Canada’s temporary foreign worker program is archaic. Here’s how the Senate wants to change it

A start:

The federal government must modernize its archaic temporary foreign worker program by allowing migrant workers to change employers within their industry and overhauling the complicated enforcement system, says a Senate report.

To better support both workers and employers, a Migrant Work Commission should be established to oversee the program, advocate for migrant workers in Canada and serve as a single point of contact for reports of abuse and mistreatment as part of its mandate, says the study released on Tuesday.

“With so many cooks in the kitchen, it is only logical to have a head chef,” Ontario Sen. Ratna Omidvar, chair of the Senate social affairs, science and technology committee, told a news conference.

“This commission would serve as a one-stop shop for migrants who need help in asserting their rights and for employers seeking support in navigating the labyrinth of red tape, and even for government departments seeking to make their operations more efficient.”

The recommendations, however, have received a cold reception by advocates, who criticized the Senate for failing to address the structural issues of the temporary worker program.

“The fundamental power imbalance is the temporary migration system itself,” said Syed Hussan of Migrant Workers Alliance for Change. “So long we have a system of temporariness, there’s going to be inequality, injustice, abuse and exploitation.”

The Senate launched the study in late 2022 into Canada’s temporary foreign work program, which was introduced in 1973 as a stopgap measure to address the country’s labour shortages but has since grown to be an indispensable part of the Canadian labour market….

Source: Canada’s temporary foreign worker program is archaic. Here’s how the Senate wants to change it

Montréal et Gatineau, l’immigration et les jeunes accélèrent le déclin du français, selon Québec

Ongoing concern one without easy solutions particularly for youth:

Malgré un maintien relatif de l’utilisation de la langue dans l’espace public, le déclin du français se poursuit, accéléré par l’immigration, par les habitudes de consommation des jeunes Québécois et par la situation à Montréal, indique le ministre de la Langue française, Jean-François Roberge.

« J’aimerais ça vous dire : “Oui, oui, c’est réglé !” Ce n’est pas le cas encore », a lancé l’élu caquiste à sa sortie du Salon bleu, mercredi, une petite heure après avoir déposé en chambre le plus récent Rapport sur l’évolution de la situation linguistique de l’Office québécois de la langue française (OQLF).

Rendu public tous les cinq ans, ce document fait une revue multidisciplinaire de l’usage de la langue de Molière au Québec. On y apprend notamment que le français dans l’espace public — une statistique sur laquelle s’appuyait le commissaire à la langue française, Benoît Dubreuil, dans un rapport en septembre — a très légèrement reculé entre 2007 (79,1 %) et 2022 (78,7 %).

Il y est aussi relevé que la proportion de personnes travaillant principalement en français est passée de 81,8 % en 2001 à 79,9 % 20 ans plus tard, en 2021. Sur la même période, l’anglais a progressé, passant de 12,3 % à 14 %.

Accosté par la presse parlementaire, mercredi, le ministre Roberge a tenu à rappeler qu’il « y a plusieurs indicateurs à surveiller ». « Tant mieux s’il y a des secteurs où on recule moins, où on a atteint un certain plateau, mais il reste qu’on n’a pas arrêté le déclin encore », a-t-il dit.

Trois « fractures »

L’élu caquiste a cerné « trois enjeux en particulier » dans le dossier du français. Il cite au premier chef la « fracture régionale » qui existe entre Montréal, Gatineau et le reste du Québec. Selon l’OQLF, 59,5 % des Montréalais s’exprimaient en français lorsqu’ils étaient à l’extérieur de la maison en 2022. Ce chiffre s’élevait à 63 % à Gatineau.

« On voit que Montréal et Gatineau sont des régions où il y a un écart très, très grand par rapport au reste du Québec », a soulevé M. Roberge mercredi.

Selon le rapport de l’OQLF, « la proportion de personnes parlant principalement le français à la maison a diminué dans chacune des RMR [régions métropolitaines de recensement] du Québec » de 2016 et 2021. « Cette diminution a cependant été plus prononcée sur l’île de Montréal, dans la couronne de Montréal et dans la RMR de Gatineau qu’ailleurs au Québec », peut-on lire.

« Maintenant, en ce moment, avec l’arrivée massive de travailleurs temporaires et de demandeurs d’asile, c’est sûr que ç’a un impact », a déclaré M. Roberge. Aux dernières nouvelles, plus de 560 000 immigrants non permanents résidaient au Québec, dont une part importante dans la région métropolitaine de Montréal.

Les données de l’OQLF montrent par ailleurs que tout près d’un tiers (31,6 %) des résidents non permanents ne parviennent pas à entretenir une conversation en français. « C’est une autre ligne de fracture », a lancé M. Roberge mercredi.

« Je l’ai nommé, je vais le redire encore aussi : quand on accueille 30 000, 35 000 étudiants non québécois anglophones au centre-ville de Montréal, qui après ont des emplois étudiants, ça aussi, ça contribue à angliciser les milieux de travail », a-t-il ajouté.

Beaucoup d’anglais chez les jeunes

Selon M. Roberge, la dernière « fracture » est « générationnelle ». D’après une étude de l’OQLF citée dans le rapport, 55 % des jeunes qui utilisent les réseaux sociaux affirment publier leur contenu « soit autant en français qu’en anglais, soit principalement en anglais ».

« Même parmi les jeunes francophones, la part de personnes publiant principalement en français n’était pas particulièrement élevée (52 %) », écrit l’Office.

À la période des questions à Ottawa, mercredi, le chef du Bloc québécois, Yves-François Blanchet, a reproché au premier ministre canadien, Justin Trudeau, d’« affaiblir le français », notamment chez les jeunes, avec ses politiques linguistiques. « On est préoccupés par le déclin du français qu’on voit à travers le pays, y compris au Québec », a rétorqué M. Trudeau, tout en affirmant que « ce n’est pas la minorité anglophone qui est une menace pour le français au Québec ».

Le ministre Roberge, qui a déposé le mois dernier un plan d’action visant à renverser le déclin de la langue, espère quant à lui « changer l’environnement » culturel des jeunes Québécois.

« Un jeune qui a 15, 16, 17 ans, s’il baigne dans un environnement culturel anglophone, bien il a plus de chances, évidemment, d’utiliser l’anglais au quotidien, de publier sur les réseaux sociaux en anglais, a-t-il soutenu mercredi. Quand il ouvre la télé, il n’ouvre pas la télé traditionnelle. Il va aller sur Netflix, il va aller sur Disney, il va aller sur toutes les plateformes de diffusion en continu. »

Alerté par un comité indépendant des risques pour la santé du français du manque de « découvrabilité » des contenus francophones, le gouvernement de François Legault s’est engagé, au début de l’année, à déposer un projet de loi pour forcer les plateformes numériques à mettre en avant davantage de contenus du Québec. « On va faire flèche de tout bois », avait affirmé en janvier le ministre de la Culture et des Communications, Mathieu Lacombe.

Plan d’action

Voilà deux ans presque jour pour jour que le gouvernement de la Coalition avenir Québec a adopté la loi 96. Cette vaste réforme de la loi 101 agit dans plusieurs sphères, avec pour objectif de protéger la langue française.

Le mois dernier, le ministre Roberge a rendu public le résultat des travaux du Groupe d’action pour l’avenir de la langue française. Dans son plan d’action, le gouvernement Legault s’engage à rehausser les fonds pour la francisation, à légiférer dans le domaine de la culture et à renforcer les exigences de français imposées aux nouveaux arrivants, entre autres.

« Donnons-nous le temps d’implanter nos mesures et de voir ce qu’elles vont changer. Si on doit aller plus loin, on le fera », a dit M. Roberge mercredi.

Interrogé au moment du dépôt de son plan d’action, l’élu caquiste avait refusé de se fixer un échéancier d’inversion du déclin du français. « Je pense qu’on va [l’]inverser […] très rapidement », avait-il dit.

Source: Montréal et Gatineau, l’immigration et les jeunes accélèrent le déclin du français, selon Québec

Globe editorial: Sorry, Ottawa, but magical thinking won’t fix the economy [on immigration]

Of note:

…Ottawa has made the choice to select lower-scoring immigrants who fit into specialized niches in the economy rather than those who, according to Canada’s own immigration system, have a better chance of long-term success.

… But it would be a serious policy blunder to carve out even more exceptions and further squeeze the general pool of permanent resident spots. Such an action would cement the trend toward a low-wage economy largely populated by immigrants.

A better, if tougher, approach would be to allow temporary migrants to compete for a spot in the general pool. Some will undoubtedly qualify, and will help to build Canada in the coming decades. Others won’t and will have to leave.

The Liberals need to keep in mind two imperatives in sorting out economic migration policy: the needs of Canadians come first – and magical thinking won’t get the country’s economy back on track.

Source: Sorry, Ottawa, but magical thinking won’t fix the economy

Adam Legge and Irfhan Rawji: Our immigration strategy is failing to deliver on its most important promise

Apart from proposing a shift in selection criteria (EE CRS) to provide more points for the trades, not specific recommendations. And arguably, the existing wealth of immigration-related data is adequate to assess overall impact on immigration’s contribution to the Canadian economy along with socioeconomic outcomes of immigrants:

Canada is a nation that has benefited tremendously from immigration. At its core, the promise of immigration is this: that new Canadians can come here from around the world, contribute to our economy and society, and build a great life for themselves, and that when they do, we will all collectively be better off for it.

The problem is, we have not been delivering on that promise.

In recent years, Canada’s immigration system has strayed, and while there are still many positives, it hasn’t been delivering as well for established Canadians and newcomers alike. Perhaps most importantly—and most frankly—is that it’s not making everyone better off, and Canadians are getting poorer.

Right now, Canada’s economy has stagnated. In fact, Canadians are no better off today than they were in 2014. And, with future productivity expectations in the gutter, our economy will not grow at the pace required to deliver opportunities for a growing population. All this has created frustration among Canadians, both long-established and new ones. Less than one-third of Canadians believe that our current approach to immigration is effective, and one-third of immigrants are unsure of their decision to move to Canada.

That’s a bad sign for Canada’s future. Future prosperity requires that the Canadian economy generates more value, not just because there are more of us, but because each one of us is better off. To get there, we need an enhanced approach and a renewed focus on the actual purpose of economic immigration: to generate prosperity for all. 

There are two main ways we need to do this:

  • Attracting and selecting the best candidates for economic immigration
  • Improving outcomes for newcomers themselves

On the selection of the best economic candidates, the statistics around this may surprise many Canadians. Today, about half of the people admitted into Canada in the economic category were not, in fact, selected for their economic contributions. They are the spouses and dependents of a primary economic immigrant. For every 10 newcomers to Canada, about three are personally selected for their economic contribution. While many of these additional people have great contributions to make to our economy as well, when we’re counting five-year-olds as economic immigrants, it’s no wonder we’re not seeing the level of economic boost we might expect.

Also, there are big gaps in how Canada decides which economic immigrants to select. Take as an example a person with a master’s degree in—because we need to pick something—Latin, versus a person with a certification as a heavy-duty mechanic.

All else held equal, the person with the master’s would receive more points than the mechanic, due simply to years of education, despite the fact that the mechanic has vastly higher average earning potential in Canada today. And, with full respect to both professions, Canada also needs far more heavy mechanics right now than we do TAs in Latin.

A clear needle-moving fix is to reform the points system used to better select economic immigrants, prioritizing those with higher earning potential over other measures. We should also make this system dynamic and update it frequently to account for changes in what skills our economy needs in real time.

On the second front, improving newcomer experience and outcomes, the fixes are clear but that doesn’t make them easy. The process needs to be streamlined and simplified. We need to connect newcomers to supports so they can find a home and a job as quickly as possible. More than all else, we need to make it much easier for newcomers to use their skills in the Canadian labour market. We must view it as economically and morally unacceptable to have people delivering Skip the Dishes who are trained as—and would prefer to be working as—physicians and engineers.

Finally, as every business person knows, what gets measured gets done. For our immigration system, we need to enhance it to deliver on its stated goal of making everyone better off. That requires tying our strategy to clear indicators of prosperity such as GDP growth per capita and directing our resources to best increase those metrics.  

There is a mandate for change. In a poll from Abacus, nearly 70 percent of Canadians feel the current immigration targets are too high. We owe it to all Canadians, from those who have been here the longest to the newest, to deliver on the promise of immigration and make everyone better off from it.

Source: Adam Legge and Irfhan Rawji: Our immigration strategy is failing to deliver on its most important promise

Tasha Kheiriddin: Liberals stuck in vicious cycle of rising immigration and housing shortages

Self-imposed and hard to extract even if Minister Miller is making some progress. Kheiriddin and the Post supportive of unions:

…The policy incoherence here is mind-boggling. The Liberals’ high-volume immigration, international student, and foreign worker policies created a massive demand for housing, which they have attempted to fix by bringing in more foreign workers, pushing down wages for domestic labour and thus making life (and housing) more unaffordable for everybody. They need to fix this, starting by respecting union workers and incentivizing Canadians to enter the trades rather than importing cheap labour.

Otherwise, their circle isn’t just vicious — it’s cruel for domestic tradespeople and foreign workers alike, who see that under this government, the Canadian dream increasingly is just a mirage.

Source: Tasha Kheiriddin: Liberals stuck in vicious cycle of rising immigration and housing shortages

Active presence of immigrants in Canada: Recent trends in tax filing and employment incidence

Interesting and relevant way to measure integration and assess emigration rates. Findings make intuitive sense:

Increased tax-filing rates of immigrants across arrival cohorts

The tax-filing rate in the first full year is a key indicator of immigrant retention, as an earlier study found that over half of immigrants who emigrated did not file income tax in their first year after arrival. This suggests that many immigrants make decisions about leaving shortly after immigration (Aydemir & Robinson, 2008).

Among immigrants aged 20 to 54 at landing, the rate of filing an income tax return in the first full year after landing remained stable from the 1990-to-1994 cohort to the 2000-to-2004 cohort. However, it increased for cohorts that arrived since the mid-2000s (Table 1). About 90% of the 2015-to-2019 and 2020 cohorts filed a tax return in the first full year after immigration, compared with 85% among the 2005-to-2009 cohort. …

The rise in first-year tax-filing rates since the mid-2010s was widespread, spanning both men and women, age groups, educational levels, official language profiles, and most source regions. This increase was also observed across admission programs, except for a slight decline among immigrants in the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP) from the 2010-to-2014 cohort to the 2020 cohort. 

The tax-filing rate in the fifth year after immigration increased steadily from the 1990-to-1994 cohort to the 2010-to-2014 cohort. Again, this uptrend was observed across immigrants with diverse sociodemographic backgrounds. However, among PNP immigrants, the filing rate in the fifth year remained relatively stable from the 2000-to-2004 cohort onward, following a decline from the 1995-to-1999 cohort. Additionally, there was a marginal decrease among immigrants from Northern Europe in the 2010-to-2014 cohort.

The tax-filing rate in the 10th year after immigration was higher among immigrants who arrived in the 2000s than among those who arrived in the 1990s. However, there was minimal change between those who arrived in the early 2000s and the late 2000s. These trends remained consistent across immigrants with various sociodemographic characteristics.

Tax-filing rates, specifically in the 5th and 10th years after immigration, were generally lower among immigrants in the Federal Skilled Worker Program and Canadian Experience Class, compared with family class immigrants and refugees. These rates were also relatively lower among immigrants with graduate degrees and those originating from the United States, and Northern and Western Europe. The literature suggests that highly skilled immigrants are more mobile and tend to explore better opportunities in the international labour market or return to their home countries when they cannot fully utilize their skills in the destination country (Aydemir & Robinson, 2008)….

Source: Active presence of immigrants in Canada: Recent trends in tax filing and employment incidence

Karas: Canada must tackle rising antisemitism and security risks:Karas:

Illustration of fears of some regarding the possible security risks, not totally unfounded:

The federal government’s plan to allow Palestinians from Gaza to come to Canada presents serious security risks.

Despite the screening protocols associated with the temporary measures for Gazans who have relatives in Canada, the prospect of a significant influx of Gazans raises legitimate concerns about the exacerbation of rising antisemitism, the incitement of violence against Jewish Canadians, and the escalation of social unrest.

Recent anti-Israel and antisemitic organized protests, such as unauthorized campus encampments at universities countrywide, highlight the pressing need for immediate government action and strict security measures.

It is no secret that the Canadian government has faced critical challenges in facilitating the relocation of Palestinians from Gaza. Despite processing close to a thousand applications, as of now, not a single individual has been granted admission under the program.

A primary hurdle arises from the difficulties faced by many visa applicants when attempting to enter Egypt for mandatory biometric screening. According to the former Canadian ambassador to Israel, Jon Allen, individuals from Gaza have used alternative routes, arranging costly departures through private Egyptian firms that allegedly engage in bribery involving Egyptian border guards and possibly Hamas operatives.

Concerns regarding the unofficial methods employed by Gazans at the Rafah border crossing into Egypt have led to visa cancellations on security grounds by Australia and other countries.

Controversy also surrounds the document requirements for Gazans seeking visas. Applicants must have up-to-date passports and provide thorough disclosure of personal backgrounds, encompassing employment records and social media activity. Critics argue that these measures are overly invasive and hard to comply with, and have pushed for more lenient criteria.

However, robust screening procedures are essential for safeguarding national security. If anything, the program’s inability to admit even a single Gazan who passes all security screenings and is allowed entry through legitimate channels emphasizes the immense challenge of vetting individuals from this region. It also highlights the considerable security risks tied to this temporary program initiative….

Source: Canada must tackle rising antisemitism and security risks

“La France, tu l’aimes mais tu la quittes” : pourquoi des musulmans surdiplômés choisissent l’exil

One could likely, for a StatsCan fee, obtain data on the religion and visible minority background of immigrants from France by immigration period and category to further quantify this qualitative study:

C’est un phénomène inquantifiable. De plus en plus de Français de culture ou de religion musulmanes, issus de l’immigration postcoloniale, très diplômés, quitteraient la France pour s’installer au Royaume-Uni, au Canada, aux États-Unis, à Dubaï mais aussi au Maghreb. C’est ce qu’affirme l’enquête “La France, tu l’aimes mais tu la quittes” (éd. du Seuil), un titre en forme de clin d’œil au slogan de l’extrême droite “La France, aimez-la ou quittez-la” en vogue dans les années 1980.

Entre 2011 et 2023, trois universitaires, Olivier Esteves, Alice Picard et Julien Talpin, ont interrogé 1 070 personnes à l’aide d’un appel à témoignages lancé sur Mediapart puis mené 139 entretiens approfondis. Leur constat est sans appel : des Français de confession musulmane, pratiquants ou non, peinent à trouver leur place en France malgré des parcours universitaires accomplis (54 % des sondés ont un bac+5). Victimes de discriminations en raison de leur nom, leur apparence ou leur religion, de microagressions, les personnes interrogées témoignent d’une “islamophobie” devenue insupportable au point de choisir l’exil. Un phénomène exacerbé depuis les attentats de 2015 mais aussi par le discours antimusulman de certains politiques. “L’islam n’est pas compatible avec la France”, affirmait ainsi en 2021 celui qui allait devenir le candidat à la présidentielle du parti d’extrême droite Reconquête!, Éric Zemmour. Entretien avec Olivier Esteves, coauteur de l’ouvrage et professeur des universités en civilisation des pays anglophones à l’université de Lille.

Source: “La France, tu l’aimes mais tu la quittes” : pourquoi des musulmans surdiplômés choisissent l’exil

Fears of new Windrush as thousands of UK immigrants face ‘cliff edge’ visa change

Of note, more an implementation issue than policy (where governments often fall short):

Lawyers and migrant rights campaigners have warned that the government is heading for a repeat of the Windrush scandal after imposing a “cliff edge” deadline for immigrants to switch to new digital visas.

By the end of this year an estimated 500,000 or more non-EU immigrants with leave to remain in the UK will need to replace their physical biometric residence permits (BRPs) – which demonstrate proof of their right to reside, rent, work and claim benefits – with digital e-visas.

In order to access their e-visa, people will need to open a UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) digital account. The Home Office has recently emailed invitations for a trial group of BRP holders to open digital accounts, but as many migrants used their solicitors’ email address as their Home Office contact, many have gone to lawyers rather than the immigrants themselves.

In addition, because personal details were excluded from the invitations for data security reasons, the lawyers would have no idea which of their potentially thousands of clients the emails were meant for, meaning they could not forward them on.

“After 31 December, a person without access to their e-visa will be un­able to prove their status in the UK,” said Zoe Bantleman, legal director at the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association. “The Home Office has placed them in a similar situation to members of the Windrush generation. They have status, but they cannot prove it.

“Given the poor reach of Home Office communications on the issue, it is fair to assume that there will be thousands of people who do not apply for an e-visa before the end of 2024.”

From this summer any BRP holder can open a UKVI digital account without an invitation. But immigration lawyers fear the government’s planned publicity drive will miss many older or poorer people who may not speak English as their first language or do not have ready access to the internet.

Zoe Dexter, housing and welfare manager at human rights charity the Helen Bamber Foundation, described the government’s plans as chaotic. She said: “The Home Office’s move to digitise proof of identity is bound to take a huge financial toll on hundreds of thousands of people, including refugees and survivors of trafficking and torture, whose proof of ID is linked to the benefits they receive.”

Critics warn the Home Office does not have measures in place to deal with possible technical failures, and that it has created a cliff edge with its deadline. People can still apply for a UKVI digital account after 31 December, but if they are not aware of the new rules they may only discover this when they are unable to prove their right to return from holiday or claim benefits, leading to disruption.

“This is a recipe for disaster,” said Bethan Lant of migrant rights charity Praxis. “People will be un­able to evidence their status through no fault of their own, because the Home Office has not communicated well and has given them a cliff edge after which they are going to struggle to access even the basics. We’re not saying don’t go digital, we’re not saying ‘don’t do this’. We’re saying engage better, do it carefully, do it softly, do it over a period of time.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “E-visas provide secure confirmation of someone’s UK immigration status, enhance security and bring cost savings for the UK public. They also offer greater convenience for customers and status checkers, using tried and tested technology. Our April phased launch marked an important step towards replacing physical documents with e-visas by 2025, a key part of the transformation and digitisation of the UK’s border and immigration system.

Source: Fears of new Windrush as thousands of UK immigrants face ‘cliff edge’ visa change

Canadian immigration asks medical worker fleeing Gaza if he treated Hamas fighters

Sigh… Good comments by Kurland and Waldman:

….The federal Immigration Department said that an interview with its minister, Marc Miller, was not possible. In an emailed statement, spokesperson Jeffrey MacDonald said visa applicants may be asked additional questions about their employment and travel history, and their online presence, as part of Canada’s screening process.

MacDonald declined to comment on why it asked a medical worker about whom they had treated, citing privacy reasons.

Canada lists Hamas as a terrorist group, and Canada has the right to screen visa applicants for possible security threats, said Lorne Waldman, a Toronto-based lawyer who wrote a widely used textbook on Canadian immigration law.

“But this type of question is completely unacceptable,” Waldman said in an interview. “If there was a shootout in Toronto between members of a gang, a doctor wouldn’t stop to ask whether a person was a gang member before they treated them.”

Canada also cannot ask such questions of a visa applicant strictly for intelligence-gathering purposes, he said.

Richard Kurland of Lawyers for Secure Immigration, a group urging the government to ask pointed questions related to Hamas and terrorist activities, said he rejects the question on two grounds. One, because it only targets Hamas and not other terrorist groups operating in Gaza, and two, because it’s “problematic,” he wrote in an email.

“Even murderous terrorists deserve medical treatment,” he said.

Source: Canadian immigration asks medical worker fleeing Gaza if he treated Hamas fighters