agreement holders, who must cover basic needs and support such as housing for a period of one year.

But upcoming changes to the program means that many groups may no longer be able to undertake this work. The federal government is implementing significant administrative requirements that will cost organizations tens of thousands of dollars, making sponsorship financially unfeasible.

For the Anglican Diocese of British Columbia, the largest SAH on Vancouver Island, these new costs are too onerous to bear. The diocese looks forward to honouring its commitments over the next few years to those whose applications have already submitted, and will be welcoming another 290 people – about half of whom will be children – to Vancouver Island. However, the diocese cannot responsibly submit any further applications under the new requirements and will allow our agreement to expire when the term is up.

For the diocese, the decision was not an easy one to make, but it can no longer afford to continue this work. Apart from raising millions in sponsorship dollars, the diocese itself contributes more than $150,000 a year to cover the administrative burden of this work. The new requirements will increase that burden and are a step too far for an already-stretched organization.

Our communities love this work. It matters. But as the federal government continues to make announcements about welcoming refugees, the reality is that much of the work is downloaded onto community and faith groups like ours.

Despite the diocese’s impeccable track record of navigating the system, raising money to sponsor refugee families, and ensuring support for these families for their first year in Canada, they are being asked by the government to do even more, without any funding and minimal support.

The work of welcoming refugees to Canada, setting up apartments, registering kids for school and ESL classes, and helping people feel at home in a new country is work that volunteers can and will continue to do. But the administrative work required by the government, in the form of expensive financial audits and forms, is too much to ask of volunteers.

As people of faith, people who are committed to providing a haven to the persecuted, we will continue to do what we can. But the government should make it easier – not harder – for us to do this work. Imposing administrative burdens on volunteers that are too heavy to bear will mean fewer refugees making Canada their home, families will remain apart, and religious institutions like ours will struggle to stay involved in this work.

We each lead congregations of people looking to build a better world. For our worshippers, just like for so many Vancouver Islanders, part of that work is welcoming refugees. We will continue to find a way to do this work because we do it well. We just want the government to help – not to hinder.

Bishop Anna Greenwood-Lee is the Anglican Bishop for the Diocese of British Columbia. Rabbi Harry Brechner leads Congregation Emanu-El in Victoria. Imam Zoheir Tahar is a leader with the Muslim Community of Vancouver Island

Source: Federal changes could make it impossible for private groups to sponsor refugees, say faith leaders

Mayorkas in El Paso: U.S. Immigration System Is Broken

Noteworthy reference at the end to Canada being a model:

As El Paso struggled Tuesday to cope with a growing migrant influx, the U.S. Homeland Security secretary visited the city and said the nation’s immigration and asylum systems were “broken.”

Alejandro Mayorkas met with Border Patrol agents, local government officials and nongovernmental organizations providing services to migrants. He spoke for about 15 minutes with reporters for KTEP public radio, El Paso Matters and the El Paso Times to talk about the ongoing challenges and the end of Title 42, a public health law that has been used since early 2020 to expel many migrants without giving them an opportunity to apply for asylum. A federal judge has ruled the program must end Dec. 21.

Mayorkas gave few specifics of how the Biden administration planned to address the soaring number of migrants arriving at the border. This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

Question: We’re already seeing huge numbers of people crossing and some of the stress and strain on local resources. So what would you want to say about the preparations for the end of Title 42?

Mayorkas: So we’ve been preparing since late last year for the end of Title 42. I think it was in April of this year that we published an outline of all of our planning to give confidence to the American public that we indeed will be prepared for the end of Title 42. That’s what we do in the Department of Homeland Security. We are operational, we prepare for different scenarios and execute accordingly. (Sunday), of course, El Paso experienced a very significant influx by essentially a caravan of buses and we’ve been working immediately thereafter with our partners to the south with Mexico to ensure that doesn’t happen again.

Q: Do you expect there to be any new limits on asylum for migrants whether that’s by nationality or a different process in place other than arriving at the border?

Mayorkas: So we believe in the asylum system, we’ve worked very, very hard to reconstruct it after it was dismantled by the prior administration. There are a lot of discussions about different ideas and how to address the number of encounters that we’re experiencing at the border. No decisions have been made. But one of the things that we’re very devoted to and we’ve been devoted to since the very outset of this administration is not only rebuilding our asylum system, rebuilding our refugee processes, rebuilding much of legal immigration, but also building lawful, safe, orderly humane pathways. So individuals who are desperate do not feel that they must place their lives, their life savings, in the hands of smugglers who only exploit them for profit.

Q:  Can you elaborate on discussions with Mexico or other programs that you’re considering to manage that?

Mayorkas: So the reality is that the challenge that we’re experiencing at the border is not exclusive to our border. I was just in Ecuador and Colombia this past week, and they were speaking of the challenges that they themselves face. In Colombia, for example, they cited the fact that they have 2.5 million Venezuelans in the country. And so what we’re experiencing is a challenge of migration throughout the hemisphere, throughout the region, and it requires a regional solution. And we really kicked that off most forcefully, I think, at the Summit of the Americas in Los Angeles. Subsequent to that, we’ve been speaking with our partners in a bilateral and multilateral context. Because a regional challenge requires partnership and a regional solution.

Q: Any specifics?

Mayorkas: I think it’d be premature because no specific plans have been determined.

Q: Do you have a date for announcing those specific plans for ending Title 42 that would expand upon the six-point plan from April based on new developments?

Mayorkas: So we’re mindful of the fact that Title 42 is going to end early next week. We’re also mindful of the fact that we have to coordinate with our partners, not just the nonprofit organizations with which we work very closely, not just cities along the border, like El Paso, but also our international partners. So we’re moving as quickly as we can. These are very important decisions. They’re very complex. The migration challenge is very, very complex. So we’re moving as quickly as we can.

Q: Any thoughts of standing up something like for the Afghan refugees to manage huge numbers of other migrants or asylum seekers here, maybe at Fort Bliss?

Mayorkas: So no decision has been made. We’re looking at a whole host of things. One of the options that of course we’re taking a look at is the success with our program for Venezuelans that we’ve built on our success for Ukrainians. How can we build a lawful pathway for individuals so that they don’t have to traverse dangerous terrain in the hands of smugglers, but rather, we can prequalify them if you will. We can vet and screen them beforehand, assess their eligibility, and then have them travel safely to the United States to ports of entry in the interior by plane, which is what we’ve seen in a tremendously successful program for Venezuelans.

Q: What would you want to tell people away from the border who see these images of people just walking across wading across the river and say “it’s out of control”?

Mayorkas: Well, remember, what we are seeing is people who are claiming asylum. And we see them surrendering themselves to Border Patrol to assert their claims for humanitarian relief, as our laws provide. And what I would say is, so be mindful of that, number one, but quite frankly, it’s an extraordinarily powerful picture of why we need our immigration system reformed through legislation. Our asylum system is broken. Our immigration system as a whole is broken. It hasn’t been updated or reformed in more than 40 years. We look to our partner to the north that has a much more nimble immigration system that can be retooled to the needs at the moment. For example, Canada is in need of 1 million workers and they have agreed that in 2023, they will admit 1.4 million … immigrants to fill that labor need that Canadians themselves cannot. We are stuck in antiquated laws that do not meet our current needs. And they haven’t been working for many, many years.

Source: Mayorkas in El Paso: U.S. Immigration System Is Broken

Douglas Todd: Chinese interest in emigrating to Canada jumps 28 times

Kurland has it right that there is a big difference in interest, based upon web stats, and acting on those interests in terms of applications, as the US interest after Trump’s election demonstrated. 
IRCC web stats “immigrate to Canada” show a comparable increase in Chinese interest in Canada, but only about 21 percent (January-November 2019 compared to 2021). However, applications from China were essentially flat from 2019,  January-October for the same period in 2021 (2022 numbers have a time lag due to data entry delays). Admissions have also remained flat for the same period.
And of course, the share of China as a source of immigrants has fallen over past years for a variety of factors:
I have been following IRCC web stats for four years now and am not finding any significant correlation with applications and admissions:
China’s most popular internet search engine experienced a 28-times surge in residents looking up the terms “conditions to immigrate to Canada” during the populous country’s severe COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns.
According to an internal Canadian immigration department report obtained under access to information requests by a Vancouver immigration lawyer, the search engine Baidu saw soaring interest in “immigration to Canada” and “immigration” before it suspended use of the terms in April.

Source: Douglas Todd: Chinese interest in emigrating to Canada jumps 28 times

Canada reverses immigration decision to make it easier for families to reunite

Of note. While invariably some stories will emerge of some failing to maintain payments, suspect minimal risk of most doing so:

Thousands of foreign nationals hoping to live in Canada are elated after Immigration Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) announced changes to how people coming to the country on a super visa can pay for their medical insurance.

Launched in 2011, the super visa program allows permanent residents (PR) and citizens to invite their non-resident parents and grandparents to stay with them in Canada for up to five years at a time.

But to do so, they have been required to pay for medical insurance up-front annually — a sometimes prohibitive price tag which varies depending on age and coverage but is an average of $1,500 for a 65-year-old and potentially higher as applicants get older.

While applicants could previously pay in monthly instalments, that changed in August when the department announced it would require annual up-front payments.

That prompted a backlash, including an online petition arguing the new payment system was punitive toward families seeking to be reunited and was resulting in fewer applications being granted.

But this week, the department confirmed its decision has been reversed, and families can once again make monthly payments. The move has been welcomed by applicants, as well as insurance and immigration experts, as a way to make it easier for families to reunite.

An important tool for multigenerational families

That’s a relief for Amritpal Singh, who lives in Surrey, B.C. and is hoping to invite his parents, who are in India, to come live with him next summer.

He says the prospect of paying for a full year of medical insurance for each of them was daunting, and he welcomes the chance to break it down into smaller payments.

“I am very excited to invite my parents to Canada. While they can get an opportunity to explore Canada with me, I will be emotionally benefited from their presence,” he said in an interview conducted in Punjabi.

Source: Canada reverses immigration decision to make it easier for families to reunite

Trudeau says Quebec has the ‘tools’ to welcome 112,000 immigrants, more than double its goal, Trudeau forcé de clarifier ses propos sur les seuils d’immigration

Correct. Not a question of having or not having the tools but Quebec takes a more more critical look at immigration rathe than the “more the merrier” approach in the rest of Canada. Have included an article from Le Devoir on the false controversy his remarks caused, forcing him to clarify his remarks (even if I found them clear).

But the divergent approaches to immigration, and the resulting dilution of Quebec’s weight in the federation, are a cause for medium-and-longer concern:

Quebec’s immigration minister has responded to comments from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, saying his assertion that the province could welcome up to 112,000 immigrants every year instead of the planned 50,000 is “insensitive” to Quebec’s challenge of protecting the French language.

Trudeau told The Canadian Press Monday afternoon in a year-end interview that Quebec had the resources to host more than double the immigration threshold it has set for itself and that the province already has “all the tools” for those people to be francophones.

Earlier this year, the federal government set a goal of welcoming 500,000 new immigrants by 2025 — 112,000 represents 22.3 per cent of that number, which is the equivalent of Quebec’s population within Canada.

Source: Trudeau says Quebec has the ‘tools’ to welcome 112,000 immigrants, more than double its goal

Le premier ministre Justin Trudeau a tenu mardi à préciser ses propos voulant qu’il fasse le « constat » que le Québec « a la capacité », selon lui, d’accueillir jusqu’à 112 000 immigrants par année, face aux commentaires désapprobateurs de la ministre québécoise de l’Immigration et de certains partis d’opposition aux Communes.

En entrevue de fin d’année avec La Presse canadienne, M. Trudeau avait, dans sa réponse à une question dans laquelle ce chiffre lui était présenté, répété ce dernier.

« Le Québec a actuellement la pleine capacité d’accueillir 112 000 immigrants par année. […] C’est un constat », avait-il dit lundi.

Le premier ministre était interpellé sur le fait que les Québécois représentent 22,3 % de la population canadienne et que ce chiffre de 112 000 correspond donc à la proportion des 500 000 immigrants que son gouvernement a récemment annoncé vouloir accueillir annuellement d’ici 2025.

Mardi, M. Trudeau est revenu sur ses propos durant la période des questions, bloquistes et conservateurs l’accusant de s’immiscer dans la décision de Québec de fixer ses propres seuils d’immigration.

« Je n’ai pas proposé de chiffres pour le Québec, a-t-il soutenu. J’ai reconnu que le Québec avait la capacité d’augmenter ses seuils d’immigration s’il le voulait. Ils ont ces pouvoirs parce que nous reconnaissons l’importance que le Québec a dans la protection de la langue française et de la nation québécoise. »

Pourtant, au cours de l’entrevue de fin d’année, il a bel et bien mentionné nommément « 112 000 » en réponse à une question.

« Je ne suis pas en train de le recommander [les 112 000 immigrants] non plus », avait ensuite nuancé M. Trudeau.

Les journalistes de La Presse canadienne venaient alors de porter à son attention l’écart entre le chiffre de 112 000 immigrants et les seuils de 50 000 et 70 000 qui ont été évoqués respectivement, en campagne électorale provinciale, par le gouvernement de François Legault et le Parti libéral du Québec. Québec solidaire a pour sa part proposé que la province reçoive entre 60 000 à 80 000 nouveaux arrivants par année.

Le premier ministre fédéral a expliqué son « constat » en faisant référence à l’accord entre le Québec et Ottawa en matière d’immigration qui donne tous les outils nécessaires au Québec pour l’accueil de 112 000 immigrants.

Dans ses échanges aux Communes, M. Trudeau a insisté que « c’est une décision pour le Québec et nous respectons les compétences à ce niveau-là ».

Or, l’opposition officielle conservatrice a plutôt interprété les propos du premier ministre comme une « directive », a résumé en mêlée de presse son lieutenant politique pour le Québec, Pierre Paul-Hus.

« M. Trudeau dit : “On peut avoir jusqu’à 112 000 immigrants au Québec”. Le gouvernement du Québec dit : “Non. On a calculé que nous, pour bien accueillir des immigrants, c’est 50 000’’. Donc M. Trudeau fait de façon indirecte une forme d’efforts d’imposer un seuil d’immigration pour le Québec, ce qu’on considère qu’il ne devait pas se faire », a-t-il dit.

Le chef bloquiste Yves-François Blanchet estime aussi que M. Trudeau veut imposer sa vision.

« En 24 heures, le premier ministre dit qu’il faut que le Québec accueille 112 000 immigrants. “Oh ! Je ne l’impose pas”, mais toutes les autres fois il a dit qu’il voudrait bien l’imposer », a-t-il mentionné durant la période des questions.

Il a, de plus, suggéré que le fédéral était bien mal placé pour parler en raison des arriérés dans le traitement de dossiers d’immigration.

« Est-ce qu’il devrait refaire ses devoirs et laisser le Québec gérer tant l’immigration que le français ? », a tonné M. Blanchet.

Du côté du gouvernement de François Legault, la ministre de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration, Christine Fréchette, a déclaré par écrit que les propos de M. Trudeau lui paraissent « insensibles ».

« C’est au Québec, et au Québec seul, de déterminer ses seuils d’immigration », a-t-elle souligné. La ministre n’était pas disponible pour une entrevue mardi.

Selon elle, le Québec a « un double défi, qui est unique au Canada », soit de s’attaquer à la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre tout en arrêtant le déclin du français, « ce à quoi M. Trudeau semble rester insensible », a-t-elle ajouté.

Source: Trudeau forcé de clarifier ses propos sur les seuils d’immigration

Michelle Rempel Garner: They’re really sorry, but your parents won’t be able to come to your wedding

Of interest by Conservative MP Rempel Garner. Most media coverage of backlogs has focussed on permanent residents, work permits and citizenship rather than visitor visas but this is as important given the impact on families and tourism. 74 percent as of this October.

Somewhat surprising in that visitor visas are a leading program in using AI and other tools to improve and streamline processing.

My take on this and related processing delays and backlogs is somewhat different from hers. I would place more blame on the political level for recklessly focussing on increasing numbers across all programs without sufficiently considering the ability to deliver (whatever happened to Deliverology?). The COVID excuse is past its best before date:

Two of my best friends got married in early October. It would have been a perfect day except for one thing — a glaring family absence.

Despite applying for something called a temporary resident visa (TRV) over four months before their wedding date, the parents of one of the grooms were unable to travel to Canada for the wedding. Their absence was due to a massive backlog in the Canadian government’s review process of this routine piece of paperwork.

For the uninitiated, a TRV is a document issued by the federal government that allows a person to enter Canada as a visitor, student or worker. If you hold a Canadian passport and have travelled to another country, you most likely never have had to apply for a visa, because many countries grant visa-free entry to Canadians.

The same isn’t true for many foreign nationals who want to enter Canada, including several countries that have large diaspora populations in Canada. The TRV application review process is supposed to be thorough, but fast. It’s designed to screen applicants for things like if they pose a security risk to the country, if they have sufficient financial resources to support themselves during their stay in Canada, and if they have enough permanent ties to their home country to ensure they return to it.

Years ago, this process would only take a few weeks, at most, to complete. Now, as with my friend’s parents, it’s taking months at best. As of the end of September 2022, there were nearly a million outstanding applications for a TRV in the processing backlog, with roughly 75 per cent of new applicationstaking longer than the service standard to process. 

The problems this backlog has created are big ones, and they have a far-reaching impact. 

TRV processing delays have had a critical negative impact on several industries, and create a drag on our economy. At a time when Canada is facing an enormous labour shortage, workers may forego coming to Canada due to the uncertainty the backlog has created. International students that could provide talent and expertise to Canada are choosing to go elsewhere. Families, even spouses, that want to be reunited with loved ones have lost a clear line of sight on if and when they’ll be able to do so. 

The backlog is also raising concerns about equity issues. Desperate applicants will attempt to get the Minister of Immigration to directly intervene. Immigration lawyers are sometimes retained in hopes of finding some way to speed up the process. This raises the question — why should application processing be determinant upon access to money and influence? 

When attempting to explain the cause of the backlog, the federal government points to global pandemic restrictions, an increase in the number of applications, limited resources, and the complexity of processing visas.

For many, these reasons don’t hold water. The backlog was rapidly growing before the pandemic started. And in recent years the federal government has dramatically increased spending on the department in charge of processing TRVs. Despite this, processing wait times have grown and remained high. Other countries with similar economic profiles and demand for visas to Canada have managed to keep their backlogs comparatively low.

The real reasons for the backlog go deeper than resourcing.

Civil society groups have raised numerous valid inequities in the TRV processing system that may add to the backlog, including how applications from certain countries have longer wait times than others. Requirements for approval change often and are not well communicated to applicants, leaving many confused and uncertain about their eligibility. This increases the likelihood of submitting incomplete applications, which creates more administrative burden for the government. 

And the actual criteria used to approve or reject an applicant is pretty opaque. Many applicants are denied visas despite meeting all of the listed requirements, so they re-apply, putting more burden on the system.

From where I sit, a big part of the reason for the backlog lies in the Liberal government treating the immigration ministry like the armpit of their cabinet. Successive Liberal immigration ministers have been allowed to throw money at the problem without seeing meaningful results and without suffering demotion from their role. To get movement on the backlog, the minister must ensure that recalcitrant senior bureaucrats aren’t incentivized to find excuses for why the problem can’t be fixed. Their continued collective employment should be contingent upon doing the opposite. 

Nor should the government be tempted to sacrifice the integrity of the process to process more applications. Thorough diligence is still needed. Nor should standard service timelines be raised to manage expectations instead of application volume. For the hundreds of millions of dollars Canadian taxpayers have spent on this system, we should get a visa processing system that is fair, rigorous, and fast — not the debacle the federal government is currently presiding over.

My friend’s parents’ TRV was approved five months after they applied; one month after the wedding. Their frustrating journey to come to Canada has become the rule, not the exception. 

For the countless Canadians who, due to the backlog, will be separated from loved ones this holiday season, and for the thousands of businesses that are without workers, that rule has brought shame to our country. We ought to be embarrassed. 

Source: Michelle Rempel Garner: They’re really sorry, but your parents won’t be able to come to your wedding

Canada overtakes U.K. as destination for Hong Kong students amid mounting exodus

Of note:

Thousands of Hong Kong students are choosing to come to Canada over countries like the U.K. and Australia, with more and more of its citizens applying for study permits abroad and contributing to a mounting exodus amid China’s growing control over the region.

This year, Canada has approved 7,920 study permits to students coming from Hong Kong, up from about 6,300 in 2021, according to Immigration, Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) data. Historically, Canada issued less than 3,000 annually — numbers that were eclipsed in the month of August 2022 alone.

The Hong Kong government’s increasing hard line against mass protests and China’s growing control over the region has coincided with more than 100,000 people leaving the region in the past two years, mostly to the United Kingdom, Australia, Singapore and Canada.

U.K. data shows just over 5,000 study permits were issued to Hong Kong students between January and September this year, while Australia issued just over 2,000 by Oct. 31.

“One country, two systems definitely never delivered,” said Ken Tung, president of the B.C.-based Civic Education Society.

“Hong Kongers realized that, and you can see people started moving.”

Pathway to permanent residency through education

Protests erupted across Hong Kong in 2019, sparked by an extradition bill that many of the city’s residents vehemently opposed, saying it would give the government powers to arbitrarily extradite anyone in Hong Kong to China to face the legal system there.

The protests began peacefully but would escalate with demonstrators clashing with police who have been accused of unlawful use of force. In the ensuing months, authorities arrested more than 10,000 people related to the protests, more than 2,900 of whom were prosecuted, according to figures released up to February 2022.

“You can see the freedom of Hong Kong, the democracy, the justice system, collapsing,” said Tung. “You can see all the talented people, all the people with resources, leaving Hong Kong. And I think Canada understands the situation.”

In 2021, Canada opened an expedited pathway for Hong Kong residents to receive Canadian permanent residency if they graduate through a designated post-secondary program. It will last until 2026.

In a statement, IRCC said it expects “this increased opportunity to remain in Canada permanently has encouraged many Hong Kongers to study here.”

Tung says Metro Vancouver and the Greater Toronto Area are the main regions where students are settling, with the pathway attracting people of all ages pursuing varying degrees of education.

“But even professionals, they can actually come to study a masters degree and strengthen their knowledge, and many of them, with a professional job, they’d like to learn something else,” he said.

“If that helps them to stay in Canada to contribute, I think that strengthens both sides — for them, and also for Canada.”

Source: Canada overtakes U.K. as destination for Hong Kong students amid mounting exodus

Germany’s Scholz says strong immigration may secure population boost to 90 million

Of note:

Chancellor Olaf Scholz said on Saturday Germany could increase its population strongly in the years ahead as the government seeks to boost immigration to help avert labour shortages and a crisis in its pension system.

The government is working on attracting foreign workers to “keep the show on the road” despite an ageing population, making an estimated 7% rise in population to 90 million by 2070 plausible, Scholz told a citizen forum in Potsdam, near Berlin.

The German government last month agreed plans to reform immigration law, as Berlin seeks to open up the job market in Europe’s biggest economy to much-needed workers from outside the European Union.

The government has said it wants to boost immigration and training to tackle a skills shortage weighing on the German economy at a time of weakening growth, with an aging population piling pressure on the public pension system.

Scholz said that current population growth due in part to rising immigration meant the government might not to raise pension contributions before the end of its mandate in 2025.

Germany’s statistics office said last week the population would likely rise by 1 million to 84 million this year due to migration from Ukraine. It could reach 90 million in coming decades, if immigration was high, it added.

Source: Germany’s Scholz says strong immigration may secure population boost to 90 million

How immigration dreams turned into nightmares

Another case of apparent consultant fraud:

Andres Medellin thought he had struck gold.

In 2021, Medellin says a  Vancouver immigration consultant pitched him and a room full of other Latin American workers on a wunderkind Canadian immigration program that  could allow anyone to legally remain and work in the country.

Instead, Medellin is back home in Mexico, his dreams of studying in Canada on hold and his immigration file full  of red flags that will cause future problems.

Medellin and dozens of other migrant  workers, mostly Mexicans, are suing that consultant, Liza Lucion,  alleging she collected thousands in fees to apply for a Canadian  immigration program that never existed.

The proposed class action  lawsuit against Lucion, which is not yet certified, alleges the  consultant’s actions deprived clients of their chance to apply for  other, legitimate ways of staying in the country.

The lawsuit has been filed  with the B.C. Supreme Court and Lucion has filed a statement of defence.  The next step is a hearing on whether the class action lawsuit can  proceed.

Some of the clients, like Medellin, have  since either chosen or been forced to leave. Lucion’s licence to work as  an immigration consultant has since been indefinitely suspended by the  College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants.

Lucion categorically denies the allegations against her, which have yet to be tested in a court of law.

In a statement sent by her lawyer, Lucion  said she “made her best efforts to honestly and in good faith provide  foreign nationals in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic with  information regarding the options available to maintain legal status in  Canada based on relevant government policies.”

She said complainants “likely misunderstood  what she told them and have been encouraged by others to make this  vicious attack on her business and reputation.”

Susanna Quail, co-counsel for the proposed  class action lawsuit against Lucion, says the case highlights deep flaws  in Canada’s immigration system.

The system is “so prone to exploitation and preying on vulnerable people,” Quail said.

Medellin says he met Lucion at a time of  uncertainly. He arrived in Vancouver in August 2019 on a visitor visa.  Medellin had visited the city when he was 15 and was staying with  friends in town.

Then the COVID-19 pandemic began. Medellin  said he had apprehensions about returning home, fearful he would spread  the virus to his mother and family. “I considered myself a visitor that  was stranded in Canada,” Medellin said in a phone interview from Mexico  City.

Over time, Medellin said, he began working  construction jobs to make ends meet, getting paid in cash. He knew it  was illegal, he said, and felt ashamed for going around the law.

“I know I was doing that illegally. I don’t  want people in Canada to get me wrong. We are proud of working very  hard, but shameful at the same time because of being illegal. It’s a  sentiment that is not very easy to communicate,” Medellin said. “We feel  ashamed because we really respect the country. It could sound a little  contradictory.”

Medellin said a job site supervisor  recommended he see Lucion. He remembers sitting in the waiting room of  her consulting firm with between 10 and 12 other people, mostly Latin  American. He said they received a presentation — translated by an  interpreter into Spanish — about a new program, which Lucion said had  been opened to all migrants in response to the COVID-19 pandemic  regardless of their legal status in the country. Medellin said Lucion  told them she had special knowledge of the program, which is why it was  not publicly advertised.

In her filed court response,  Lucion said those meetings happened but argued she had only promoted  existing and legitimate immigration programs into Canada. In the chaos  of the early COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government had implemented  policy changes aimed at helping migrant workers stay in the country,  including temporary measures giving migrant workers more time to restore  temporary residence status. Her statement of defence says she had an  “honestly held belief” that applicants would be legally eligible for the  programs they applied for.

Medellin said Lucion told the crowd the  process cost $7,000 — half to start, and the other half upon completion.  He says she urged them to apply soon, since spots were limited.

Medellin was suspicious but desperate. He  had a dream of getting legal status in Canada and eventually going to  graduate school at the University of British Columbia to study art  history. “My impression was, if something good comes out from this, I do  not want to be out of it,” Medellin said.

He described himself as holding out the money with one hand while using the other to cover his eyes and turn his head away.

Quail says the roughly 50 other  migrant workers who have come forward describe a similar pattern: an  information session of eight to 12 people, a request for cash, then  silence.

“For some people, it appears she took their  money and did nothing. And then for some people she took their money  and did other kinds of applications they weren’t actually eligible for,”  Quail said.

Medellin alleges Lucion had promised she  could secure a visa in as little as two weeks. But his messages to her  went largely unanswered.

At one point, he said Lucion told him she  could not explain the delay because he did not speak English, a language  he commanded well enough to conduct a 45-minute interview with The  Tyee.

Concerns about the promises began to spread  through the Mexican community in the Lower Mainland. Medellin said he  hosted information sessions with workers in Stanley Park and the issue  was discussed on social media.

Court filings show Lucion sued two separate  people she alleged had defamed her in a Facebook group. She also sued  three other people after a tense office meeting, where one of the  defendants claimed Lucion had threatened to have the three of them  deported. None of those cases appear to have moved forward in the court  system beyond statements of defence.

It is not the first time Lucion took court  action against a critic. In 2017, she sued a fellow member of a Filipino  volleyball team for, among other things, “purposely hitting the ball  aiming to the plaintiff.”

Word about the allegations reached Berenice  Díaz Ceballos, Mexico’s consul general in Vancouver, who said the  consulate began to direct affected migrants towards Quail’s legal team.

“Some had to leave Canada, because there  were no options and they were in a risky situation. They didn’t have  status anymore,” Ceballos said in a November interview. She worries some  people may not know about the lawsuit.

“Here you are deciding or obstructing the  opportunities of real people, of real families,” Ceballos said. “When  humans are involved, it’s a very sensitive issue.”

Quail believes the case highlights  longstanding problems with the Canadian immigration system that place  desperate, vulnerable workers at risk.

Many economic migrant workers coming to the  country are on strict closed permits, allowing them to work only for a  specific employer in a specific location at a specific time. Getting an  open work permit is considerably more difficult.

“At each step of this process, we have  people who are very vulnerable to being scammed by consultants, because  people are really desperate for a way to get status in Canada. They hear  it and they want to believe it. If you can get status in Canada, it’s  life-changing,” Quail said.

Immigration consultants in Canada do have a  regulatory college. In July, its disciplinary council passed a decision  to indefinitely suspend Lucion’s right to practise after it received 11  complaints about her in the span of two years. But Quail believes  oversight of consultants is lax compared to other professions, like lawyers.

On the other hand, expectations of would-be immigrants are strict.

Amanda Aziz is Quail’s co-counsel on the  lawsuit and a lawyer at the Migrant Workers Centre. She says many of her  clients are often stuck untangling themselves from legal trouble after  an issue with an immigration application or being misrepresented by a  consultant.

“For the most part, people aren’t coming to  Canada and enjoying living here without status and just being flagrant  about the immigration system,” Aziz said. “For the most part, people are  trying very hard to make sure their status is legal, working very hard  to make sure they can get their next status. We make it difficult, and  when a mistake is made, we make it very hard for them to fix.”

In October 2021, months after he met Liza  Lucion, Medellin got a visit from immigration officials. He was not  deported, he said, but was told he had to leave the country, an order he  complied with. He is now back in Mexico City. He is currently appealing  a rejected application for a student visa in Canada. He hopes the  lawsuit, if it is certified and successful, will help clear his name  with Canada’s immigration officials.

“We know that we could get money out of the  class action, but we’re not really concerned about this… Money is not  important to us,” Medellin said. “We want justice.”

Source: How immigration dreams turned into nightmares