Immigrant workers protest in P.E.I.: What’s going on now and how did it start?

Another example of expectations not being met and the policies that contributed to that. The usual false claim that there “will be hunger strike to death;”

Immigrants living on Prince Edward Island are protesting policies put in place to slow down population growth, which have affected their ability to renew work permits and become permanent residents.

The protests, which have been ongoing in Charlottetown, escalated on Tuesday when one protester said workers are ready to go on a hunger strike if their needs are not met by Thursday.

“This will be hunger strike to death,” Rupinder Pal Singh told the CBC. “We are losing our work permits. There are no other places for us to go.”

What sparked the protests?

In February, the province introduced new framework to relieve the pressure of population growth “on our increasingly stressed public services and infrastructure system,” Premier Dennis King said in a statement.

The province’s growth is, in part, due to immigration, as well as birth and death rates and interprovincial migration, according to a news release.

The new policy reduces immigration nominations by 25 per cent for 2024.

Seventy-five per cent of nominations are being “redistributed to align with nine provincial sectors, with a strong emphasis on nominating skilled workers in health care, trades, childcare, and other key industries facing labour shortages.”

Applying for a nomination is one way for people to become a permanent resident.

“Individuals are selected for nomination based on their intention to live and work in PEI and their economic ability to establish here,” according to P.E.I.’s Office of Immigration.

What are the demands?

On Monday morning, a video posted on Instagram showed protesters walking together chanting, “We want fair rules!”

Part of the demands include extending work permits for immigrants already in the province, who are working in sectors that are considered not in demand.

“We want them to grandfather us in and we want them to listen (to) what is right,” Singh, whose work permit will expire in two months, told CBC. He has lived in Charlottetown for one and a half years as an internet technology sales representative.

Protesters also want an easier route to permanent residency after changes were made to P.E.I.’s Provincial Nominee Program.

Singh said he thinks immigrants already working should be allowed to continue their path to permanent residency, CBC reported.

‘Urgent need for action’

The protests started small, with about 25 people gathered outside of government buildings in Charlottetown on May 9, the CBC reported.

It quickly grew to around 300 people by Tuesday morning.

Protesters carried signs that read “Immigrants deserve justice” and “Support sales & service.”

“The protest in Charlottetown highlights the urgent need for action on expiring work permits for foreign workers in PEI The threat of a hunger strike underscores the seriousness of the situation,” wrote Licensed and Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant Kubeir Kamal in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

The Department of Workforce, Advanced Learning and Population would reportedly be meeting with protest organizers on Tuesday.

Source: Immigrant workers protest in P.E.I.: What’s going on now and how did it start?

Chris Alexander: I am a former immigration minister. Unsustainable population increases won’t solve Canada’s underlying issues

Late to the various debates and discussions given his recent focus on Russia and Ukraine. More descriptive than prescriptive, with few concrete suggestions or recommendations:

In March, the Globe and Mail reported that Canada’s population had grown by 1.3 million in 2023—the largest annual increase on record.

This surge was driven by higher numbers of immigrants, international students, temporary foreign workers, and asylum claimants.

Given that the 2021 census showed that 8.3 million Canadians, or 23 percent of our population, had an immigrant background, this latest increase means that, in a Canada of over 40 million people, one in four of us is a temporary or permanent resident, or was born abroad. This proportion of newcomers is the highest since Confederation, beating the previous record of 22.3 percent set in 1921. By comparison, the immigrant share of the U.S. population is today about 14 percent.

So what is driving these trends? Given that in recent decades immigration has been virtually the sole driver of Canada’s population growth, what overarching federal and provincial policy goals and real-world pressures are behind this recent surge?

Every year Canada’s minister of immigration, refugees, and citizenship tables what is called a “levels plan” in the House of Commons. This is a set of targets for how many permanent residents and refugees should be admitted to Canada in a given year, with projections for the two following years.

Under Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), as adopted in 2001 and amended and updated regularly by successive governments ever since, the federal government must consult with its provincial counterparts on three issues: the number of permanent residents to be admitted in a given year; their “distribution in Canada taking into account regional economic and demographic requirements”; and what we call settlement issues, namely “the measures to be undertaken to facilitate their integration into Canadian society.”

In concrete terms, this means federal and provincial officials are in touch constantly, with the minister meeting his or her provincial and territorial counterparts regularly, as well as many other groups with an abiding interest in immigration.

The minister also has the option to consult provinces on policies and programmes. For instance, how do we get more digital artists, welders, hairdressers, workers for fish or meat-packing plants, or harvesters in the autumn when Canadians do not fill the jobs? Quebec implements its own immigration programmes, which have become more restrictive in recent years, but consults the federal government on its own levels’ plan: every Quebec immigrant still receives a Canadian visa. All other provinces also have their own programmes—including the Provincial Nominee Programme and Atlantic Immigration Programme—accounting for 40 percent of economic immigrants this year, or one-quarter of our total permanent intake in 2024.

Canadian context

So far, so good. But how have these levels evolved in recent years? For the first fifteen years of this century, Canada’s annual immigration intake ranged from 220,000 to 260,000, though in 2010 we had 281,000, and in 2015, 272,000. From 2016 to 2019, between 286,000 and 341,000 newcomers arrived yearly. With the pandemic in 2020, this number fell to 184,000. From 2021 to 2024, it rose to between 405,000 and 485,000. In 2025 and 2026, our goal will be 500,000 new immigrants per year.

In other words, the number of immigrants coming to Canada in a given year is now double what it was, on average, between 2000 and 2015. 

To put this in context, we now have the highest annual immigration levelssince we admitted 400,900 newcomers in 1913 under Prime Minister Sir Robert Borden. While today’s annual immigration represents more than 1 percent of Canada’s population, in 1913 it was over 5 percent.

But what else has been happening? In just three years, the number of non-permanent residents in Canada has quietly doubled. In the third quarter of 2021, there were about 1.3 million non-permanent residents in Canada: about 560,000 workers, half a million international students, and 166,000 asylum claimants. By the first quarter of 2024, there were 2.7 million non-permanent residents—with all three categories (temporary workers, international students, and asylum seekers) each more or less doubling in only three years.  

By March of this year, there were 329,000 asylum claimants in Canada, with 187,000 refugee protection claims pending before the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB). (By way of comparison, in late 2015, at the end of my time as minister of citizenship and immigration, this backlog of pending claims was under 10,000.)

This bottleneck means ordinary refugee claims, which are supposed to be heard by law within 60 days, now take up to three years. As a result, the government has recently brought in new rules and additional resources for the IRB that are meant to speed decisions and processing of cases.

Global context

So what is driving upward trends in permanent immigration, temporary workers, international students, and asylum claims?

Let’s start with refugees and asylum seekers. In 2009, just over 40 million people had been forcibly displaced. In my time as minister, this number was rising fast due to genocide in Syria, civil breakdown in Venezuela, and other conflicts.

By June of 2023, serious wars in Ukraine, Sudan, and elsewhere in Africa, meant that over 110 million people were, as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees puts it, “forcibly displaced from their homes due to persecution, conflict, violence, human rights violations and events seriously disturbing public order.” In only fifteen years, the number of displaced people worldwide has almost tripled.

Since President Biden entered office, the number of migrants apprehended by patrols at the U.S.-Mexico border has oscillated between 100,000 and 250,000 per month, with 2.5 million encountered by U.S. border patrols in 2023.

By contrast, in 2013 U.S. Customs and Border Protection apprehended only421,000 “illegal aliens”; in 2019, they apprehended 860,000. 

In the febrile landscape of U.S. politics, this human drama on the Rio Grande makes for sensational headlines and salacious conspiracy theories. There is even hard evidence that state actors such as Russia are, via large-scale information warfare and other forms of influence, fanning the flames of this crisis in order to aid the Trump campaign and generally make U.S. politics even more grid-locked and chaotic.

This should come as no surprise since Russia, with the support of allies of convenience such as Turkey, actively “weaponised” Europe’s Syria-related migration crisis over 2014-16 in order to marginalize moderate voices and create fertile ground for xenophobic groups, though European politics have polarized less dramatically than other parts of the world, including the U.S.

Quite apart from conflicts and interference now triggering unprecedented forced displacement, including now from North Africa as well, Canada’s peer democracies have seen recent immigration figures jump. Australia saw a net inflow in 2022-23 of 518,000 people; over the same period, the U.K. had a net gain of 672,000, with 1.2 million newcomers arriving over 2022-23. Many attribute this recent spike to pent-up demand following the pandemic, when travel was restricted or postponed.

Indeed, all English- and French-speaking countries, as well as increasingly the European Union as a whole, are competing to attract more international students. Canada’s unique combination of strong institutions of higher education, work permits, and pathways to permanent residency have lifted our international student population from 330,000 in 2014 to over one million today. 

The challenge with such large net inflows of immigrants, students, workers, and asylum seekers has not been to find them work or places to study. The main pressure points are increasingly over infrastructure needs—housing, transport, health care, and other basic services—as well as affordability. How can so many newcomers find an affordable place to live in Canada without inflating rents or house prices, or creating hardships for the population at large?

While the impacts of these larger flows on the housing market are complex, it is fairly clear that large numbers of international students have driven rents upward in many cities, while new construction of single-family, multi-family, or student rental units has not nearly kept pace with demand due to the pandemic-related slowdowns, higher interest rates, and prohibitive zoning in many municipalities. 

At the same time, a growing student presence has brought enormous benefits to Canada, shaping a younger, larger, more dynamic, and innovative population, which on current trends (according to Statistics Canada) may reach 47 million by 2041.

Canada’s economic issues

In my view, the greatest overriding challenge Canada now faces—also a major disincentive for immigrants—is that for ten years incomes have stagnated. At the end of 2014, Canada’s inflation-adjusted per capita GDPwas $58,162; by the third quarter of 2023, it was $58,111—a loss of $51 over nine years.

In comparative terms, Canada’s poor performance is even more striking: for two years (2011 and 2012), Canada’s per capita nominal GDP was higher than the U.S.: according to IMF figures, in 2012 a Canadian earned USD $52,745 per year, while an American earned USD $51,737 per year.

Now fast forward to this year, when the IMF projects our nominal per capita GDP to be USD $54,866 compared to $85,373 for the U.S.—meaning that after twelve years the average American earns 56 percent more, while Canadian incomes have stood still.

The greatest overriding challenge Canada now faces is that for ten years incomes have stagnated.”

To add insult to injury, other advanced, high-income OECD economies where per capita GDP was lower than in Canada in 2012—such as Belgium, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Israel, and the Netherlands—now have higher per capita GDP.

What has created this growing discrepancy? This is a much longer story. The short answer is that business investment, productivity and the scale and value of our exports have, to put it mildly, not kept pace with the U.S. or many other peer economies over the past decade.

In a very short time, we have gone from being a country that was praised for low debt levels, a competitive tax system, innovative firms, prosperous cities, an educated workforce, and leadership on issues from energy to immigration to one that is considered to be heavily indebted, less affluent, less attractive to investors and falling behind—to the point where a leading Financial Times columnist has branded us the leading “breakdown nation.”

Immigration cannot solve these problems. Indeed, if such trends continue, the most qualified immigrants are unlikely to choose Canada. Moreover, the combination of record newcomer arrivals and stagnant incomes is souring Canadians themselves: after supporting immigration for many years by two to one, recent polls show disaffection growing, with Canadians now closer to evenly divided.

Immigration and the future of Canada

The bottom line is that immigrants, students, and workers chose Canada over centuries because we sustained high levels of growth and high standards of living. Canada’s declining affluence over the past decade undermines this pull factor—and is thus a major threat to our future ability to welcome newcomers.

By introducing caps both for international students and temporary residents as a whole—for the first time ever in Canada—our current government appears to agree that runaway inflows are unsustainable, particularly amid the slow expansion of our housing stock and lacklustre economic performance generally.

The most obvious areas for focused attention are asylum seekers, where the current backlog needs to be drastically reduced to ensure hearings are once again held within 60 days. This will allow Canada to sustain higher levels of refugee resettlement, which under our latest levels’ plan is now slated to decline slightly in 2025 and 2026.

Canada could easily have resettled 100,000 Syrian refugees since 2014 and 100,000 Afghans since 2021. After all, these are conflicts where people put their lives on the line for democracy, free speech, the rule of law, and women’s rights, often with Canadian support, but now face persecution in its most horrendous forms. Instead, we have so far resettled only 43,000 Afghans and 44,620 Syrians. This is a far cry from what Canada did for 120,000 Vietnamese refugees, otherwise adrift in small boats, when we welcomed them en masse starting in 1979.

Canada’s citizenship, immigration, study, and refugee programmes give our country a vital lifeline and a crucial advantage. But we cannot afford to be complacent. To meet the expectations of a next generation of newcomers, we need to become once again a leading destination for business investment and commercial success—a country where new firms, innovative products, and emerging sectors take root, find growing markets, and drive a new era of prosperity.

Chris Alexander was Canada’s Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2013-15) and MP for Ajax-Pickering (2011-15). He is a distinguished fellow of the Macdonald-Laurier Institute and the Canadian international Council.

Source: Chris Alexander: I am a former immigration minister. Unsustainable population increases won’t solve Canada’s underlying issues

War-displaced Ukrainians call on Ottawa for a simplified pathway to permanent residency

Hard not to see this coming given the ongoing situation in Ukraine:

Ukrainians living in Canada who fled from war are urging the federal government to create a streamlined pathway to permanent residency, saying that they do not qualify for many of the existing programs.

Those programs include ones tied to jobs and education, humanitarian considerations and the presence of family in Canada – but all have caveats that make it a difficult fit for many.

In March, 2022, Canada put into place the Canada-Ukraine authorization for emergency travel program (CUAET), which allowed Ukrainians to temporarily come to Canada. Over the course of two years, 286,000 people arrived through the program, but it officially ended on March 31, leaving Ukrainians who fled the war, and whose homes have been destroyed, with no way of staying…

Source: War-displaced Ukrainians call on Ottawa for a simplified pathway to permanent residency

Immigrant workers say future in limbo as government ranking system scores soar

Consequences of a failed immigration system that encouraged such hopes and education institutions that catered to international students seeking pathways to permanent residency through often lower skilled business programs. Another disconnect.

And in general, a rise in the express entry cut-off is a sign that the program is working to select more qualified immigrants under the “general” category:

Kanika Maheshwari moved to Brampton from India in 2020 to study business management. Her dream, she says, was to open a jewelry business one day.

Since graduating, she has been working with a logistics company as a sales executive. The 29-year-old has built a life in Canada with her husband, who works as a trader — both are saving to open her jewelry store.

But Maheshwari says her dream is now at risk because her Canadian work permit expires in August, and she hasn’t heard back about her permanent residency (PR) application since she applied last year, due to Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) draws which have been consistently way higher than her score.

One immigration consultant says that is because a record number of people are applying for a PR with higher scores, having collected more points through lengthy and costly application processes that come with no guarantee of success.

Canada accepted a record high of 430,000 PR applications in 2022.

“It feels like I’m going straight and there will be a well where I will fall down,” Maheshwari says.

CRS is a ranking system used by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to score immigrants applying for a permanent residency, using factors like age, level of education, English proficiency and work experience. Every two weeks, IRCC draws a CRS rank and applicants with that score or higher are invited to submit documents to receive a PR card.

All the draws since January this year for the general category have averaged over 540, according to IRCC’s website.

“That’s terribly high. It’s impossible to meet, and it’s really rare,” says Manan Gupta, a Brampton immigration consultant.

Most people with a post-graduate work permit (PGWP) — lasting a maximum of three years — don’t meet the current threshold, Gupta says.

That high score comes at a time when Immigration Minister Marc Miller says permits expiring after 2023 will not be extended, as the ministry decided to end the temporary extension program introduced during the pandemic in 2020 to retain students as workers. Miller made the announcement in December.

Gupta says he’s worried that will lead to hundreds of thousands of workers exiting the country.

“If these temporary foreign workers suddenly exit the labour market, we don’t have people to fill in the same job,” he says.

Canada had 286,000 PGWP holders in 2022 — a similar number of those work permits have been issued annually since 2019 — with over half of them intending to work in Ontario, according to IRCC data.

Few categories prioritized

There have been a slew of changes to immigration policy since Miller’s appointment in July last year. One of them was to maintain the target number of new permanent residents in the country at nearly 500,000 until 2026.

However, there are six priority categories to fill labour shortages: workers in STEM, agriculture, health care, transportation, trade and French speakers.

But Canada’s recruitment of international students was not aligned with its labour shortages, as it welcomed nearly 800,000 students in business programs, compared with 113,000 students in health care and 36,000 students in trades between 2018 and 2023, according to a CBC News analysis of federal data.

“For someone who has given five to six years of their prime youth to Canada, now they are being told you have to go back home and start fresh. Canada is closing doors on them,” Gupta says.

“You don’t know what future lies there. It is choosing between a rock and a hard place.”

‘Band-Aid approach’ needs to stop: consultant

Maheshwari, who lost her mother two years ago, says she provides financial support for her family back home. Her husband is on a spousal permit, which means if she leaves, he also has to return to India.

“Because of the anxiety I can’t sleep the whole night. It’s a huge lot of hell,” she says.

With only three months before her visa expires, learning French or switching professions is not an option, she says.

The couple is working overtime to make ends meet and pay some $30,000 for a lawyer who can advise them through their next possible options.

Gupta says he’s seeing an increasing number of people spending tens of thousands of dollars to bump their score, by hiring immigration consultants or lawyers, to become eligible for different PR streams like Provincial Nomination Program or by completing a Labour Market Impact Assessment.

New data obtained by CBC News show that Canada’s recruitment of international students failed to match the job market. Colleges and universities brought in far more foreign students to business programs than in-demand fields like healthcare or the trades. CBC’s senior reporter at Queen’s Park Mike Crawley has the story.

“If I have to go back; what I have done in four years — made my career, spent a lot of money — will just be a waste, all lost. Not just for me, but for an entire family whom I’m supporting,” Maheshwari says.

While she supports IRCC’s adjustments to immigration programs, she says the country is doing little to retain working immigrants.

Gupta says if the government wants to have skilled workers, it needs to focus on shutting down programs which continue to attract students but do not fill the acute labour shortages.

“The trust is kind of up in the air right now, because every other week there is a new policy being announced. Every other week there is a Band-Aid approach by the government. That approach needs to come to a full stop,” he says.

Source: Immigrant workers say future in limbo as government ranking system scores soar

Some illegal border crossers receive $224 in food and accommodation per day while awaiting processing

Silly comparison between pension income, for those who largely have a home and are settled, and asylum claimants who are not. Legitimate to question the government’s handling of asylum claimants and immigration in general as many do but need to do so intelligently rather than just to stoke outrage. And of course, these are irregular arrivals in legal parlance, not illegal ones:

As the number of Canada’s refugee claimants hits new highs, a Conservative MP has revealed that Ottawa budgets about $224 per day to feed and house some foreigners who claim asylum after illegally entering the country.

Last week, Conservative MP Lianne Rood uploaded documents to social media showing the government’s answer to her question about what “goods and services” are provided to foreigners who have claimed asylum in Canada — but have not yet had their applications reviewed by immigration authorities.

The average accommodation cost is “$140 per night per room,” and the average cost for meals is “$84 per day per claimant” — for a total of $224 per claimant, per day.

And the per diem cost may go even higher once factoring in the other “essential items” provided for free to claimants, including “toiletries, medicines, diapers.”

“Claimants in IRCC operated hotels, regardless of how they entered Canada, are provided with accommodations and meals once they are relocated,” read the official answer to Rood, signed by Paul Chiang, parliamentary secretary to the minister of diversity and inclusion.

“The NDP-Liberal government is giving TEN TIMES the benefits to illegal border jumpers than it is giving to help Canadian seniors! DISGRACEFUL!” wrote Rood in an accompanying caption to a May 7 post on X uploading the document.

As of the most recent figures by the IRCC, there are 156,032 pending asylum claims before the agency — although not all of them are in Canada and living within an IRCC hotel….

Source: Some illegal border crossers receive $224 in food and accommodation per day while awaiting processing

Saunders: Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda scheme is a global lesson in policy stupidity

Valid critique, and not helping the Conservatives much in the polls:

…Mr. Sunak’s scheme is faring even worse. Without having managed to deport a single migrant, his government has already paid $412-million to the government of Rwandan president Paul Kagame, who has an appalling human-rights record. Britain’s National Audit Office recently estimated that it will cost more than $900-million to deport the first 300 people – more than $3-million per migrant – though it seems unlikely that as many as 300 will ever be deported.

This vast cost, extraordinary inefficiency, policy pointlessness, unnecessary cruelty and general stupidity could all have been avoided if Mr. Sunak just paid attention to the very rational decision-making processes that guide those migrants. As experts have repeatedly pointed out, Channel crossings would all but disappear if it were easily possible to apply for British humanitarian and labour visas and family-reunification admissions en route, in Europe and elsewhere, creating safe legal paths for applicants.

That would increase his country’s refugee intake by a small, manageable margin (and would require some old-style deportations of those rejected), but it would all but end deadly illegal migration and its political consequences, at far lower cost. This would allow a politician to say “I ended this terrible problem” – something no number of flights to the middle of Africa will accomplish.

Source: Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda scheme is a global lesson in policy stupidity

One way to decrease temporary residents is to make them permanent, ministers suggest

Still boils down to the overall numbers, both temporary and permanent:

…Several ministers warned the new policy would create added demand for their provincial immigration programs as temporary residents apply to stay in the country. They pitched expanding their provincial programs as a win-win solution to keep people in Canada permanently.

“The fact people are already here, their impact on affordability has already been baked in, so it’s smart,” Miller said.

“But it doesn’t mean by extension that everyone’s entitled to stay here or be here in Canada.”

Ottawa can also do more to seek people who are already in Canada when it comes to federal permanent residency programs, he said….

Source: One way to decrease temporary residents is to make them permanent, ministers suggest

Also:

Talks about reducing the number of temporary foreign residents in Canada have kicked off between the federal government and provinces, with the Immigration Minister Marc Miller acknowledging that there needs to be better co-ordination to shrink numbers across Canada.

The Forum of Ministers Responsible for Immigration (FMRI) met in Montreal on Friday, where Mr. Miller asked his provincial and territorial counterparts to provide figures to show where there is a need to bring in more foreign workers, as he took the first step to reducing numbers.

There are now about 2.5 million temporary residents, a number that includes asylum seekers, international students and people here on work permits. The government plans to reduce the proportion of temporary residents in the population from 6.2 per cent to 5 per cent over the next three years. That would decrease the temporary resident population by about 19 per cent….

Source: Ottawa holds first talks with provinces about reducing temporary foreign resident numbers

Douglas: Cash Cows And Scapegoats: The Plight Of International Students

Indeed, a nuanced and balanced account of the issues and responsibilities, along with the honesty to state no easy answers:

“We will have to be nuanced in our response.” I wrote to my Board of Directors, as a follow up to their discussion on the almost daily announcements of changes to the International Students Program from the federal Minister of Immigration. But after hitting send, I wondered how do you nuance the lives of individuals that are being impacted by these changes? 

In the last year or so, Canada’s housing crisis has unfairly landed on the shoulders of International Students, here in Ontario and across the country. In some quarters, the increasing cost of living, the damped down wages and rising youth unemployment numbers, all laid at their blameless feet. Some ‘charities’ in the Greater Toronto Area has even gone as far as barring them from accessing food to feed their hungry stomachs. 

Students – young people courageous enough to cross oceans in search of education and yes, hopefully an opportunity to stay here in this land of plenty (for some) where they can build a life for themselves and those who sacrificed to afford them this opportunity. We know their stories. During the recent health pandemic, they were praised (along with migrant workers) for filling the labour gaps of food delivery, cleaners, drivers, shelf-stockers and cashiers in our grocery stores and other jobs that employers were only too glad to fill with their underpaid labour. 

But now, as rental housing prices soar in cities and towns and grocery barons are allowed to gouge us as consumers with impunity, we lay the blame at their feet. We do not ask, why were universities and especially community colleges (including the private ones) allowed to significantly increased enrollment of international students without providing affordable dormitories or other housing for them? Why didn’t provinces, who bankrolled the costs of post-secondary education on the backs of international students, ensure that enough affordable rental units were being built to accommodate the growth in population? What about the federal government who exponentially increased the number of student visas issued each year- tripling the number in the last decade or so – did they stop to think about infrastructure as they responded to provinces and educational institutions insatiable appetite for international student dollars? 

The vitriol in the comments sections of newspaper covering the Immigration Minister’s announcement is unbelievable at times- the xenophobia, the racism, the misinformation, all forming a perfect storm of hate towards this very heterogenous group of people. 

But there are issues here that must be addressed, I remind myself. Are the changes the Minister has made, all wrong? Of course not. Students are here to study, but must also work to support their daily needs. The change back to twenty-four hours (three eight hour shifts per week) during the school year and uncapped number of hours during vacation or school break seems reasonable to me. The increase in funds they must have available on annual basis was more than doubled. Some increase surely was required, but more than doubling? On top of the astronomical tuition fees? Maybe not so reasonable. 

The significant reduction in the number of visas issued per province and the Ontario government’s decision to ensure that the vast majority of these visas go to publicly funded (and not private colleges) tertiary education institutions- absolutely the right decision. 

And what about the unintended consequences? Who or what else is impacted by these changes? During our regional meetings with member agencies last month, we heard about the negative fall out for smaller and rural communities. Especially northern Ontario. International students are an important bread and butter line for those communities. There will be much negative fall out there. 

On the other hand, we are hoping that these drastic changes would mean a lessening of exploitation of students not yet here – from unscrupulous recruiters peddling false dreams. Landlords who invested in housing, driving up housing costs and fleecing these unfortunate students, who at times were reduced to renting time in a bed- so crowded were some of these spaces. Or the employers who steal the labour of students refusing to pay them for the actual time they have worked. 

There are no easy answers here. I still remember the stories from our community health centres who speak of the pain of having to inform families of the suicide of their child (at least 91 international students from India reportedly died in Canada in the past five years). 

For the students already here and who are navigating these changes, we call for their institutions to step up to ensure that they have adequate shelter and access to basic needs. We call on the federal government to leverage their existing funded settlement services programs so that these students have the supports they require to make their way through their studies and eventual success as permanent residents of our communities. 

A nuanced response? Maybe not. But certainly, the reality at this moment. More to come on this. 

Source: Cash Cows And Scapegoats: The Plight Of International Students

Minister said ‘hundreds’ of Canadians might use Gaza visa. More than 7,500 applied.

Not an easy environment in which to make accurate estimates but still striking:

More than 7,500 Canadians signed up in the first three months of the year to get family out of Gaza through a federal visa pathway that lawyers have described as onerous, chaotic and nearly impossible to complete….

…The data show Canadians filed 7,549 initial applications, or statutory declarations, to obtain temporary visas for their family members from the day the program opened on Jan. 9 through April 1.

When Immigration Minister Marc Miller announced his department’s plans to launch the family reunification program in December, he told a news conference he expected the number of people who might benefit would be “in the hundreds.”

From those 7,549 declarations filed, just 179 visas had been issued as of April 29, according to a spokesperson for the Department of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada….

Source: Minister said ‘hundreds’ of Canadians might use Gaza visa. More than 7,500 applied.

Canada’s immigration points system is flawed, a new report says. Here’s how it proposes to fix it

More advocacy on need to focus on productivity:

Canada should revamp its immigration points system to better select those with the skills to boost productivity, a new report says, even if the changes might favour applicants from some countries.

Immigration has long been premised on newcomers being the engine of economic growth and prosperity, said the study by the Business Council of Alberta. But “cracks” have emerged with Canada’s recent population surge, which has magnified challenges in housing and health care.   

“That’s always been the promise of immigration over the years, but it hasn’t delivered recently,” said Mike Holden, the council’s chief economist and vice-president of policy.

“We need to make sure we’re selecting the right immigrants because otherwise that national consensus and that perception of immigration is going to continue to fall.”

Prompted by concerns over Canada’s rising immigration intake amid a stagnant economy, researchers looked at how the country selects skilled immigrants and released the report on Wednesday. The council recommends “a prosperity-driven immigration system” to ensure it delivers on its promise and grows Canada’s per-capita gross domestic product.

Although the Canadian economy is getting bigger as a result of a surging population, primarily driven by immigration, the report said productivity — an indicator of living standards — has been weak for decades and, more recently, has turned negative.

“We’re not getting wealthier. There are just more of us around,” said the 40-page study, titled “Delivering the Promise.”

“Future prosperity requires that the Canadian economy generate more value, not just because there are more of us, but because each one of us is better off.”

The business council’s own survey of Canadians released this month found less than half of the 2,300 respondents think immigration is good for Canada’s economy and standing in the world, society and prosperity; only 28 per cent believe the current approach is effective in its selection and support of immigrants…..

Source: Canada’s immigration points system is flawed, a new report says. Here’s how it proposes to fix it