Coy: Why So Many Children of Immigrants Rise to the Top

More commentary on Streets of Gold: America’s Untold Story of Immigrant Success, by Ran Abramitzky of Stanford and Leah Boustan of Princeton:

The lack of a shared set of facts about immigration makes it easy for accusatory and often false messages to echo loudly in the run-up to the midterm elections. J.D. Vance, a leading Republican candidate for Ohio’s open Senate seat, claimed in a recent advertisement that “Joe Biden’s open border is killing Ohioans, with more illegal drugs and more Democrat voters pouring into this country.” Representative Paul Gosar of Arizona has describedimmigration as “full scale invasion.” Tucker Carlson of Fox News told a guest on his show in 2017: “Go to Lowell, Mass., or Lewiston, Maine, or any place where large numbers of immigrants have been moved into a poor community, and it hasn’t become richer. It’s become poorer. That’s real.”

A new book, “Streets of Gold: America’s Untold Story of Immigrant Success,” by two economists, Ran Abramitzky of Stanford and Leah Boustan of Princeton, should undercut some of the fearmongering. They linked census records to pull together what they call “the first set of truly big data about immigration.”

Using the data set, Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan were able to compare the income trajectories of immigrants’ children with those of people whose parents were born in the United States. The economists found that on average, the children of immigrants were exceptionally good at moving up the economic ladder.

Immigrants and their children are assimilating into the United States as quickly now as in the past, the economists found. That’s in line with recent research into the effects of immigration. While “first-generation immigrants are more costly to governments than are the native-born,” according to a 2017 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, the “second generation are among the strongest fiscal and economic contributors in the U.S.”

Second-generation-immigrant success stories have long been a part of America’s history. Looking at census records from 1880, the researchers found that men whose fathers were low-income immigrants made more money as adults than the sons of low-income men born in the United States. (They focused on sons because it was harder to track women from one census to the next, since so many adopted their husbands’ names at marriage.) Because of privacy restrictions, they had access to individual data only through the 1940 census. They used other sources for subsequent years.

Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan observed the same pattern a century later. Children born around 1980 to men from Mexico, India, Brazil and almost every other country outearned the children of U.S.-born men.

“America really does have golden streets that allow immigrants to quickly make more than they could have earned at home,” they write. But, they add, “moving up the economic ladder in America — and catching up to the U.S.-born — takes time.”

Once Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan found abundant evidence of second-generation immigrants’ upward mobility, they tried to figure out why those children did so well.

They arrived at two answers. First, the children had an easy time outdoing parents whose careers were inhibited by poor language skills or a lack of professional credentials. The classic example is an immigrant doctor who winds up driving a cab in the United States.

Second, immigrants tended to settle in parts of the country experiencing strong job growth. That gave them an edge over native-born Americans who were firmly rooted in places with faltering economies. Immigrants are good at doing something difficult: leaving behind relatives, friends and the familiarity of home in search of prosperity. The economists found that native-born Americans who do what immigrants do — move toward opportunity — have children who are just as upwardly mobile as the children of immigrants.

Looking at maps of where immigrants have settled at different points in time, it’s clear that those regions were also areas of productivity and economic growth. In 1910, European immigrants went to work in the factories of the Midwest and New England. In 1980, immigrants from elsewhere in the Americas filled jobs in rapidly growing parts of Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California and Florida.

If immigrants are so upwardly mobile, why doesn’t it seem that way? One reason is that there are more newcomers than there have been in decades and most haven’t had time yet to get ahead. The share of foreign-born people in the United States is back to the levels of the first two decades of the 20th century.

Another reason is that most immigrants are arriving well below native-born Americans socioeconomically. They are more likely, Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan found, than immigrants of the past to come from countries that are significantly poorer than the United States, including El Salvador, India and Vietnam. But it’s those immigrants who start at the bottom who ascend the most. In contrast, affluent, educated immigrants tend to be the least upwardly mobile, simply because they’re already at or near the top.

Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan dispute the argument that immigrants frequently take jobs from native-born Americans. Less skilled immigrants gravitate toward jobs for which there is relatively little competition from native-born Americans, such as picking crops, while highly skilled immigrants often create more jobs for native-born Americans by starting businesses and inventing things, they write.

The research of Mr. Abramitzky and Ms. Boustan has made headlines before, but in their new book they broaden and deepen the narrative with excerpts from diaries and oral histories of immigrants. Signe Tornbloom, 18, a daughter of hardscrabble Swedish farmers, immigrated alone in 1916 after receiving a letter that said, more or less: “Well, you’d better come over here. Everything is much better than it is at home.”

The notion that immigrants have become a permanent underclass, isolated from the American mainstream, is popular among immigration restrictionists — as well as among some pro-immigration groups that say immigrants need more help to break out of poverty. The truth is that today’s immigrants are advancing just as swiftly as those of the past. “The American dream,” Mr. Abramitzky said in an interview, “is just as alive now as it was a century ago.”

Source: Why So Many Children of Immigrants Rise to the Top

Refugee sponsor groups accuse Ottawa of ‘breach of agreement’ as families wait to reunite

Another example of IRCC operational difficulties? The Mennonites are one of the easiest and most reasonable groups to work with:

More than 100 groups across Canada that have formal agreements with Ottawa to privately sponsor refugees are accusing the federal government of breaching their agreements, leaving them unable to help vulnerable people.

These groups, known as Sponsorship Agreement Holders (SAHs), are religious, humanitarian, or community organizations that assume the full financial, legal and logistical obligations related to settling refugees in Canada. They often work with smaller community groups that handle the fundraising and arrange, among other things, housing, schools, and jobs.

Every year, SAHs are each allotted a certain number of refugees — for a combined total of roughly 10,000 to 12,000 — for whom they can submit applications to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada, which then carries out interviews, medical check-ups, and security clearance.

The Canadian Refugee Sponsorship Agreement Holders Association (SAH Council) wrote a letter to the federal minister, Shawn Fraser, on June 20 to complain that Ottawa still hasn’t given its members their annual allotment of sponsorship spaces, which it says is “a breach of the Sponsorship Agreement.” It’s calling for the immediate release of 2022 allocations.

“SAH’s are facing a quickly diminishing window of time to submit new sponsorship applications within this calendar year,” the Council said, adding that it’s difficult to plan or confirm support to vulnerable refugee families.

“It’s frustrating,” said Mark Bigland-Pritchard, a migration and resettlement coordinator for the Mennonite Central Committee (MCC), a faith-based agency that’s had a sponsorship agreement with Ottawa for about 40 years.

“The bulk of our allocation, we just cannot submit until the time comes that they permit us to.”

These delays endanger thousands of people who are facing persecution or living in dangerous places, he said.

Families separated, refugees at risk

Three applications that are still sitting on his desk, ready to be submitted, belong to nine-year-old Adnan Kharsa’s parents and sister. As CBC News reported in April, the Syrian boy has been separated from his family, who are in Turkey, for five years. He made it to Saskatoon with his grandmother and uncle as a privately-sponsored refugee last year.

Adnan’s aunt, Doha Kharsa, who lives in Saskatoon, formed a sponsorship group in the community and raised $40,000 to privately sponsor Adnan’s parents and sister. Then, she teamed up with MCC, as the sponsorship agreement holder, to submit their applications as part of its 2022 allotment.

Bigland-Pritchard says MCC is normally allotted about 400 spaces a year, and those numbers are usually confirmed in February. That didn’t happen this year. In May, the federal government allowed each sponsorship agreement holder in Canada to submit 25 applications.

Kharsa was disappointed to learn Ottawa hasn’t accepted more applications, including hers.

“It’s shocking,” she said. “I don’t know how to tell my mom, or even Adnan, or even my brother in Turkey about this.”

“I don’t understand why. The money is there. The applications are ready to go. So why the delay?”

In the letter to Fraser, the SAH Council said it “acknowledged the tremendous pressure IRCC currently faces in its response to multiple global crises.” It said IRCC had indicated to SAH Council that the delay is, in part, due to what it called “processing challenges” at the Resettlement Operations Centre in Ottawa.

In a statement to CBC News, IRCC did not offer an explanation for the delays.

“The Department is actively working to release the remaining 2022 allocations to SAHs,” said the statement attributed to a spokesperson for Fraser.

“We can confirm that we received a letter from the Canadian Refugee Sponsorship Agreement Holders (SAH) Association and will be responding directly to address their concerns. We look forward to continuing our working relationship with the Canadian Refugee Sponsorship Agreement Holders.”

2-3 year wait after application goes in

Bigland-Pritchard said it’s critical to resume steady sponsorship submissions because getting the application into the system is only the first step.

After that, the processing time for MCC’s privately-sponsored refugees is about two to three years. For example, MCC is still waiting for half of the refugees they applied for in 2019 to arrive in Canada, and most of the people they applied for in 2020 haven’t arrived.

Source: Refugee sponsor groups accuse Ottawa of ‘breach of agreement’ as families wait to reunite

Chouinard: Demandeurs d’asile largués [childcare subsidies]

Of note:

La décision de Québec de porter en appel un jugement qui redonnait enfin aux demandeurs d’asile le droit aux garderies subventionnées, et ce, après quatre ans d’interdit, traduit une politique migratoire insensible à la vulnérabilité des citoyens en attente d’un statut. Les organismes de défense des droits de ces demandeurs, qui ont un permis de travail mais ne peuvent l’utiliser faute de moyens, ont raison d’être exaspérés.

Ce dossier à la fois complexe et d’une simplicité désarmante nourrit les manchettes depuis quatre ans. En avril 2018, le gouvernement libéral de Philippe Couillard a décidé sans crier gare de réinterpréter l’article 3 du Règlement sur la contribution gratuite de la Loi sur les services de garde éducatifs à l’enfance. Alors que cet article donnait jusque-là accès aux garderies à 8,70 $ par jour à tout titulaire d’un « permis de travail et [qui] séjourne au Québec principalement afin d’y travailler », une nouvelle lecture de cet article a exclu les demandeurs d’asile, qu’on a jugés présents au Québec pas « principalement » pour travailler. Du jour au lendemain, cette catégorie de migrants s’est donc retrouvée privée d’accès aux services de garde subventionnés, et ce, malgré le fait qu’ils détenaient un permis de travail.

En prenant le pouvoir en 2018, la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) n’a pas jugé bon d’annuler la décision du précédent gouvernement, qui avait soulevé l’ire de tous les groupes de défense des droits des réfugiés et des demandeurs d’asile. L’accès à la garderie subventionnée revêt une importance capitale dans la vie de personnes nouvellement arrivées au Québec et qui désirent s’intégrer, travailler et apprendre le français. Pour les enfants, cet accès est capital. Même les arguments économiques ne tiennent pas la route pour justifier cet entêtement obscur de Québec à exclure ce groupe de citoyens de l’accès à la garderie, car, faute de moyens financiers, plusieurs mères doivent renoncer à travailler, et ce, même si elles détiennent un permis de travail. En pleine pénurie de main-d’oeuvre, c’est d’une absurdité sans nom.

Les médias ont rapporté nombre d’histoires invraisemblables : des mères célibataires forcées de se rabattre sur l’aide sociale et de refuser nombre d’offres d’emploi, car le prix d’une garderie privée — environ 50 $ par jour, contre 8,70 $ dans les garderies soutenues par Québec — équivalait littéralement au montant mensuel de leur loyer. Alors que les pénuries de main-d’oeuvre dans nombre de secteurs cruciaux sont en train de créer un Québec vivant sur le mode gruyère, avec des trous béants dans son offre de services essentiels, on tournerait le dos à un groupe de travailleurs prêts à s’intégrer dans la société québécoise par le truchement du travail ?

Québec prétexte le fort afflux de migrants, les listes d’attente pour les garderies subventionnées et les délais d’attente déraisonnables imposés par le fédéral pour justifier son refus de relire avec justesse l’article 3 du Règlement ; mais la vérité est qu’il ajoute lui-même des embûches sur la route déjà tortueuse de l’intégration des migrants. En outre, et cela est une véritable disgrâce pour un gouvernement dont le slogan de la dernière campagne électorale dans le dossier d’immigration était « en prendre moins, mais en prendre soin », l’interprétation de la CAQ prend pour cible un groupe vulnérable. C’est en totale contradiction avec toutes les politiques humanitaires de soutien aux demandeurs d’asile.

Il a donc fallu se tourner vers les tribunaux pour savoir si Québec avait erré en décidant de proposer une nouvelle lecture de l’article 3. Fin mai dernier, le juge Marc St-Pierre, de la Cour supérieure, a décrété que oui. « [Le Tribunal] déclare que l’article 3 du Règlement sur la contribution réduite a été adopté sans habilitation législative et est par conséquent ultra vires et nul », a-t-il conclu, ce qui a provoqué un immense soulagement du côté des organismes qui s’agitaient depuis quatre ans pour ce revirement de situation. La victoire fut de courte durée, car le 7 juillet dernier, Québec a décidé d’en appeler de la décision. C’est navrant.

À l’approche d’un 3e Sommet de l’immigration, qui doit normalement se tenir en novembre prochain, il serait intéressant de valider la cohérence de l’ensemble des politiques d’immigration et des pratiques de terrain, car l’ensemble de l’oeuvre laisse poindre nombre de ratés et d’invraisemblances qui nuisent aux objectifs économiques et aux politiques sociales du Québec. On a fait grand cas des seuils d’immigration, résumant le dossier à une affaire de chiffres, alors que le coeur du travail se trouve dans l’intégration — ratée — de ceux qui y sont.

La souque-à-la-corde qui se joue entre Ottawa et Québec autour de ce dossier crucial ne vient d’aucune manière donner de l’air au Québec, il faut le rappeler. Ottawa est empêtré dans une lourdeur administrative et des délais qui font honte, et dont pâtit le Québec. Mais celui-ci doit honorer ses promesses envers les personnes à qui il ouvre sa porte et leur permettre d’accéder de la manière la plus rapide et la plus digne au marché de l’emploi.

Source: Demandeurs d’asile largués

Saunders: How the pandemic may have made government agencies better at their jobs

Ironic timing, given that large immigration and passport backlogs in Canada. That being said, IRCC is moving on IT and more online services.

But perhaps MPI should have accompanied this analysis with a snapshot on backlogs in all the countries surveyed:

Chaos descended on governments more than two years ago, when the COVID-19 pandemic forced millions of frontline public-service workers and back-office bureaucrats to abandon their offices, stop meeting with clients and managing lineups, and switch quickly to improvised digital services in departments that in many cases had barely moved beyond the fax machine.

Unsurprisingly, some departments became frozen and dysfunctional, leaving a legacy of perpetual waiting lists, undelivered projects and unanswered calls. But an unexpected consequence of the global crisis was that some branches of government actually sharply improved their quality of service, in terms of both timeliness of delivery and effectiveness of results. The virus forced transformations, in many places, that should have happened decades ago.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the way governments have changed how they deal with the process of immigration, settlement and the pathway to citizenship. If you’ve ever emigrated to new country, you know it involves years of day-long waits at government offices, repeat trips to bring in the proper documents, hard-to-arrange appointments with officials, forms that must be handled in person and often years of non-optional classes in language and citizenship. Even for a middle-class immigrant with resources, it’s a complex, disruptive process that can go on for years.

But the pandemic had a striking and often overwhelmingly positive effect on the Western world’s immigration bureaucracies. That’s made apparent in a new study, “The COVID-19 Catalyst,” by Jasmijn Slootjes of the Brussels-based Migration Policy Institute Europe, in which her team looked at the immigration bureaucracies of 14 countries, including Canada’s.

Pretty much every developed country faced twin problems during the pandemic. One, restricted travel and sometimes-closed borders made it very hard to bring in the people who were needed to keep the economy rolling, especially in suddenly crucial fields such as healthcare, eldercare and food production. And two, an already undersized bureaucracy was now working from home and unable to operate service desks, offices and classrooms.

Three important things happened, according to Ms. Slootjes.

First, the entire landing, settlement, integration and naturalization process was moved online. While this created some disadvantages – immigrants often value in-person meetings and the networking opportunities that come with them – these, the researchers were surprised to find, were usually far outweighed by the benefits, which allowed more people to be reached, far more quickly and effectively, across a wider geography and with less inconvenience.

This was particularly true for immigrant women and members of vulnerable refugee communities, who, for various reasons, previously had trouble making in-person meetings during business hours but now could be reached directly, in large numbers. Some countries did this immediately: Germany spent €40-million in 2020 developing online language-oriented integration classes.

Of course, some immigrants and especially refugee claimants have trouble finding internet connections and smart devices. But the speed with which this problem was solved surprised everyone. In the Netherlands, a major new program brought tech companies together with government to give devices to more than 12,000 people. Canada’s tech-donation schemes became far more active, and Ottawa launched a popular digital-literacy program for immigrants during the pandemic.

Second, national governments were forced to work with outside organizations and local governments, who actually have more front-line knowledge. (That’s the paradox of immigration: It’s a national policy area that manifests itself almost entirely at the municipal level.) “In Canada, Finland, Flanders and France, governments were forced to reach out to colleagues in other policy areas to address newly arising issues,” Ms. Slootjes writes

Many countries decided to follow the decentralization lead of Canada, whose settlement and integration services are mostly delivered not by the federal public service but by 500 not-for-profit institutions and local-government offices whose employees and volunteers are able to work longer and more flexible hours, adapt more quickly and work in more trusted relationships with clients, at lower cost.

And third, the pandemic forced government agencies to rethink their primary missions – and sometimes, their entire purpose.

The concept of “integration,” which in Europe had often meant language and “values” education, was quickly redefined around its more important meaning: inclusion in the country’s economy, education and housing systems.

Immigration agencies, which had previously seen themselves as gatekeepers that slowly filtered in the more desirable and well-off people from lists of applicants, suddenly found “a renewed appreciation of low-skilled migrant workers in essential roles,” and often invested in chartered flights and instant naturalization invitations in order to fill the economy’s yawning gaps with such people.

Countries that undertook this rethink are, in this year of overheated recovery, typically having less difficulty with shortages and inflation than countries that stuck to their old ways. And, thanks to the wholesale reinvention of their immigration bureaucracy, they’ve been able to respond better – and with less hassle or controversy – to the millions of Ukrainian refugees they now face.

Few of them will publicly credit a deadly pandemic with making them better at their jobs. But they could.

Source: How the pandemic may have made government agencies better at their jobs

Germany eases path to permanent residency for migrants

Of note, another nail in the coffin of the guest worker approach:

Tens of thousands of migrants, who have been living in Germany for years without long-lasting permission to remain in the country, will be eligible for permanent residency after the government approved a new migration bill Wednesday.

The new regulation, endorsed by the Cabinet, applies to about 136,000 people who have lived in Germany for at least five years by Jan. 1, 2022.

Those who qualify can first apply for a one-year residency status and subsequently apply for permanent residency in Germany. They must earn enough money to make an independent living in the country, speak German and prove that they are “well integrated” into society.

Those under the age of 27 can already apply for a path to permanent residency in Germany after having lived in the country for three years.

“We want people who are well integrated to have good opportunities in our country,” Interior Minister Nancy Faeser told reporters. “In this way, we also put an end to bureaucracy and uncertainty for people who have already become part of our society.”

The new migration regulation will also make it easier for asylum-seekers to learn German — so far only those with a realistic chance of receiving asylum in the country were eligible for language classes — with all asylum applicants getting the chance to enroll in classes.

For skilled laborers, such as information technology specialists and others that hold professions that are desperately needed in Germany, the new regulation will allow that they can move to Germany together with their families right away, which wasn’t possible before. Family members don’t need to have any language skills before moving to the country.

“We need to attract skilled workers more quickly. We urgently need them in many sectors,” Faeser said. “We want skilled workers to come to Germany very quickly and gain a foothold here.”

The bill will also make it easier to deport criminals, includes extending detention pending deportation for certain offenders from three months to a maximum of six months. The extension is intended to give authorities more time to prepare for deportation, such as clarifying identity, obtaining missing papers and organizing a seat on an airplane, German news agency dpa reported.

“In the future, it will be easier to revoke the right of residence of criminals,” Faeser said. “For offenders, we will make it easier to order detention pending deportation, thus preventing offenders who are obliged to leave the country from going into hiding before being deported.”

Source: Germany eases path to permanent residency for migrants

LILLEY: Feds allow illegal immigration to flourish while the legal system fails

Apples and oranges comparison between irregular arrivals and those who come through the regular immigration processes but does highlight the backlogs and the damage to trust in and credibility of government:

Canada has long had an immigration system that worked — one that we could be proud of — but right now, no one can say that. Like so many government services these days, the immigration system simply isn’t working like it should.

Now we face an incredible backlog for legal immigration while people stream across the border illegally at will, something that’s relatively new in this country.

Unlike in the United States, immigration has never been a political hot potato thrown around between the two main parties.

There have been differences throughout the years, with Liberals tending to favour increases in family reunification, while the Conservatives have placed an emphasis on economic migration. Both main parties have supported high levels of newcomers to this country.

I was born in this country, but only three years after my parents immigrated. That process, according to my mother, took only a few months.

But now, it’s too often taking years for people simply to have their application processed under what are called “express” conditions.

Right now, there is a backlog of more than 2.4 million applications, an increase of more than a 250,000 from just a couple of months ago. That’s an untenable position for our system to be in and a hopeless one for those waiting for word on whether they can come to Canada.

According to the federal government’s website, it takes 42 months to process the application of someone coming in under the federal skilled trade program. That works out to three years and six months just to have your application processed.

Who would want to wait that long?

The Quebec business class program takes 63 months to process applications, while the provincial nominee program “express” track takes 21 months. On what planet is 21 months processing time considered express?

It takes almost two years to sponsor a spouse and just shy of three years to sponsor your parents.

Meanwhile, anyone willing to take a flight to JFK in New York City and then make their way to Roxham Road in Quebec can simply walk across the border and be welcomed to Canada. The number of people crossing at Roxham Road has far surpassed pre-pandemic levels.

After dropping from 1,500 to 2,000 per month to just a few dozen a month during the pandemic, the numbers are now about double. For example, the 3,449 people who crossed illegally this past May is double the previous high for that month in 2018.

We are now seeing higher numbers than ever before enter Canada illegally, while our legal immigration system can’t process people.

Quebec Premier Francois Legault has called for the Roxham Road crossing to be closed, saying his province’s social services are being strained by a lack of federal action. Legault has rightly pointed out that many of those crossing aren’t refugees, they are economic migrants.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said in response that closing the crossing won’t stop people crossing illegally, and instead has now started to transfer people to Ottawa and Niagara Falls.

All of this undermines faith in and support for our immigration system as a whole. How can Canadians, or those hoping to become Canadians, have faith in a system that can’t process applicants following the rules but can constantly expand for those going around the rules?

Like passports, customs and airport screening, the immigration department is another example of the federal government not being able to get the basics right.

If the minister can’t fix this, maybe he should look for applicants in that backlog who can and step aside.

Source: LILLEY: Feds allow illegal immigration to flourish while the legal system fails

Quebec’s Roxham Road on track to see record number of asylum seekers — but they face delays and despair in post-pandemic Canada

As do many others…

In Pascal’s Canadian dream, he becomes a doctor.

He’s only been in the country a month. He has a long way to go. But consider how long he’s been running, and how far he came to get here.

He left his home in Cap-Haïtien, on the north coast of Haiti, for the Dominican Republic, which occupies the eastern half of the island of Hispanola, right next to Cuba.

From there, he travelled with others in a car to Brazil. From Brazil, west to Peru, then north, through Ecuador, Colombia and Panama, where they were set upon by thieves who stole pretty much everything — except for the money that Pascal had hidden in a hollowed-out deodorant container.

This money allowed him to continue his northward journey, through Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Guatemala, Mexico and the United States, said 39-year-old Pascal, who requested that his last name not be published for security and privacy reasons.

On May 21, he arrived at the Canada-U.S. border, where more than 13,000 people so far this year have been arrested by Royal Canadian Mounted Police as they take their first hesitant steps along a dirt path at the end of Roxham Road onto Canadian soil.

Technically a dead-end street, Roxham Road is a sleepy country route watched by high-tech border surveillance cameras. The passage that starts in New York state and continues into Hemmingford, Que., stands as the worst-kept secret of those seeking refuge from despots, disasters and all manner of dire circumstances, including North American immigration laws.

Thanks to the lifting of COVID-19 restrictions on border crossings, the return of air travel and a general increase in the numbers of people seeking asylum, 2022 is on track to become a record year for the controversial crossing point.

The federal government, which screens newcomers to determine their eligibility to make a refugee claim, is now straining to keep pace with the flow.

The result is delay and despair: a months-long wait during which asylum seekers receive social assistance payments but are denied a temporary work permit in a country struggling to meet its labour needs.

“They want to work,” said Stéphanie Valois, president of the Quebec Association of Immigration Lawyers. “They’ve got nothing — no money, no furniture. They’ve got nothing and they need it.”

This could also be a decisive and pivotal moment for a haphazard arrangement that allows refugee claimants to cross at Roxham Road, make their asylum claim while already on Canadian soil, and thus bypass the terms of the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, which obliges asylum seekers to make their claim in the first country they reach.

The Quebec government, facing a fall re-election, wants Ottawa to plug the hole in the nearly 9,000-kilometre Canada-U.S. border, saying that it has neither the resources nor capacity to deal with the flow of migrants.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Canada has agreed to hear a constitutional challenge to the Safe Third Country Agreement which, if successful, could allow asylum seekers to make a claim at any official Canadian border crossing — spreading Quebec’s burden more equitably across the country.

“We have an obligation to examine the cases of people who seek protection here,” says Wendy Ayotte, founder of Bridges not Borders, a support group for asylum seekers.

“Of course it is correct to say that it isn’t a fair distribution of people entering irregularly into Canada. Obviously it’s not fairly distributed across the country, but surely the response … is to call for the end of the (Safe Third Country Agreement) and then people can go anywhere.”

The Star met Pascal, a community organizer who said he was beaten and threatened by members of a local Haitian political party, at Maison d’Haïti, a Montreal community centre where he had come, immigration documents in hand, to consult Peggy Larose, a social worker.

From her cramped office behind the reception desk and the centre’s coffee bar, Larose helps Haitian refugee claimants complete their myriad forms and find housing, food and jobs, all while listening to the thoughts that weigh heavily on their minds.

“They are long stories and difficult stories. There are stories that rip you apart, that make you want to scream and cry out,” she said, recounting the plight of one couple who told her how their young daughter had been struck and killed by a truck while they travelled through Mexico, and was buried where she died.

Evidence of the great distances and hardships that people endure to get to Canada lies in the high grass on either side of Roxham Road.

The two halves of an identification card for a 25-year-old woman who stayed at a homeless shelter in Portland, Maine; part of a bright yellow Bancolombia bank card; the four ripped quarters of a blue plastic pass issued to a Nigerian man upon his admission to to a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement processing centre in Tacoma, Wash.

Relics, secrets or the shame from past lives that people hope to leave behind.

Last Sunday, a group of seven people — three men and four women — boarded American Airlines Flight 1280 from Phoenix to New York, paying $378.60 (U.S.) each for the second-to-last leg of their journey to Canada. Their tickets were recovered floating in the water of a stream that runs alongside Roxham Road.

The next day, Monday, a woman named Jakelina boarded an Adirondack Trailways bus in New York City at 6:30 p.m., arrived in Plattsburgh, N.Y., at 1:20 a.m. on Tuesday and made her way toward Roxham Road, discarding the receipt for the $77.25 trip moments before starting a new life in a new country.

Roxham Road owes its popularity among those fleeing their homeland to the immigration policies of former U.S. president Donald Trump.

In January 2017, Trump signed an executive order banning Syrian refugees and blocking citizens of seven majority-Muslim countries from entering the United States — the so-called Muslim ban.

Later that year, 58,000 Haitians living in the U.S. learned of Trump’s plan to let their “Temporary Protected Status” expire, depriving them of protections under the special programs for migrants from countries deemed unsafe or which had suffered humanitarian emergencies, as Haiti did during the 2010 earthquake.

These policies prompted a flight to Canada with little modern precedent as asylum seekers took advantage of a loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement that allowed them to avoid being forcibly returned to the U.S. by crossing into Canada at a spot between official border posts — something known as an “irregular border crossing.”

In 2017, 18,836 people were intercepted by the RCMP crossing irregularly into Canada in the province of Quebec, compared to 1,018 who were intercepted in Ontario and 718 in British Columbia, 14 in Saskatchewan and six in Alberta.

The phenomenon — and the provincial ratio — continued in 2018 and 2019 but dropped sharply with the arrival of COVID and the closure of the Canada-U.S. border.

“If you crossed at Roxham Road, you were given a notice by the Canadian government known as a ‘direct back’ notice, which means that we’re not willing to hear your claim right now, we’re going to send you back to the U.S. and at some later date when we think the time is good we will allow you to return to pursue your claim,” says Janet Dench, executive director of the Canadian Council for Refugees.

She says that some of those who wanted to make refugee claims in Canada were subsequently detained in U.S. immigration detention centres and, in at least a few instances, were deported to their country of origin.

When the Canada-U.S. border reopened in November 2021 asylum seekers returned almost immediately to Roxham Road.

Compared to October 2021, when there were 96 RCMP interceptions, 832 people were picked up after crossing in November and 2,778 in December. That monthly tally has remained steady through to May 2022 — the last month for which statistics are available — when 3,449 people entered through the Quebec crossing.

In response to questions from the Star, a spokesperson for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada said that federal officials “continuously monitor conditions and developments in other countries to inform our planning.”

The government declined to speak about the possible reasons for the increased volume of people crossing the border, though others attribute it to the newfound freedom of movement that people around the world are experiencing after lengthy pandemic lockdowns

“I think it’s just normal that — like everyone else — people are starting to move again. These are people who were blocked in their home countries or in transit on their way to Canada,” says Valois, who practises immigration law in Montreal.

“Looking at the bigger picture, there are many more people entering the United States each day and there is also an increase in the number of asylum seekers who arrive in the U.S., so the percentage of those who make it to Canada is really small.”

Not so small that they escaped the attention of Quebec Premier François Legault.

In mid-May, Legault, who casts himself as a fiscally conservative nationalist whose policies are guided by common sense, complained about the “unacceptable” number of people crossing the border into the province and the strain it was placing on the province’s resources.

“We are the only province that has a wide-open road named Roxham, and the federal government, which is responsible for controlling the borders, is not doing its job,” he said.

Legault added that there is a long delay in making an initial eligibility assessment to determine whether there are sufficient grounds for a refugee-claim hearing. During this time, the province is obliged by law to provide health-care services and financial assistance to asylum seekers, he complained.

“A good number of these people aren’t real refugees,” the Quebec premier said in a news conference. “A refugee is someone who faces physical risk in their country, but the majority are not refugees and eventually, when their case is analyzed, they are refused and returned to their country.”

Data from the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada from February 2017 to March 2022 on refugee claims made by irregular border crossers such as those who enter Canada through Roxham Road would appear to contradict Legault’s claim.

Of more than 63,000 claims, nearly 28,000 were accepted and 19,000 rejected while some 6,000 were abandoned or withdrawn. More than 11,000 claims are waiting to be heard.

But government statistics show that refugee claims made by individuals from the two largest source countries of irregular border crossers — Nigeria and Haiti — find their demands for protection from Canada rejected more often than they are accepted.

Marjorie Villefranche, Maison d’Haïti’s general manager, says Haitians are compelled to come to Canada not so much due to the widespread poverty in the country but because of the violence and insecurity in their native land.

“They say, ‘If I remain here, I will die. I will die with my children.’ What family would accept to stay and die?” she asked. “Anyone would try to do whatever they can to save their lives and to save the lives of their children.”

Villefranche says that it was “exaggerated” to claim that a wealthy country such as Canada could be overloaded by an influx of 20,000 or 30,000 refugee claimants, as the Quebec government claims.

“I think that, as a rich country it’s the least we can do to receive a certain number of refugees,” she says. “There are even poor countries that receive a million or two million refugees across their borders.”

Post-pandemic, Canada is nevertheless struggling to keep up with the flow of asylum seekers.

Upon arrival on Canadian soil, people undergo an initial interview where border agents record their identities, take fingerprints and make biometric recordings. Once their file is created, they are able to receive health care and social assistance.

But it is not until a more thorough admissibility investigation is conducted that a refugee claimant is eligible to receive a temporary work permit.

Dench, from the Canadian Council for Refugees, says a delay that was once limited to several days has now stretched to a months-long wait because officials conduct more extensive security checks that include the exchange of biometric data with other countries.

“They are so keen to exclude people from the refugee determination system that they make a system that is unworkable and starts accumulating these huge backlogs,” she says.

In response to the Star’s questions about delays, a spokesperson for the Canada Border Services Agency said the time required to complete an eligibility check depends on the complexity of the case, the availability of information and the amount of research required.

Legault, the Quebec premier, put this delay at 14 months. Pascal, the Haitian asylum seeker who arrived in May, says he was told he would have to wait until March 2023 before he would receive an eligibility ruling — meaning he will not legally be able to work for 10 months.

Valois, the immigration lawyer, said the delay in receiving an admissibility hearing was “relatively new” and “really problematic.”

“The client wants to work. They want to get moving. They want to have a hearing. They want to be heard. The delay is not to their advantage.”

In an post-pandemic economy that is experiencing desperate labour shortages, the delay in approving work permits for people ready and willing to work is not to the country’s advantage either.

“It’s so ridiculous when you see that so many employers are wanting to employ people and yet the federal government is keeping people in this kind of limbo state because they can’t even get them through the first part of the process,” says Dench.

Another young Haitian couple arrived in Canada in April after a seven-month period in the U.S. during which they were held in detention and the man was forced to wear an ankle bracelet to track his movements.

He wants to find work as a driver, eventually. She said she would like to train to become a caregiver in a hospital — a line of work that, by some estimates, up to 2,000 asylum seekers in Quebec took up during the COVID-19 pandemic, when the needs were greatest.

The couple did not want to provide their names, nor would they discuss the reasons they had for seeking refugee protection from Canada.

But they were happy to share the details of their first Canadian victory — finding an apartment of their own that will allow them to finally leave the downtown Montreal shelter that they and hundreds of other refugee claimants call home.

It’s a studio apartment. It will cost them $850 a month, not including utilities. That will leave them less than $300 a month to eat, to support themselves as well as the baby boy due to enter the world this fall.

Source: Quebec’s Roxham Road on track to see record number of asylum seekers — but they face delays and despair in post-pandemic Canada

There are legitimate concerns regarding the undue burden on Quebec given that over 99 percent of irregular arrivals occur there (2022 to date):

The federal government is starting to relocate asylum seekers who have crossed irregularly into Quebec from the United States, following a rise in the number of would-be refugees at the border.

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada says that as of June 30, officials have started to transfer a “small number” of asylum seekers to Ottawa and Niagara Falls to help reduce the pressure on Quebec. The department didn’t give details.

More than 13,250 refugee claimants were intercepted outside official points of entry in Quebec by border agents between January and May, mostly at Roxham Road — a rural road leading from the U.S. into the province.

That is more than double the number of people who crossed irregularly into Quebec during the same period in 2019, before the entry points into Canada were closed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Roxham Road was reopened to would-be refugees in November 2021.

Premier François Legault has asked the federal government to shut down Roxham Road because of the pressure the rise in asylum seekers is putting on Quebec’s ability to care for the newcomers.

The Canada Border Services Agency says it has increased its capacity to temporarily house asylum seekers at the Roxham Road crossing, to 477 people from 297.

Source: Ottawa starting to transfer ‘small number’ of asylum seekers to Ontario from Quebec

Quebec and the rest of French-speaking Canada are at a crossroads

Interesting contrast on how Francophones outside Quebec are embracing Francophone immigration and multiculturalism:

rebelle and rêveur, my father was a young audacieux, venturing from Sudbury, Ont., the Nickel City where he had come of age, off to the Université Laval in pursuit of graduate studies in 1978.

But after he arrived in la ville de Québec (a wonderful city, he insists), he was excluded by his Québécois peers — “from Ontario,” he had lived among les anglais. Among the Anglos

It did not matter that he was born and raised in la belle province, that he was French Canadian and Catholic, or that he spoke eloquent French and then-incomprehensible English. He was, as René Lévesque said in 1968, a dead duck. A “cadavre encore chaud,” the still-warm corpse of a Francophone outside Quebec. A spectre that (falsely) reminded this société distincte of what would happen if it did not seek refuge from the empire and its dominion, which had worked to uproot the fait françaisin Canada over centuries. 

rebelle and rêveur, my father was a young audacieux, venturing from Sudbury, Ont., the Nickel City where he had come of age, off to the Université Laval in pursuit of graduate studies in 1978.

But after he arrived in la ville de Québec (a wonderful city, he insists), he was excluded by his Québécois peers — “from Ontario,” he had lived among les anglais. Among the Anglos

It did not matter that he was born and raised in la belle province, that he was French Canadian and Catholic, or that he spoke eloquent French and then-incomprehensible English. He was, as René Lévesque said in 1968, a dead duck. A “cadavre encore chaud,” the still-warm corpse of a Francophone outside Quebec. A spectre that (falsely) reminded this société distincte of what would happen if it did not seek refuge from the empire and its dominion, which had worked to uproot the fait français in Canada over centuries. 

It was, said my father years later, une mentalité de paroisse — a parish mentality. One that excludes, prompting the question: who has a right to be Québécois? Who has a right to be Franco-Canadian? Who has a right to belong? 

It’s a question that Francophone communities across Canada, at a crossroads in the expression of our identities, are contemplating with vastly different outcomes. We, Quebec and the rest of French-speaking Canada, are following divergent paths as we define what we aspire to be.

On the eve of la Fête Nationale last month, celebrated on June 24 under the banner of “our language of a thousand accents,” Quebec Premier François Legault threw oil on the traditional feu de joie, or bonfire. “It’s important that we don’t put all cultures on the same level; that’s why we oppose multiculturalism,” said Legault. “We prefer to concentrate on what we call interculturalism, where we have one culture, the Quebec culture.”

Quebec’s notion of predatory multiculturalism intertwines with its secularism law (which impacts Muslim women in particular) as well as its problematic new language law (a notable transgression on truth and reconciliation with Indigenous nations). Coupled with obstinate denials of the existence of systemic racism in the terrible aftermath of Joyce Echaquan’s death, this all conspires to put the province on a path to a narrow and exclusionary definition of who is truly Québécois. 

By contrast, Franco-Canadians are choosing a different path — one that rejects the notion of our provincial and national identities as being pure laine, instead connecting us back to a mosaic that is multiracial, multifaith, multilingual and multicultural. Our communities and institutions have recognized that, despite our unbreakable spirit, our declining demographic dividend may not sustain the French language over generations to come. Francophone immigration can ensure that the French language continues to thrive in Canada, opening us to an incredible “francophone galaxy.”

Despite my determined idealism, our communities in Franco-Canada are far from utopian. In my hometown of Sudbury, a “welcoming francophone community,” advocates are calling out systemic barriers to employment for francophone immigrants and the need for a northern anti-racism strategy in pursuit of equity for immigrants and First Nations, Inuit and Métis nations. We Franco-Ontarians have our work cut out for us.

And so, who belongs? 

After over 50 years in northern Ontario, my father continues to speak eloquent French and still-incomprehensible English. The jeune audacieux would grow to become a leader of la Franco-Ontarie, among the youth involved in the creation of the beloved Franco-Ontarian flag

He wasn’t from Sudbury, from the north, or even from Ontario. Yet he became Franco-OntarianOn ne naît pas Franco-Ontarien — on le devient. You aren’t born Franco-Ontarian — you become one.

As Franco-Canadians, we benefit immensely from multiculturalism. Our Francophonie is ripe with a thousand accents, persuading us that there is much to be gained in global citizenship — and as a mosaic of global sociétés distinctes in our own right.

Isabelle Bourgeault-Tassé is a Franco-Ontarian writer.

Source: Quebec and the rest of French-speaking Canada are at a crossroads

Les délais pour le Certificat de sélection du Québec humanitaire explosent

Nice to see a rare critical article on the Quebec’s government handling of an immigration program rather than the almost reflexive but sometimes warranted blaming the feds:

Le gouvernement Legault accuse des retards sans précédent dans la délivrance du Certificat de sélection du Québec (CSQ) pour des immigrants que le Canada a pourtant acceptés comme résidents permanents pour motifs humanitaires. Alors que ce n’était qu’une formalité de quelques semaines, il faut maintenant près d’un an pour obtenir ce précieux sésame, qui donne accès à d’importants services, dont l’assurance maladie du Québec.

« C’est une situation dramatique », dit l’avocate Anne-Cécile Raphaël. « C’est un document court et simple. Il n’y a pas de difficultés à le produire. »

Me Raphaël a plusieurs clients ayant été acceptés comme résidents permanents pour des raisons humanitaires, mais qui attendent depuis des mois d’avoir le CSQ. « J’ai des clients dont la demande a été déposée en juillet-août [2021] et qui n’ont toujours pas leur CSQ, dit-elle. J’ai une cliente qui a un dossier complet et dont le CSQ est la dernière pièce manquante. D’ailleurs, pour l’écrasante majorité des cas, il n’y a que ça qui manque. »

Le Devoir a pu constater que de nombreux avocats ont des clients dont la demande de CSQ, déposée à l’été dernier, n’a effectivement toujours pas été traitée. Certains rapportent même que ces personnes ont carrément abandonné l’idée de vivre au Québec pour aller dans une autre province. « J’ai même une famille du Nigeria qui a déménagé en Ontario en raison des longs délais pour avoir le CSQ », a indiqué l’avocate Nataliya Dzera.

Ancien président de l’Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en immigration, Guillaume Cliche-Rivard, remarque que le problème des délais semble uniquement se poser pour les personnes ayant fait une demande de résidence pour des « considérations d’ordre humanitaire ». « Ce n’est pas aussi long pour le refuge ou la réunification familiale. C’est dans l’humanitaire que les délais explosent », soutient l’avocat qui s’apprête à briguer les suffrages pour Québec solidaire dans Saint-Henri–Sainte-Anne, à Montréal.

« Je ne comprends pas pourquoi le gouvernement tarde à donner le CSQ. Ce sont tous des gens qui sont ici et qui ont fait l’objet d’une décision positive d’IRCC [Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada]. Ils ont des circonstances personnelles assez dramatiques qui ont justifié ces demandes humanitaires. »

Privés de RAMQ

Le gouvernement fédéral a le pouvoir d’accorder une résidence permanente pour considérations d’ordre humanitaire à quelqu’un qui fait la démonstration d’une bonne intégration et qui remplit certains critères justifiant les exemptions demandées. Pour une personne désirant s’installer au Québec s’ajoute l’étape du CSQ qui, il n’y a pas si longtemps, s’obtenait facilement et rapidement, soit en deux ou trois mois, selon les observations des avocats. « Quand le formulaire est rempli et que toutes les informations sont là, c’est un simple document à délivrer. C’est un taux d’approbation de plus de 95 % », a observé Me Cliche-Rivard.

Toutefois, tant que le CSQ n’est pas reçu, il n’est pas possible d’avoir accès à la RAMQ, ni aux mêmes droits de scolarité que les résidents permanents et les citoyens canadiens. Sans le CSQ, il n’est pas non plus possible pour un demandeur de conclure son dossier de résidence permanente afin, ensuite, d’entamer les démarches pour parrainer ses enfants qui seraient demeurés dans le pays d’origine. Cette lenteur, qui nuit au dossier de leurs clients, indigne plusieurs avocats en immigration.

« Je m’occupe d’une veuve originaire de l’Europe de l’Est, dont [la demande pour motifs] humanitaires avait été acceptée à la suite d’une bataille en cour fédérale. Cette fois-ci, elle doit attendre presque un an pour être admissible à la carte RAMQ », raconte Me Dzera, en laissant entendre que sa cliente est âgée et pourrait avoir besoin de soins.

Après avoir obtenu une réponse positive à sa demande de résidence permanente pour motifs humanitaires, Diana, qui ne donne pas son vrai nom par crainte de représailles, a ensuite attendu près de 8 mois avant d’avoir son CSQ et 11 mois pour avoir sa RAMQ et sa résidence permanente. « J’ai eu de graves problèmes de santé et je n’avais pas ma carte [d’assurance maladie]. Mes visites à l’hôpital coûtaient très cher », raconte cette Haïtienne d’origine, mère de six enfants. « Je n’allais pas bien. J’étais en dépression. »

Diana avait aussi le projet de faire venir au Québec sa fille aînée, qui avait alors 21 ans, âge limite pour parrainer un enfant, mais son CSQ est arrivé trop tard. Sa fille a eu 22 ans dans l’intervalle. « Je veux ma fille ici avec moi. C’est très triste ce qui est arrivé. On avait préparé tout son dossier pour pouvoir le déposer le plus tôt possible. »

11 mois d’attente

Le ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI) ne nie pas que le délai s’est allongé et estime à 11 mois le délai actuel moyen pour le traitement des demandes de CSQ pour considération humanitaire. Cela inclut l’attente pour obtenir des documents ou renseignements manquants par le client, le cas échéant. À la mi-juin, le MIFI en était à examiner les demandes reçues à la mi-août 2021.

« Le nombre de demandes de sélection permanente [CSQ] reçues par le MIFI dans le cadre du Programme des personnes sélectionnées pour considérations humanitaires a augmenté depuis les dernières années », a indiqué le ministère pour expliquer ces délais.

« Comme une grande partie des personnes qui présentent ces demandes sont des demandeurs d’asile déboutés, le MIFI estime que l’augmentation du nombre de demandes d’asile faites au Québec influe sur le nombre de demandes pour considérations humanitaires reçues », ajoute-t-il.

Source: Les délais pour le Certificat de sélection du Québec humanitaire explosent

Ontario needs stronger voice in immigration, McNaughton says

Pre-negotiation starting position. Higher national levels provide federal government with room to meet or partially meet Ontario’s demands:

Ontario needs more autonomy in immigration to ensure newcomers meet the economic needs of the province, Labour, Immigration, Training, and Skills Development Minister Monte McNaughton says.

The province is seeking more control as it negotiates a new federal-Ontario immigration agreement this fall, similar to the deal with Quebec, with the goal of filling an estimated 340,000 job vacancies, he said.

“Over the last 18 months, we’ve reprioritized the immigrants that Ontario needs, so skilled trades workers and health-care workers are the professionals that we’re prioritizing through the Ontario Immigrant Nominee Program (OINP),” McNaughton said Saturday. “But as it stands today, the federal government only gives us 9,000 newcomers to select out of 125,000 that come to Ontario every year.”

Given its population, Ontario has a disproportionately small voice in choosing newcomers compared to other Canadian jurisdictions, he said.

As a first step, the federal government should immediately double the number of newcomers through OINP to 18,000 a year, he said.

McNaughton said he has already reached out to his counterparts in other parts of the county to determine common ground and goals before approaching the federal government at a joint meeting at the end of the month.

“That’s how Ontario and Canada was built over the last 155 years, by bringing in newcomers with the right skills to build the future of our country,” McNaughton said. “And that’s exactly what we’re asking for from the federal government.”

Being free to choose newcomers based on their skill sets means a better match with the labour market and more success for new immigrants, he said.

“Only 25% of immigrants today that are here in Ontario are actually working in fields that they’ve studied,” he said.

The Doug Ford government has been set on its labour and immigration agenda for several years, becoming the first government in Canada to recognize all foreign credentials outside health care, he said.

Ontario has now opened all its training programs as widely as possible including to newcomers, people on social assistance and those with criminal backgrounds, he said.

“My message is if you have the skills and want to work, Ontario needs you,” McNaughton said.

A substantial time lag in the federal immigration approval process remains a challenge with some applicants waiting years, he said.

Ontario has offered its own resources to accelerate the process, he said.

“I just can’t press enough of the federal government to give us more of a say, to speed up the process and ensure that we’re bringing in immigrants with the right skills to build the future of Ontario,” McNaughton said.

Source: Ontario needs stronger voice in immigration, McNaughton says