Some refugee claimants can now enter Canada

Good overview of the limited exceptions:

Some refugee claimants from the United States can once again enter Canada.

The Canada Border Services Agency announced Wednesday that claimants eligible for exemptions under the Safe Third Party Agreement between Canada and the U.S. can enter the country through official land border crossings. Those entering through irregular border crossings will still be returned to the U.S.

“People who arrive irregularly between border crossings are still prohibited from entering Canada to make a refugee claim,” the federal agency said on Twitter, in French.

“As of today, claimants can enter the country at designated land ports of entry only if they are among the few who are eligible for exemptions under the Safe Third Party Agreement.”

Those exempted from the agreement include claimants with family in Canada, unaccompanied minors or people who already have permits, like a student visa. They will also be subject to the mandatory 14-day quarantine for new arrivals.

Last month, in announcing the closure of the Canada’s border with the United States, as part of efforts to contain the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government said it would return all refugee claimants coming into the country via irregular crossings back to the U.S. The Americans also said they would do the same for those entering their country from Canada.

At Monday’s sitting of the House of Commons, Public Safety Minister Bill Blair, answering a question from Conservative MP Joël Godin, said that at least 10 people had made irregular crossing since the ban. They were returned to the United States, Blair confirmed.

News of the change to allow some refugee claimants to enter Canada through designated ports of entry first came on Wednesday when Jean-Pierre Fortin, president of the Customs and Immigration Union, gave radio interviews.

Fortin called the change a “surprise” move that was communicated to his members at the end of the day Tuesday.

“We are in a state of crisis,” Fortin said. “We think it is too early to open the border.”

He added that the Canadian Border Services Agency has reserved a nearby hotel, with about 50 rooms, where refugee claimants who take advantage of this new opening would have to go into quarantine for 14 days before the claims could be processed.

Fortin also expressed concerns that Customs officers would need protective equipment and safeguards to deal with people who may have the COVID-19 virus and he said the waiting room for people coming through the border crossing is not large, making social distancing difficult.

In Ottawa, when he was asked about the change at his daily pandemic briefing, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said as far as he knows the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement is still in force. He then referred the question to Minister Blair.

CBSA media relations staff disclosed the Order in Council to reporters seeking more information. The new rules remain in effect until May 21, the date the Canada-U.S. border is set to reopen.

The change was requested by Health Canada, according to a CBSA official, who said the intent is to “minimize the risk of exposure to COVID-19 in Canada.” The official confirmed that foreign nationals are still prohibited from entering Canada from the United States if they have “COVID-19 or have signs and symptoms of COVID-19” or officials have “reasonable grounds to suspect they have such signs and symptoms.”

Refugee rights advocates have called on the government to reopen the border to all asylum seekers.

Janet Dench, the Canadian Council of Refugees, said the ban is “wrong and unnecessary.”

Still, she said changing the rules to allow refugee claimants who have family members already in Canada to enter represents “a step in the right direction.”

“I doesn’t solve the problem, though,” Dench said, calling on the government to respect the rights of asylum seekers to come to Canada.

Source: Some refugee claimants can now enter Canada

Trump Administration Bars Most International Students From Receiving Coronavirus College Relief

Seems similar to the Canadian approach (Canadian citizens and permanent residents studying at Canadian institutions) but to be confirmed when program guidelines confirmed:

The Trump administration is barring most international students and all students who entered the U.S. illegally from receiving emergency college grants approved by Congress as part of a $2.2 trillion coronavirus rescue package.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos issued the restriction in new guidelines released Tuesday telling colleges how to distribute more than $6 billion in grants meant to help students cover unexpected costs triggered by the pandemic. Earlier guidance from the Education Department suggested universities would have wide flexibility in distributing the grants, but the new guidelines said that only students who qualify for other federal student aid can receive the aid.

More than 400,000 students are estimated to have entered the U.S. illegally. More than 1 million international students are enrolled at U.S. colleges.

University leaders and immigration groups blasted the change, saying DeVos is imposing new limits that were not included in Congress’ legislation. The rescue package did not specify which students are eligible for grants, and many colleges had planned to distribute emergency grants to needy students regardless of their citizenship status.

Some prestigious universities cited the new policy in decisions to reject the funding. Princeton University announced Wednesday that it would refuse its $2.4 million share of coronavirus relief over the policy. Harvard University also cited the change in its decision to reject $8.7 million in aid.

The Education Department said its guidance is aligned with other federal laws. The agency cited the Higher Education Act, a sweeping law that says only U.S. citizens and a narrow set of “eligible noncitizens” are eligible for federal student aid. Angela Morabito, a department spokeswoman, said the rescue package legislation “makes clear that this taxpayer funded relief fund should be targeted to U.S. citizens, which is consistently echoed throughout the law.”

But some higher education advocates challenged that claim. The American Council on Education, an association of college presidents, said the rescue package placed no limits on student eligibility.

“The statute says almost nothing about who is eligible to receive a grant. The Department of Education owns this decision. Period,” said Terry Hartle, the group’s senior vice president. He added that the group is disappointed by DeVos’ policy. “We strongly believed many of these students needed help.”

The guidelines have created confusion about exactly which students can receive the grants, Hartle said. It’s clear that the department is excluding immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally and international students, he said, but it’s unclear how schools should determine eligibility. Most colleges don’t ask students if they’re U.S. citizens, he said, and officials have no easy way to check.

“A college could give an emergency grant to a Dreamer without realizing the person is a Dreamer,” he said, referring to immigrants who were brought to the U.S. illegally but allowed to stay under the under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.

At the University of California, Riverside, officials had been planning to award grants to some of the campus’ estimated 600 DACA recipients. Now, officials will turn to fundraising or other revenue sources to help students excluded by the Education Department.

Chancellor Kim Wilcox said he’s grateful for the federal relief but was disheartened by DeVos’ policy.

“I was disappointed for students here at UCR, for students across California, and I was disappointed for the nation,” Wilcox said. “This is a huge economic hit and there are pressing needs everywhere.”

Student advocates see DeVos’ update as a reversal from her previous guidance. When DeVos made the funding available in early April, she said colleges would be given flexibility in deciding how to award grants. She told colleges to focus on helping the neediest students. And in paperwork that colleges sign to receive the funding, the agency says the relief isn’t considered federal financial aid.

That earlier guidance led some schools to believe the grants were exempt from citizenship requirements.

Sara Goldrick-Rab, a professor of higher education policy and sociology at Temple University, said the new requirements are cruel to students who were counting on the grants to cover food, housing and other costs, and to colleges that now have to scramble to revise plans for distributing the funding. Losing access to the grants will likely force some students to drop out, she said, especially those whose families are dealing with unemployment amid the pandemic.

“They’re not going to have the money that they need to stay connected to their college. And people who drop out of college often do not come back,” said Goldrick-Rab, who founded the nonprofit Hope Center for College, Community and Justice.

Critics say the policy is particularly unjust because the same students now barred from receiving grants were counted in the formula used to allocate money for schools. The rescue package provided $14 billion for the nation’s colleges, offering them varying sums based on their student enrollment and the percentage of students they teach from poorer backgrounds.

The United We Dream Network, which advocates for DACA recipients, said it was “callous” of DeVos to block so many students from access to funding. Sanaa Abrar, the group’s advocacy director, urged Congress and colleges to find other ways to help students excluded by DeVos’ directive.

“Every single relief package being discussed in Congress must include both the health care and financial assistance immigrant communities need,” Abrar said, “especially as the Trump administration continues to attack and scapegoat our communities amidst a pandemic.”

Source: Trump Administration Bars Most International Students From Receiving Coronavirus College Relief

Ibbitson: Neither the United States nor Canada can afford to ban immigration

As some have noted, this is more of a rhetorical argument than substantive, as the debate, at least in Canada, will be more with respect to levels and the mix of programs than a ban (which Trump will continue to talk about for political purposes):

However, Ibbitson is a bit too optimistic that Canada will automatically go back to the current immigration plan and a bit too accepting on the general demographic arguments without considering the expected impact of AI and automation.

Posing options as closing doors or returning the current immigration plan and levels is a false choice as the reality for Canada, I expect, will remain towards open immigration but with some adjustments once the medium-term effects of COVID-19 work through the economy:

The tweet may simply have been a bit of raw meat for his base. But if Donald Trump really does plan to ban all immigration into the United States, that would be the worst act of his presidency, which is saying something.

Banning immigrants would amplify one of the most important demographic trends of our time: declining fertility rates among millennials and Gen Z. Babies who are not being born must be replaced with people brought in from abroad. The inevitable alternative is increased joblessness and economic decline. This is as true for Canada as it is for the United States.

The U.S. President tweeted Monday night that “in light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens, I will be signing an Executive Order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States!”

On one level, the tweet in nonsensical. Most countries have closed their borders as they grapple with this pandemic. Until the novel coronavirus is brought under control one way or another, both Canada and the United States will be largely closed to immigration.

But once economic life returns to something approaching normal, then not only will immigration need to return to previous levels – currently 340,000 a year in Canada’s case; traditionally more than one million a year in the case of the United States – they should be increased to make up for the immigrants who should be arriving today but aren’t.

“We desperately need immigration,” said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist of the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, in an interview. “We are an aging society that in 10 or 15 years will be totally dependent on immigrants that we are getting now.”

That Canadian fertility rate declined from 1.6 children per woman in 2010 to 1.5 last year, while in the United States it fell to 1.7, far below the 2.1 needed to keep a population stable. Fertility rates have been below the replacement rate in most developed countries for decades, which is why immigration is required for population growth.

But in recent years, a new trend has emerged. The birth rate for millennials and Gen Z is lower than it was for Gen X and the baby boomers. A study by Ron Kneebone, a professor of economics at University of Calgary, showed that fertility levels for Canadian women under 30 declined significantly between 2000 and 2017.

Citing correlations between past economic downturns and fertility, Prof. Kneebone strongly suspects that the current economic crisis will lower Canada’s birth rate even further. “When I’m uncertain whether I’m going to keep my job and be able to pay the mortgage, is this the time to be having another kid? Probably not,” he said in an interview.

And, as he points out, countries with low fertility, little immigration and declining populations struggle to preserve economic growth. Just ask Italy or Japan.

Mr. Trump has played to nativist sentiments throughout his presidency. The fabled wall on the Mexican border, banning visitors from certain Muslim countries, suppressing immigration levels overall – these are policies designed to appeal to Americans who fear their white, Christian culture is being overwhelmed by foreigners.

In that context, Monday’s tweet should be seen not as an update on pandemic border control but as a racist reassurance to his MAGA base.

But restricting immigration would be disastrous for the United States. One-quarter of all health care workers in the U.S. are immigrants. They account for half of all the entrepreneurs whose startups grew to be worth US$1-billion or more. They account for almost 40 per cent of U.S. Nobel Prize winners.

The American health care system and the American economy depend on immigrants. By stoking anti-immigrant sentiments, Mr. Trump is threatening the future of both.

Polls show that most Canadians continue to support the high level of immigration that this country has enjoyed under both Conservative and Liberal governments for three decades. But Quebec Premier François Legault has reduced the number of immigrants coming into the province and has said he may reduce the level even further in the wake of the pandemic.

That’s a policy for economic suicide. When the borders reopen, Canada should increase its immigration target above next year’s goal of 350,000. Every immigrant we don’t bring in this year and next is an opportunity lost for Canada’s future, unless we make it up further on.

Neither the U.S. nor Canada can afford to close its doors.

Source: Opinion: Neither the United States nor Canada can afford to ban immigration

Fewer than 10 asylum seekers sent back to U.S. since Canadian border shutdown: Blair

As expected. Full April stats, when available in about a month, will show a dramatic decline in overall numbers:

The federal public safety minister says fewer than 10 asylum seekers have been turned back to the U.S. since the historic shutdown of the border.

Bill Blair provided the figure to the House of Commons today, noting it has been almost a month since the Canada-U.S. border closed to all but non-essential travel to help curb the spread of COVID-19.

The deal struck by the two countries included a provision that those crossing between formal border points in order to seek asylum would also be turned back.

Figures published today by the Immigration Department suggest, however, that the flow of people prior to that remained relatively steady.

The RCMP intercepted 930 people crossing irregularly in Canada in March, down from 1,002 the same month last year.

So far this year, 3,035 people have been intercepted crossing between formal border points, up from 2,698 in the first three months of 2019.

Source:  Less than 10 asylum seekers sent back to U.S. since Canadian border shutdown: Blair – National

Trump says he will suspend all immigration into U.S. over coronavirus

Not terribly surprising given that has always been his intent and that of his senior policy advisor and anti-immigration hawk, Stephen Miller. Details yet to come:

President Donald Trump said on Monday he will suspend all immigration into the United States temporarily through an executive order in response to the coronavirus outbreak and to protect American jobs.

The move, which the Republican president announced on Twitter, effectively achieves a long-term Trump policy goal to curb immigration, making use of the health and economic crisis that has swept the country as a result of the pandemic to do so.

The decision drew swift condemnation from some Democrats, who accused the president of creating a distraction from what they view as a slow and faulty response to the coronavirus.

Trump said he was taking the action to protect the U.S. workforce. Millions of Americans are suffering unemployment after companies shed employees amid nationwide lockdowns to stop the contagion.

“In light of the attack from the Invisible Enemy, as well as the need to protect the jobs of our GREAT American Citizens, I will be signing an Executive Order to temporarily suspend immigration into the United States,” Trump said in a tweet.

The White House declined to offer further details about the reasoning behind the decision, its timing, or its legal basis.

“As our country battles the pandemic, as workers put their lives on the line, the President attacks immigrants & blames others for his own failures”, former Democratic presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar said in a tweet.

Immigration is largely halted into the United States anyway thanks to border restrictions and flight bans put in place as the virus spread across the globe.

But the issue remains an effective rallying cry for Trump’s supporters.

Trump won the White House in 2016 in part on a promise to curb immigration by building a wall on the U.S. border with Mexico. He and his advisers have spent the first three years of his tenure cracking down on both legal and illegal entries into the country. Crowds regularly chant “Build the Wall!” at Trump’s political rallies, which are now idled because of the virus.

Trump has lamented the economic fallout of the outbreak; his stewardship of the U.S. economy was set to be his key argument for re-election in November.

The U.S. death toll from the virus topped 42,000 on Monday, according to a Reuters tally.

The U.S. economy has come to a near standstill because of the pandemic; more than 22 million people applied for unemployment benefits in the last month.

“You cut off immigration, you crater our nation’s already weakened economy,” former Democratic presidential candidate Julian Castro said in a tweet. “What a dumb move.”

The United States has the world’s largest number of confirmed coronavirus cases, with more than 780,000 infections, up 27,000 on Monday.

But the president has made a point of saying the peak had passed and has been encouraging U.S. states to reopen their economies.

“It makes sense to protect opportunities for our workforce while this pandemic plays out,” said Thomas Homan, Trump’s former acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. “It’s really not about immigration. It’s about the pandemic and keeping our country safer while protecting opportunities for unemployed Americans.”

The United States in mid-March suspended all routine visa services, both immigrant and non-immigrant, in most countries worldwide due to the coronavirus outbreak in a move that has potentially impacted hundreds of thousands of people.

U.S. missions have continued to provide emergency visa services as resources allowed and a senior State Department official in late March said U.S. was ready work with people who were already identified as being eligible for various types of visas, including one for medical professionals.

The administration recently announced an easing of rules to allow in more agricultural workers on temporary H2A visas to help farmers with their crops.

Source: Trump says he will suspend all immigration into U.S. over coronavirus

How the language of migration put expats on a pedestal – and left immigrants in the dust

Good discussion on the changing meanings of immigrant, migrant and expat. The greater distinction, in my view, is between immigrant and migrant/expat, as the former means settling more or less permanently with a more formal pathway to citizenship, whereas migrant/expat is more temporary, with the distinction being more with respect to socioeconomic status:

Growing up in Hong Kong, I was constantly surrounded by people from around the world. From the UK to South Africa and Canada, I was exposed to a number of different cultures in my day-to-day life, especially in school. But it wasn’t until middle school, where acquaintances would casually use two distinct terms to define either affluent or poorer areas of the city, that I really began to take notice of the significance of the language of immigration.

Based on what I observed, it was clear that whenever someone referred to a person as an “expat”, they generally tended to be middle to upper-class native English speakers, working in professions such as banking, tech, education or creative roles. When it came to the word “immigrant”, the term tended to apply loosely to both blue-collar workers, and those desperate to flee their birth country in order to make “a better life” for themselves.

Around a month ago, while FaceTiming a friend who had just moved back to Singapore from London, the extent of those differences became even more pronounced. In the middle of our chat, he mentioned a print magazine called Expat Living, and how bizarre it was that among other publications, it was still considered a best-seller in the country despite the dying print media industry. It led me to think about the marketing power of the word “expat” – clearly a symbol of financial value in society. It placed them on a uniquely aspirational pedestal.

Expats are praised for daring to move to a new country, while immigrants feel pressured to get approval from citizens and assimilate for survival. Whether it’s a conscious or subconscious decision, there’s no denying that these terms represent the double standards in society’s view on immigration. It’s not so different here in London, where even after seven years of living here, I’m still confronted by the same forms of hypocrisy, especially in the language the media uses in stories about immigration. Prior to this pandemic, for example, a simple search for the terms “immigrant” would typically pull up more divisive and sensationalist headlines.

In popular media, the word “immigrant” often showcases individual storylines of struggle, hard work and overcoming hardships. On Instagram, a search for accounts and posts hashtagged with “immigrant” reveal feeds of documentary-style visuals and text about sacrifice and injustice. Clearly, there’s a heavy sense of activism connected to the immigrant experience in the media, in contrast to the image of luxury and privilege that is seen to come with being an expat.

Why? When it comes to the way people treat both groups, the narratives the words we use to describe create an unconscious bias. There’s a general feeling that immigrants are associated with negative qualities about their birthplace, whereas expats are commended for living in a country outside of their own. The meanings we’ve ascribed to these words have a lot to do with connotations about certain races and class systems.

Look at the etymology of the word​ “expat” (the short form of “Expatriate”), for example. It derives from the Latin terms “ex” (out of) and “patria” (fatherland). By definition, an expat is just someone who moves to live in a country they weren’t born in. Interestingly, the term was most commonly used in the 20th century to describe British servants who were often sent to work abroad against their will. According to Sophie Cranston, a lecturer in human geography at Loughborough University​, who spoke to The Atlantic about the changing meaning of terms like expat, it was only in the early 90s, that it came to mean what it does now: a descriptor for (typically wealthy) westerners living abroad.

With immigration being brought up more on social and mainstream media, it’s also important to note that these terms are being reclaimed. The term “migrant”, which is sometimes used in place of “immigrant” and often bears the same connotations (although the definitions vary from place to place), seems to have been reclaimed.

In 2015-16, immigration became the hottest political topic in the UK due to the European migrant crisis and Brexit. The Leave campaign heavily focused on villainising immigrants in the media, using anti-migrant propaganda and anti-migrant sentiments to create fear towards them, which subsequently led to their unfortunate victory.

The negativity has since inspired a rise of people from immigrant backgrounds to create movements reclaiming and redefining the meaning of being an immigrant. Groups like Migrants in Culture and Migration Collective are both optimistic examples of how immigrants have used the power of art, statistics, and culture to express different realities and examine issues regarding immigration in the UK.

Migrant Journal, a monthly print and digital magazine with a social media platform that focuses on the experiences of people, goods, and information around the world and the positive impact they have on various spaces, has also embraced the word “migrant”. The design of their issues are illustrative, with cerebral stories and minimal details that bring a smart and thoughtful impression to “migrant” labels. They’ve shown that beyond the stories of people, other things such as objects, spaces and fine art can express the immigrant experience in media in a highbrow manner.

Contrastingly, there’s a rise in using social media to poke fun at “expat” realities and stereotypes. For instance, the popular meme Instagram account @hkmehmeh was founded by a Korean woman who identifies as an expat living in Hong Kong. Her account uses popular internet culture with a mix of Cantonese slang and relatable “Hong Kong” sayings to create humorous memes that put a light-hearted spin on living in the city from an expat perspective. The account’s satirical integration of expatriate stereotypes and local culture makes it entertaining for all people who reside in the city – there’s no discrimination with her memes. As a Korean expat, her presence is inadvertently broadening the image of “expat” and diminishing the assumption that expats can only be white people.

While these labels once showed the double standards of the language of migration, they’re beginning to break away from strict definitions. By forging cultural visibility for terms like these, we create opportunities for more open conversations about questioning the need for labels, their effect on our unconscious bias and reclaiming these terms in a positive way.

Platforms that enable positive outlooks on reclaiming negative labels can unite people rather than split them apart. Hopefully, more of this kind of action will allow people to see that regardless of your identity, anyone who immigrates to another country shares more similarities than differences and that labels shouldn’t limit or define anyone in what they want to achieve.

Source: How the language of migration put expats on a pedestal – and left immigrants in the dust

Critics say more action needed from Alberta government on immigration issues in wake of public opinion survey

Reflects the overall more conservative rural base and while the difference with other provinces is significant, there is less polarization than portrayed in the article. The UCP government, like most provincial governments, is generally pro-immigration:

Almost half of Albertans feel that there is too much immigration, a major increase over the national average. But advocates say the Alberta government has not done enough to curve that discrimination.

According to the Canadian Public Opinion on Immigration survey conducted in 2019 by the Environics Institute, 42 per cent of Albertans feel there is too much immigration. This is nine per cent more than the national average, with British Columbia at 30 per cent and Saskatchewan at 34 per cent.

The survey was based on telephone interviews conducted via landline and cell phones with 2,008 Canadians between Oct. 7 and Oct. 20, 2019. The results are accurate to within plus or minus 2.2 percentage points in 19 out of 20 samples.

These results don’t come as a surprise, as Alberta has made headlines for its anti-newcomer sentiments.

In 2016, an article from the National Post reported that a Calgary school was vandalized with anti-Syrian and anti-Trudeau graffiti. These messages included “real Canadians hate Syrians” and “burn all mosques.”

A similar story happened later in 2016 when a Calgary man spray-painted anti-Syrian graffiti to a Calgary LRT station because he was “mad at ISIS.” According to the CBC, the man later apologized in court and stated he had “changed his views.”

Two years later, a video of a woman shouting at a group of men in a Lethbridge Denny’s was uploaded to Facebook. The video shows the women yelling things such as, “Go back to your own f–ing country. We don’t need you here,” and “You’re not Canadian.”

The group of men she was yelling at were of Afghan background.

That anti-immigrant sentiment continues to this day. Dina Farman – an immigrant who moved to Alberta in 2006 – says she still faces discrimination.

“I worked in retail. I know how some people don’t like immigrants,” she says. “And even with me actually, I have black hair and [an accent], and some people give you that look like you’re not welcomed or something.”

One group that has been accused of making newcomers feel unwelcome is the Yellow Vests, a movement that has members in Calgary. The group was inspired by the “gilet jaunes” protests that began in France in 2018 as a result of high gas prices and the rising cost of living there. The movement there has been linked with outbursts of racism and anti-semitism.

But, in Canada, the Yellow Vests Facebook page says the group was created to “protest the CARBON TAX, Build That Pipeline and Stand Against the Treason of our country’s politicians who have the audacity to sell out OUR country’s sovereignty over to the Globalist UN and their Tyrannical policies.”

This movement is also known for opposing the presence of some newcomers in Canada and have been associated with racist and xenophobic behaviour and comments. In Calgary, members advocate for an end to what they describe as illegal migration while supporting immigration of “people who share our democratic values.”

One member of Yellow Vests Calgary — who wished not to be identified to prevent media scrutiny — says that for her, migration and immigration are different. Migrants and refugees have created some negative experiences for her, while the immigrants who “are willing to integrate are a joy.”

“I would consider immigration to be something that’s embedded, that we are choosing people that are going to help us economically, that are going to contribute and integrate and that they’re going to become Canadian. That’s a good thing for this country.”

“But then you have a large faction of people that come, that aren’t integrating and they’re clinging to a nation for which they’ve kind of turned away from but haven’t really [given up],” she says.

“If there’s an idea that they’re bringing with them [from] wherever they’ve come from, and it doesn’t fit with the morals and values of the country that you’ve chosen to come to, then that’s the challenges you face as an immigrant.”

Abdie Kazemipur, a professor at the University of Calgary who studied the socio-economic experiences of immigrants in Canada, says this is a very common argument. However, he says every time there is a pressure by mainstream institutions or populations to force immigrants to adopt their mainstream values, it actually backlashes.

“Even if immigrants [integrating] into the mainstream values and cultures is the desired outcome, the way to achieve that is by opening the society to them and giving them their space and allowing them to have interactions,” he says

Meanwhile, some governments in Canada are trying to reduce discrimination against refugees and immigrants.

In Manitoba, that led to the creation of their Advisory Council on Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism in 2015.

Their council is similar to Saskatchewan’s multicultural council, which was founded in 1975 to raise awareness of the benefits of cultural diversity and the dangers of racism.

More recently, the United Nations Refugee Agency created the campaign #WithRefugees in order to invite cities and local authorities all over the world who are working to promote inclusion, support refugees and bring communities together to sign a statement of solidarity.

While 16 cities across Canada have signed onto this campaign to show support, no cities in Alberta signed on.

But, at a provincial level, Alberta has taken some action. In 2018, the government released a long-delayed report on anti-racism activities. At the time, Global News published an article in which Greg Clark, the now-former MLA for Calgary-Elbow, said “it just fell off the radar and we’ve heard nothing about it. So obviously there is action needed.”

After that release, the Anti-Racism Advisory Council was created as the first government organization to fight the increase of racism in Alberta. A $2 million anti-racism community grant was also introduced to do the same thing.

However, since the UCP government has come into power, there has been no update found on the Anti-Racism Advisory Council’s webpage.

The UCP government has also eliminated the Alberta Human Rights Commission’s human rights education and multiculturalism fund as of November 2019 under the recent budget cuts. This $1-million grant has helped fund anti-racism and anti-discrimination in Alberta since 1988.

Additionally, the $2-million anti-racism community grant was replaced with the multiculturalism, indigenous and inclusion grant program with a budget of $1.5 million under the UCP government. In other words, less money is now being used to address a lot more problems – just one of which would be anti-immigrant sentiment.

Sam Nammoura, the co-founder of the Calgary Immigrant Support Society, says the government of Alberta can be doing more to bring awareness towards the discrimination of immigrants.

“Instead of making a one-week event to create awareness, it should be addressed constantly,” he says.

Kazemipur, who wrote his PhD thesis on the economic experiences of immigrants and ethnic minorities in Canada, also says the Government of Alberta is taking too minimal of an approach.

“They can actually try to encourage the population to develop better views and better experiences of immigrants and minorities,” he says.

“After this happens and after this population blends into one larger population, then this distinction between immigrant and non-immigrant becomes basically meaningless. So all these negative feelings towards immigrants will disappear as a result.”

Kazemipur thinks that the best way to encourage this solution would be through educational programs that bring people together.

“Educational programs are definitely a starting point to emphasize the cultural competence and to expose people to different lives despite different cultural orientations and the values that are embedded in any of these alternative lifestyles,” he says.

“I think there could be more education in order to move people from their own comfort zones so that they can engage with people from other cultural backgrounds.”

Nada Bodagh, who moved to Canada from Iraq in 2009, agrees.

“People just don’t understand yet because they need answers to their questions,” she says. [Immigrants need to] feel they are involved so they are not isolated because the worst feeling when they are new here is feeling lonely and isolated.”

Kazemipur says that the government needs to make improvements to strengthen the bond between the population.

“The provincial government could be more proactive and could make this a priority knowing that without [social interaction] in the population, the economic plans and political plans wouldn’t succeed,”

“I think there’s a lot more work that needs to be done,” says Nammoura.

To better understand the work that is being done by the Alberta government, the Calgary Journal attempted to contact Leela Aheer, the minister of culture, multiculturalism and status of women for an interview involving the lack of programs in place that create inclusiveness for immigrants and refugees.

Instead, we received a statement from the press secretary, Danielle Murray.

“Our government is working to build a province where all people feel safe, welcome and valued. We are working with the Alberta Anti-Racism Advisory Council to determine how they can support our work to address racial and multicultural barriers in Alberta,” the statement read.

We did not receive any further response after a second request for an interview with Aheer.

Source: Critics say more action needed from Alberta government on immigration issues in wake of public opinion survey

After coronavirus: Immigrants will be key to Canada’s economic recovery

While I value the work and analysis of Kareem El-Assal, I think that this presents an overly optimistic picture, or at least a pre-mature one as we really don’t know about how fast and complete the recovery will be, particularly when you consider the impact on retail, travel and hospitality industries.

And like so many pro-immigration narratives, it tends to gloss over whether the impact would be only on overall GDP or also with respect to per capita GDP where the benefits are less clear.

My guess is that we will only really know about one year from now, when most of the effects have hopefully worked their way through society:

The coronavirus pandemic is having a devastating impact on economies around the world.

The IMF projects the global economy will contract by 3 per cent in 2020, in what it calls the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Just days before it announced travel restrictions to help contain the spread of COVID-19, Canada said it would welcome over 1 million immigrants between 2020-2022, mainly to help grow its economy.

Of course, little did Canadian government officials know at the time of the announcement that the global economy would be heading towards such a major contraction.

Should Canada welcome more immigrants?

The current state of affairs may lead one to legitimately question whether Canada should continue with its immigration plan, or scale it back.

There is no doubt that COVID-19 will require Canada to adjust its immigration plans.

However, it would not be sound economic policy to significantly reduce Canada’s immigration levels beyond the coronavirus crisis.

The reason for this is that Canada needs immigrants more than it ever has in its modern history to promote economic growth.

Why Canada needs more immigrants

Canada’s desire to welcome over 300,000 immigrants per year is meant to help alleviate its demographic challenges.

Canada has one of the world’s lowest birth rates and one of the world’s oldest populations. As more Canadians retire, it will struggle to replace them in the labour market since the country is not having enough children. This is where immigration comes in.

Immigration has been the main driver of Canada’s population growth since the 1990s, and will be the only driver of it by the early 2030s.

Population growth is important because it fuels labour force growth. The two ways to grow an economy is by adding more workers and using those workers more productively.

Today, immigration tends to account for all of Canada’s labour force growth, or the vast majority of it, in a given year. This means that Canada would constrain its economic growth potential if it welcomed fewer immigrants.

Canada will see a full economic recovery

The consensus among economists is that the Canadian and global economy should rebound fairly quickly once social distancing restrictions have been eased.

This means that more Canadians will be back to work, and there will also be more job opportunities for immigrants.

Canada’s economy pre-coronavirus is very telling of what we can expect once the economy is back to normal.

Leading up to the coronavirus pandemic, Canada’s unemployment rate was at record lows and its economy enjoyed a decade of growth following the 2008 global financial crisis. Remember that Canada maintained high levels of immigration even following that crisis, which in hindsight, was the correct economic decision to make.

One significant reason for the low unemployment rate pre-coronavirus is many of Canada’s over 9 million baby boomers were retiring, which caused a shortage of workers as the economy was expanding. This benefitted Canadian-born workers and immigrants alike.

Similarly, Canadian-born workers and immigrants are poised to benefit from the post-coronavirus economic rebound. In the coming years, it is realistic to expect Canada to deal with worker shortages again, and even more so than prior to COVID-19 as all of Canada’s 9 million baby boomers reach the age of retirement within the next decade.

Immigration policy always has long-term economic implications and we should not lose sight of that even in the wake of the coronavirus crisis.

Immigrants will help to create more jobs post-coronavirus

Canada’s economy is facing tough times, but immigration will play a pivotal role in supporting Canada’s economic recovery since immigrants will help to fill newly-created jobs and also support job creation in other ways.

Statistics Canada research shows that immigrants have a high propensity to start businesses. In one of its recent studies, Statistics Canada found that immigrant entrepreneurs created 25 per cent of new private sector jobs between 2003 and 2013, even though they accounted for 17 per cent of companies studied. In other words, immigrant entrepreneurs punched above their weight when it came to job creation.

Hence, immigrant entrepreneurs post-coronavirus will create businesses that will create new jobs for fellow Canadians.

Finally, immigrants bring significant savings with them which helps to fuel the economic activity that is critical to fueling job creation in Canada.

Consider the useful proxy of international students. According to the federal government, the over 600,000 international students in Canada contribute to over $22 billion in economic activity each year which supports nearly 200,000 Canadian jobs.

Canada has over 8 million immigrants, who make an even bigger contribution to economic growth and job creation than international students.

Source: After coronavirus: Immigrants will be key to Canada’s economic recovery

Quebec considers lower immigration levels to offset rise in joblessness

While Quebec is distinct in its approach to immigration and selects its own economic class immigrants, wonder whether this questioning of immigration levels post-pandemic will also occur at the federal level and with provincial nominations:

Quebec Premier François Legault says everything is on the table as the province looks to mitigate the damage from the coronavirus pandemic – including reducing immigration levels to counter a rise in domestic unemployment.

“It’s something we will look at. I think we have to review everything,” Mr. Legault said on Tuesday. “The number of immigrants, with the high rate of joblessness we’ll have in the coming months, we could reduce the number.”

The province has some autonomy over its immigration levels. Some 40,500 immigrants were admitted into Quebec last year, a 20-per-cent decline from the year before.

The provincial government is also preparing to pump billions of dollars more into its economy and rescue distressed companies in the months ahead, Economy Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon said in an interview this week.

“There will be more money put into the rebound of the economy than [spent for] the shutdown,” he said. “We have to be very selective and think about the strategic sectors of the economy. We can’t let a very strategic sector fall.”

Mr. Legault’s government is conducting an analysis of Quebec’s economy and businesses as it tries to work out its funding priorities. And it has also begun an analysis of its trade balance with a view to producing more of its own goods.

The province has already unveiled a $2.5-billion emergency loan program for businesses in need of immediate liquidity, and it is now pledging more as the crisis stretches out.

“The word ‘bailout’ might be strong, but some will be bailouts,” Mr. Fitzgibbon said, adding the government could also take equity in certain companies and offer some aid that is forgiven. “I’ve got companies in my mind that may need a break for a couple of months and that’s it – they’re going to be as profitable as they were before. But others, you know, will have a long path to recovery. And the path could be 12 to 18 months.”

Quebec has been slowly working towards reopening its economy after enacting some of the continent’s most severe emergency measures.

On Monday, it announced that mining, residential construction and all auto repair and maintenance services would restart under strict conditions limiting human contact. The next logical sectors to reopen would be general construction and manufacturing, Mr. Fitzgibbon said.

The province is also working with public health officials towards allowing smaller retailers to reopen, particularly those who compete against big chains that have remained in operation, such as Walmart and Costco, Mr. Legault said on Wednesday.

Business groups, unions and social groups in Quebec are weighing in on how the province can recast its economic and fiscal policy in a more permanent way. On Wednesday, several organizations including employer group Conseil du patronat du Québec, the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec union and environmental group Équiterre released a letter they sent to Mr. Legault spelling out measures they believe will help reboot the economy while building a resilient, low-carbon future.

Among the suggestions: Accelerate spending on $44-billion worth of planned public transit and high-speed internet projects, expand support for energy-efficient building renovation, and fund initiatives to increase consumption of locally grown food.

The groups suggest financing the measures in part by redirecting deposits currently earmarked for the province’s debt-repayment fund.

“We not only have to deal with this humanitarian and economic crisis, we also have to prepare what comes after that,” said Yves-Thomas Dorval, president of the Conseil du patronat, which represents major employers such as Rio Tinto Alcan Inc. and Royal Bank of Canada.

“It made sense to us to work with our civil-society partners to offer suggestions based on the broad social, environmental and economic consensus we have forged in Quebec over the last 10 years. Our widely shared goals are to make our society more resilient to shocks such as this pandemic, better equipped to deal with ongoing crises like climate change, more prosperous and socially strong and united.”

In trying to determine where best to direct aid for companies, Quebec is using models to look at data such as employment, salaries and business clusters where it sees strength, Mr. Fitzgibbon said. The province has in the past identified aerospace and engineering as two industries with the financial weight and profile crucial to its economy but “it’s not obvious” now which companies might be saved, the minister said.

Quebec has no shortage of companies in difficulty, but their ability to weather the storm varies wildly. Some, like Bombardier Inc., have significant debt and shrinking prospects for repaying it, while others with more tenable capital structures face cash-flow trouble as demand for their products evaporates.

Source: Quebec considers lower immigration levels to offset rise in joblessness

Canada is sending the right immigration signals to the world

Of note. Good summary:

Canada may be the most open country on the planet right now.

Countries around the world have shut their borders, closed their airports, and imposed lockdowns to fight the deadly coronavirus.

Canada, too, has implemented such emergency measures.

But, it is also seeking to strike a balance between containing COVID-19 while also enabling global talent and foreign nationals into the country. This is due to Canada’s recognition that newcomers are part of the solution to supporting its economy during this challenging period, as well as the country’s unwavering commitment to reuniting family members even in the wake of its travel restrictions.

Canada doing everything it can to accommodate immigrants

On March 16, 2020, Canada unveiled special immigration measures related to the coronavirus pandemic.

The most notable measure was the decision to restrict travel into the country until June 30th, although several major exceptions were made.

Recognizing that the immigration system would face significant disruptions due to developments that are both within its control as well as beyond its control, Canada has taken additional steps to try to keep its immigration system running as smoothly as possible.

For instance, Canada has stated that no immigration application will be refused due to incomplete documentation. Rather, the federal government will provide applicants with more time to obtain their documents before it makes a decision on their application.

Make no mistake about it, Canada’s immigration system is facing disruptions.

Canadian government officials must work remotely to protect their health and safety as well as the safety of their family, friends, and communities. They are also responding to competing priorities to navigate this crisis which is requiring them to divert their attention from their day-to-day immigration responsibilities.

Factors beyond Canada’s control include people overseas facing lockdowns, travel restrictions, service disruptions, and other obstacles that are hindering the ability of foreign nationals to come to Canada or submit a completed immigration application.

Nonetheless, Canada is doing its best to adapt which is sending the right signals to foreign nationals around the world.

That is: we will do everything we can to accommodate your immigration goals and help you during this period of need.

Permanent residents

Consider that despite all that is happening in the world, Canada continues to hold Express Entry draws.

Four Express Entry draws have taken place in the three weeks following the travel restrictions being announced, including two draws on April 9 that saw Canada issue a total of 3,900 invitations to apply for permanent residence.

In addition, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba have all had Provincial Nominee Program draws.

Permanent residents outside of Canada are being accommodated in a number of ways. They are still able to travel to Canada. And, those who received a confirmation of permanent residence (COPR) prior to March 16 are also able to come to Canada.

International students

Some international students are exempt from Canada’s travel restrictions, but Canada took a step further recently to try to accommodate even more international students.

The decision to allow some international students to pursue online study and remain eligible for a Post-Graduation Work Permit was a major one. The majority of Canada’s international students are interested in transitioning to permanent residence. Hence, the PGWP is a critical stepping stone in helping them achieve their immigration goal.

Canada recognized it would be unfair to deem students ineligible for the PGWP due to circumstances completely out of the student’s control (that the student was forced to pursue online instructions due to the cancellation of classes to prevent the spread of the coronavirus).

Time will only tell if Canada chooses to take its PGWP flexibility one step further.

If public health officials advise the federal government to extend its coronavirus containment measures, Canada may feel the need to enable the September 2020 cohort of international students to also be able to access online courses while remaining eligible for the PGWP.

This may be necessary any way, given international students may struggle to find available flights or face other disruptions that could prevent them from being in Canada in time for September 2020 classes.

Foreign workers

Temporary foreign workers (TFWs) are largely exempt from the travel restrictions given how important they are to Canada’s economy. Canada has sought ways to make it easier for employers to hire TFWs by loosening Labour Market Impact Assessment rules in priority occupations in the agri-food and transportation sectors. Such flexibility is crucial to helping employers access workers to help sustain Canada’s food supply.

Assistance for newcomers in Canada

Much of the financial support announced by Canada in recent weeks is available to immigrants who are Canadian citizens or permanent residents, as well as international students and temporary foreign workers. Irrespective of their immigration status, individuals within Canada may be eligible for vital government income support such as Employment Insurance or the new Canadian Emergency Response Benefit.

Here, Canada is telling the world that even if you are not a citizen or permanent resident of our country, we will stand by you to provide you with as much support during this difficult time.

Immigration will help Canada recover from the coronavirus crisis

We are currently living in an unprecedented moment in history that is taking a significant toll on the emotional, physical, and financial health of us all.

Nevertheless, it is important to remember that we will eventually get through this difficult period and once we get a chance to catch our breath, we will look back at how governments around the world responded to the crisis.

On the immigration front, it is difficult to criticize Canada’s response and it appears very likely that Canada will be lauded for the compassion it has shown to immigrants of all stripes during a period where it is very well within its right to shut down its borders and immigration system.

Immigration has various short-, medium-, and long-term benefits for Canada, and a very strong argument can be made that facilitating immigration even during this crisis is necessary.

In the short run, permanent residents, foreign workers, and international students will help to stimulate economic activity in Canada which will help to alleviate the economic strain Canada is currently under.

In the medium- and long-term, immigrants will be key to keeping Canada prosperous since they will spur economic activity as workers, consumers, and taxpayers.

Source: Canada is sending the right immigration signals to the world