Ottawa not sufficiently addressing flood of access requests for immigration records, watchdog says

Biting and justified comments:

…While she commends IRCC and CBSA’s efforts to increase the efficiency of their access teams, those measures aren’t enough to stem the tide, and amount to “treating the symptoms” instead of “curing the illness,” Ms. Maynard says in the report.

“It’s frustrating, because I think they do know how to fix it,” Ms. Maynard said in an interview. IRCC’s operations division, responsible for processing immigration applications, “are not doing their part in fixing the root cause,” she said.

“Three years ago, we told them, ‘You have to find a different way to provide that information. You have to fix your system, you have to increase the amount of information that’s provided to new applicants.’ They said they would do it. But, as you can see in the report, it’s now three years later and it still hasn’t been fixed.”…

Source: Ottawa not sufficiently addressing flood of access requests for immigration records, watchdog says

Refugees ecstatic over golden opportunity to live in Canada

Of note. The purists miss the point:

…Dana Wagner, co-founder of TalentLift, a non-profit recruitment company that matches refugees with employers, said the program gives refugees, welcomed to Canada as skilled employees, a sense of self-worth.

Refugees who have endured extreme hardship also “have remarkable drive and resilience,” she said. But most employers are unaware that the pathway to Canada exists.

Unlike claims for asylum from people fleeing persecution in their home country, the pilot program links refugee resettlement with economic immigration.

It’s a program that raises concerns for Yvonne Su, assistant professor in interdisciplinary refugee and diaspora studies at York University. She warned against creating categories of refugees that are rooted in their economic value, rather than just welcoming people because they are in danger and deserve help.

“If a program like this becomes very popular then we will have refugees that are seen as ‘ideal refugees’ who have a well-founded fear of persecution and have huge economic potential so they are more deserving of a faster visa-immigration process,” she said…

Source: Refugees ecstatic over golden opportunity to live in Canada

Setting the record straight on refugee claims by international students

Good analysis of the data and placing it in perspective.

However, makes the mistake of only focussing on the overall numbers and not considering growth rates. For example, an increase of three percent to eight percent over the last 5 years is an increase of about 170 percent, a valid concern particularly if the trend continues given the overburdened refugee determination system (and higher than the overall increase of 150 percent).

While “only one percent” of international students making claims is a small number, given the large number of international students again that understates the issue.

Of course, the media and much commentary focuses on these issues rather than for example, declining naturalization rates. But that’s the reality, and IRCC and Ministers have contributed to that given the policies that got us to this place.

But valid, of course, to assess against low acceptance rates.:

The Canadian government placed a cap on the number of study permits granted to international students earlier this year. The government stated that a rapid increase in the number of international students was putting added “pressure on housing, health care and other services.”

In addition, Immigration Minister Marc Miller criticized some private colleges for the increasing number of refugee claims from their international students, saying the trend was “alarming” and “totally unacceptable.”

Similarly, a recent article in the Globe and Mail stated refugee claims by international students increased by 646 per cent from 2018 to 2023, and raised concerns about students exploiting Canada’s immigration system.

However, focusing on refugee claims, and not refugee claim approvals, obscures the context needed to understand such a complex issue. These comments and statistics are misleading and contribute to fueling xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment.

Given the central place of immigration in heated political debates in Canada, it’s crucial to unpack these claims and understand the implications of perpetuating unfounded criticism of Canada’s refugee and immigration system.

Growing number of displaced people

Amid the war in Ukraine, violence in Haiti and enduring humanitarian crises in Afghanistan, Syria, Somalia, Venezuela, Sudan and elsewhere, over 114 million people have been displaced worldwide. Accordingly, refugee claims have increased around the world from displaced people; many of whom face the risk of being forcibly returned home or sent to a third country.

The number of refugee claims in Canada fluctuates over time, largely in response to global events. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic there was a notable decline in refugee claims from 58,378 in 2019 to 18,500 in 2020. However, refugee claims in Canada increased from 55,388 in 2018 to 137,947 in 2023.

While the increase in the number of international students making refugee claims is worth investigation, the impact of this increase should not be exaggerated or taken out of context. In 2018, international students made up three per cent of new refugee claims. By 2023, this figure increased to only eight per cent.

Most importantly, these numbers need to be examined as a percentage of all international students in Canada. In 2023, only one per cent of international students sought asylum.

A table showing the number of refugee claims madein canada each of the years along with those that were accepted, rejected and made by international students.
Data on the number of refugee claims made in Canada between 2018 and 2023. (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada), Author provided (no reuse)

Refugee fraud is rare

The large majority of refugee claims in Canada succeed. In recent years the number of refugee claims approved increased from 63 per cent in 2018 to 79 per cent in 2023.

During this same period, fraud in the refugee determination system has been relatively rare. When Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Board encounters a claim that is “clearly fraudulent” the Board has a legal obligation to declare that the claim is “manifestly unfounded.” This occurs only a few dozen times per year.

The result is that most refugee claimants in Canada are determined to have a well-founded fear of being sent back home. As such, most will obtain permanent residence in Canada and be on the path to citizenship.

Dangers of alarmist rhetoric

Statistics Canada data indicate that more than 15 per cent of immigrants are deciding to leave Canada within 20 years of immigrating. Meanwhile less than half of permanent residents are deciding to become citizens. There is also a similar trend among international students. More and more international students are contemplating leaving Canada amid declining affordability and diminishing job prospects.

However, these realities are often not as interesting or enraging as the alarmist rhetoric adopted by politicians and media. The fact that fraud is rare in Canada’s refugee system doesn’t sell newspapers or win votes. Declining citizenship rates are not as compelling as tales of international students exploiting loopholes to stay in Canada.

This kind of rhetoric also overlooks the fact that many students do come from countries experiencing political instability and violence, making their refugee claims deserving of consideration. In the face of migration controls and the absence of safe and legal channels, coming to Canada as a student and seeking refuge may be the only viable option for some people seeking protection from persecution.

With that in mind, politicians and media must be careful regarding how they discuss refugee claimants. It is misleading to imply that it is “alarming” and “unacceptable” for someone to make a refugee claim simply because they are an international student. Seeking asylum is a right they have under both international and Canadian law.

Such rhetoric fosters a climate of suspicion and distrust towards newcomers, fueling xenophobia and hostility towards those in need of protection. Instead, politicians, media and the public in general, should recognize that Canada has processes that are well-placed to examine these claims. These include one of the world’s most well-regarded refugee determination systems that assesses each claim on its merits.

When politicians engage in rhetoric that plays into anxieties about migration, the media must act as an informed voice that scrutinizes their comments, instead of amplifying reactionary claims about fraud and the spectre of bogus refugees.

Source: Setting the record straight on refugee claims by international students

Global Housing Shortages Are Crushing Immigration-Fueled Growth

Of note, Canada not alone (but doesn’t excuse the policy and program mistakes….). Money quote: “Canada’s experience shows there’s a limit to immigration-fueled growth:”

For decades, the rapid inflow of migrants helped countries including Canada, Australia and the UK stave off the demographic drag from aging populations and falling birth rates. That’s now breaking down as a surge of arrivals since borders reopened after the pandemic runs headlong into a chronic shortage of homes to accommodate them.

Canada and Australia have escaped recession since their Covid contractions, but their people haven’t with deep per-capita downturns eroding standards of living. The UK’s recession last year looked mild on raw numbers but was deeper and longer when measured on a per-person basis.

All up, thirteen economies across the developed world were in per-capita recessions at the end of last year, according to exclusive analysis by Bloomberg Economics. While there are other factors — such as the shift to less-productive service jobs and the fact that new arrivals typically earn less — housing shortages and associated cost-of-living strains are a common thread.

So is the immigration-fueled economic growth model doomed? Not quite.

In Australia, for instance, the inflow of roughly one million people, or 3.7% of the population, since June 2022 helped plug a chronic shortages of workers in industries such as hospitality, aged care and agriculture. And in the UK — an economy near full employment — arrivals from Ukraine, Hong Kong and elsewhere have made up for a lack of workers after Brexit.

Skills shortages across much of the developed world mean more, not fewer, workers are needed. Indeed, the US jobs market and economy are running hotter than many thought possible as an influx of people across the southern border expands the labor pool — even as immigration shapes up as a defining issue in the November presidential election.

While the US has seen a widely-covered surge in authorized and irregular migration, the scale of the increase actually pales in comparison to Canada’s growth rate. For every 1,000 residents, the northern nation brought in 32 people last year, compared with fewer than 10 in the US.

Put another way: Over the past two years, 2.4 million people arrived in Canada, more than New Mexico’s population, yet Canada barely added enough housing for the residents of Albuquerque.

Canada’s experience shows there’s a limit to immigration-fueled growth: Once new arrivals exceed a country’s capacity to absorb them, standards of living decline even if top-line numbers are inflated. The Bank of Nova Scotia estimates a productivity-neutral rate of population growth is less than a third of what Canada saw last year, which would be more in line with the US pace.

So even as that record population growth keeps Canada’s GDP growing, life is getting tougher, especially for younger generations and for immigrants such as 29-year-old Akanksha Biswas.

Biswas arrived in Canada in the middle of 2022, just as per-capita GDP started plunging amid the start of the post-pandemic immigration boom and the Bank of Canada’s aggressive interest-rate tightening cycle.

The former Sydneysider moved to Toronto for what she believed would be a better life with a lower cost of living and greater career prospects. Instead, she faced higher rent, lower pay and limited job opportunities.

“I actually had a completely different picture in my mind about what life would be like in Toronto,” said Biswas, who works in advertising. “Prices were almost similar, but there’s a lot more competition in the job market.”

Canada’s working-age population grew by a million over the past year but the labor market only created 324,000 jobs. The upshot: The unemployment rate rose by more than a full percentage point, with young people and newcomers again the worst hit.

Biswas spends more than a third of her income on the monthly rent bill of C$2,800 ($2,050), splitting the cost with her partner. She’s dining out less and making coffee at home instead of going to the cafe. She’s also pushing back plans to have children or buy a home.

“I don’t see my future here if I want to raise a family,” she says.

While millions of Americans also face a housing affordability crisis, their real disposable income growth has stayed above the rise in home prices over much of the past two decades. Not so in Canada. The median price for homes in Toronto is now C$1.3 million, nearly three times that of Chicago, a comparable US city.

The chronic underbuilding of homes and decades of continuous rises in prices has drained funds from other parts of the economy toward housing. That lack of investment in capital — combined with firms’ focusing instead on expanding workforces due to cheaper labor costs — has driven down productivity, which the Bank of Canada says is at “emergency” levels.

Growing anxiety around the housing crunch forced Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government to scale back on its immigration ambitions, halting the increase of permanent resident targets and putting a limit on the growth of temporary residents for the first time.

Canada’s goal is now to cut the population of temporary foreign workers, international students and asylum claimants by 20%, or roughly by half a million people, over the next three years. That’s expected to slash the annual population growth rate by more than half to an average of 1% in 2025 and 2026.

Meantime, Biswas and her partner are calling it quits on their Canada experiment and moving to Melbourne, where they reckon they can afford a two-bedroom apartment for less than what they paid for a one-bedroom space in Toronto.

But life won’t be easy Down Under either as many of the same strains are playing out, with Australia facing its worst housing crisis in living memory.

Building permits for apartments and town houses are near a 12-year low and there remains a sizable backlog of construction work, largely due to a lack of skilled workers. The government has tried to plug the labor supply gap by boosting the number of migrants, only to find that’s making the problem even worse.

Just like Canada’s experience, the ballooning population is not only exacerbating housing demand, it’s also masking the underlying weakness in the economy.

GDP has expanded every quarter since a short Covid-induced recession in 2020, yet on a per-capita basis, GDP contracted for a third consecutive quarter in the final three months of 2023 — the deepest decline since the early 1990s economic slump.

In absolute terms, Australia’s per-capita GDP is now at a two-year low — a “material under-performance” versus the US and an outcome that could spur higher unemployment, according to Goldman Sachs Group Inc.

Angst about the lack of housing, soaring rents and surging home prices has prompted Anthony Albanese’s ruling Labor government to crack down on student visas.

“It has been proven over many many years that there’s a positive to Australia from a high migration intake,” said Stephen Halmarick, chief economist at the nation’s biggest lender Commonwealth Bank of Australia. “But in the very near term, you can see that it’s putting upward pressure on rents, house prices and clearly that’s a concern for many and the demand for some services is seeing sticky inflation.”

Neighboring New Zealand is grappling with a similar headache.

The government there last month made immediate changes to an employment visa program, introducing an English-language requirement and reducing the maximum continuous stay for a range of lower-skilled roles, citing “unsustainable” net migration. The changes were part of a plan to “create a smarter immigration” that is “self-funding, sustainable and better manages risk,” Immigration Minister Erica Stanford said in the statement at the time.

Calvin Jurnatan, 30, moved to Sydney from Indonesia in December to study construction design as a gateway to becoming a permanent resident. Months later, he still doesn’t have a job. One reason is that migrants face long and expensive processes to get their qualifications recognized.

Jurnatan’s failure to find a part-time role in construction comes despite the sector being high on the skills shortage list, especially after the government set an ambitious goal of building 1.2 million new homes by 2029. That target looks increasingly unachievable, industry players say.

Frustrated, Jurnatan has stopped looking for construction jobs and is instead scouting the retail sector where roles are easier to find. He’s doing some freelance photography to eke out a living and says he wouldn’t recommend Australia to his family and friends back home.

“People are struggling,” he said. “I’m struggling. It’s not cheap and everyone needs to work really, really hard here. So, when people call me and ask, ‘hey, how is living in Sydney right now?’ I tell them the truth.”

Independent think tank the Committee for Economic Development of Australia found in a recent report that the hourly wage gap between recent migrants and Australian-born workers increased between 2011 and 2021. On average, migrants who have been in Australia for 2 to 6 years earn more than 10% less than similar Australian-born workers.

“There are big costs from not making the best use of migrants’ skills,” according to CEDA’s senior economist Andrew Barker.

Over in Europe, its largest economy, Germany, also saw a per-capita recession that comes against a backdrop of rising political tensions over a large number of asylum seekers, housing shortages and a misfiring economy. Bloomberg Economics analysis shows that France, Austria and Sweden are also among those who have suffered per-capita recessions.

In Britain, too, record levels of migration have begun to weigh on the economy. A technical recession in the second half of last year saw headline GDP slip 0.4%, yet the slump was longer and deeper when adjusted for population. Per-capita GDP has contracted 1.7% since the start of 2022, falling in six out of the seven quarters and stagnating in the other.

With Britain close to full employment and over 850,000 dropping out of its workforce since the pandemic, immigration has helped employers fill widespread worker shortages, not least in the health and social care sectors.

“A very good bit of the growth that we saw through the 2010s was down to net migration,” said Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies. “In terms of the overall size of the economy, it’s been really important. What’s really hard to say is what impact the net immigration has had on the per-capita numbers.”

UK GDP has expanded 23% since the start of 2010. On a per-person basis, growth in output has been far less impressive at 12%.

Over the same period, the population has surged, growing an estimated 11%, or almost 7 million, to 69 million. The Office for National Statistics expects it to hit close to 74 million in 2036 in updated population projections that now predict faster growth. Over 90% of the increase in the population expected between 2021 and 2036 will come from migrants, it said in January.

“If we hadn’t had such high immigration, housing would be cheaper than it is at the moment, possibly quite significantly,” Johnson said. “But the converse of that is that the problem has been that we simply haven’t built enough houses, given what we know is happening to the size of the population.”

The UK’s post-Brexit immigration system aimed to stop cheap labor from Europe and prioritize high-skilled workers. However, the government allows some foreign workers easier access if they are in shortage-hit sectors.

“Those shortages really are pretty much always caused by poor paying conditions, although the employers will tell you it’s all skills,” said Alan Manning, labor market economist at the London School of Economics. “Then they start complaining about ‘we can’t afford higher wages and so we have to have migrants so we can keep our existing wages.’”

The growing pressures on housing and stretched public services are prompting a backlash among voters against Rishi Sunak’s ruling Conservative government ahead of a general election expected later this year. It has hemorrhaged support to the right-wing populist Reform UK party, which is promising “net zero immigration,” while the Tories are polling in single digits among 18- to 24-year-olds who put housing as their second-most important issue.

The opposition Labour party has promised a “blitz” of planning reforms to unlock construction, as well as restraint on immigration as it heads toward what’s widely anticipated to be a sweeping election victory.

A shortage of properties for the bigger population has sent house prices to over eight times average earnings in England and Wales, and 12 times in London. In 1997, they were 3.5 times earnings and four times, respectively. A lack of supply has also caused rental costs to rocket at a record pace in the last 12 months, worsening a cost-of-living crisis for young Britons especially.

Official figures show that 234,400 homes were added to the UK housing supply in 2022-23, well below the levels needed to meet huge demand and the 300,000-a-year target the Tories promised to reach by the mid-2020s at the last election.

“If we’re looking to grow GDP by throwing more people at it, then we need more housing,” said Peter Truscott, chief executive of FTSE 250 housebuilder Crest Nicholson.

However, UK housebuilders and the government have struggled to boost construction of new homes to the levels needed. A restrictive planning system has been used by Nimbys — “not in my back yard” — to block local developments and efforts to overhaul the system by the ruling Conservatives were scuppered by concerns of a backlash in their rural southern heartlands.

“We have a completely utterly dysfunctional planning system in the UK,” said Truscott. “Forty years in house building, it’s never been so bad, and the rate of decline in planning has been quite incredible over the last couple of years.”

While encouraged by Labour plans, he cautions that it will take two parliamentary terms to make a difference as supply chain constraints will prevent an instant “flood” of new homes.

The longer voters in the UK, Australia, Canada and similar economies see their living standards go backwards, the more their opposition to rapid immigration programs will harden. A lasting fix requires government policies, especially in housing, that convince both would-be migrants and the existing populations of the benefits of immigration-led economic growth.

Source: Global Housing Shortages Are Crushing Immigration-Fueled Growth

Fines mounting for violations in Canada’s temporary foreign worker programs

Of note. Good and revealing data analysis:

The federal government penalized nearly 200 companies last year for violating the rules of its temporary foreign worker programs, resulting in record fines for infractions such as wage theft and abuse in the workplace.

Ottawa reached 194 decisions against non-compliant employers in 2023 and handed out $2.7-million in penalties, an average of $13,800 per decision, according to a Globe and Mail analysis of figures published by the government. Some employers have also been suspended from hiring temporary labour from outside the country.

While the government reached more decisions of non-compliance in 2021, last year set a new high for fines. And 2024 is shaping up to be even worse.

So far this year, the average fine is nearly $29,000, according to data pulled by The Globe in late April. In 2019, it was roughly $3,200….

Source: Fines mounting for violations in Canada’s temporary foreign worker programs

Immigration is surging, with big economic consequences

From the Economist, with some good comparative stats:

…There is one context in which averages matter: the provision of public services. If gdp per person falls, their quality might deteriorate. For this reason, Milton Friedman once remarked that “you cannot simultaneously have free immigration and a welfare state”. The state is under pressure in much of the rich world. Roads are congested and in countries with public health care, hospital waiting lists are long. “Those are not externalities, those are direct effects of new market participants affecting supply and demand,” says Mikal Skuterud of the University of Waterloo.

The crucial question is whether new arrivals on net contribute to or drain from the public coffers. High-skilled types make enormous net fiscal contributions. But for low-skilled workers the question is harder to answer. In immigrants’ favour is the fact that, because they typically arrive as adults, they do not require public schooling, which is expensive. And they may even prop up public services directly. The largest increase in British work-visa issuance last year, of 157%, was for desperately needed health and care workers.

Potential trouble comes later. Immigrants age and retire. Social-security systems are often progressive, redistributing from rich to poor. Thus a low-earning migrant who claims a government pension—not to mention uses government-provided health care—could end up as a fiscal drag overall. They are most likely to have a positive lifetime effect on the public purse if they leave before they get old.

Quite how this shakes out depends on the country and immigrants in question. A review by America’s National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine in 2016 estimated that the 75-year fiscal impact of an immigrant with less than a high-school education, at all levels of government and excluding public goods like national defence, was a negative $115,000 in 2012 dollars. By contrast, a study by Oxford Economics in 2018 found that in Britain about one-third of migrants had left the country ten years after arrival, although it did not distinguish them by skill level.

If the fiscal impact is positive, it will not be felt unless the government invests accordingly. A windfall is no good if public services are allowed to deteriorate anyway, as in Britain, where the government is cutting taxes ahead of an election. Similarly, if regulations stop infrastructure from expanding to accommodate arrivals, migration risks provoking a backlash. Nowhere is this more obvious than in the case of housing, where supply is strictly curtailed by excessive regulation in many of the same places now experiencing a migration surge. Migrants, like natives, need places to live, which increases the imperative to build. Welcoming new arrivals means a lot more than just letting them in. 

Source: Immigration is surging, with big economic consequences

La bouée de sauvetage des travailleurs temporaires coule

Of note, regarding open work permits for Temporary Foreign Workers:

De Vancouver à Gaspé, des personnes immigrantes attendent durant des mois la réponse à leur demande de permis ouvert pour travailleurs vulnérables afin de fuir les abus qu’elles subissent. Un programme d’urgence censé offrir cette protection rapidement est bloqué, selon cinq organisations qui accompagnent les travailleurs dans de telles démarches.

Une forme de soupape pour remédier aux risques du permis lié à un seul employeur, appelé « permis fermé », le programme a été lancé en 2019 avec la promesse de traiter les demandes en cinq jours. Ce délai est d’autant plus problématique que les responsables politiques l’utilisent pour se défendre des critiques, notamment formulées par le rapporteur spécial des Nations unies sur les formes contemporaines d’esclavage.

Mais cette manière « rapide » de « régler la situation des employés vulnérables », comme l’a décrite le ministre de l’Immigration, Marc Miller, en commission parlementaire, est en panne. Sur la soixantaine de demandes que ces organisations ont soumises depuis janvier dernier, seulement cinq ont été traitées, ont-elles confirmé au Devoir. 

Sur les 1349 demandes reçues pour les trois premiers mois de l’année 2024, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada (IRCC) n’a délivré que 201 permis jusqu’à maintenant, soit nettement sous la moyenne de l’an dernier. Une trentaine de permis seulement ont été octroyés en mars. La page Web du programme a été modifiée en catimini depuis novembre 2023.

Ces réponses qui arrivent au compte-gouttes créent une « situation intenable » et « énormément de pression » sur les immigrants, dit Noémie Beauvais, organisatrice communautaire au Centre des travailleuses et travailleurs immigrants (CTI).

« Quelqu’un m’appelle en détresse quasiment chaque jour », illustre Florian Freuchet, organisateur communautaire au CTI du Bas-Saint-Laurent…

Source: La bouée de sauvetage des travailleurs temporaires coule

Un service de Québec dédié aux nouveaux arrivants rate la cible

Of note. Those in the rest of Canada shouldn’t feel to smug as they also have gaps in settlement services:

Le service Accompagnement Québec, visant à guider les nouveaux arrivants dans leurs démarches d’installation et d’intégration, rate sa cible. Alors que certains organismes d’aide aux immigrants s’interrogent sur son utilité, les plus récentes données démontrent que le service est très peu utilisé, voire carrément méconnu.

En 2023-2024, à peine plus de 12 000 personnes ont bénéficié d’une évaluation de leurs besoins par Accompagnement Québec, révèlent les plus récentes données du ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI). L’année précédente, en 2022-2023, près de 10 000 personnes immigrantes avaient eu une rencontre avec un agent du service.

Pour Stephan Reichhold, directeur de la Table de concertation des organismes au service des réfugiés et immigrants, atteindre quelques milliers de personnes sur un total de centaines de milliers d’immigrants qui arrivent ici, « c’est rien ! »

Selon lui, la centaine d’organismes d’aide aux immigrants qu’il représente et qui sont aussi financés par le MIFI pour soutenir et accompagner les immigrants en a accueilli bien plus : soit près de 100 000 personnes au cours des 12 derniers mois. « Tout le monde est d’accord pour dire qu’[Accompagnement Québec], ça ne fonctionne pas », a-t-il déclaré. « C’est une marque de commerce du gouvernement, mais [en fait], ça ne peut pas continuer. »

Parachevé en mai 2023, un sondage réalisé par le MIFI obtenu par Le Devoir révèle que 70 % des répondants affirmaient ne pas connaître Accompagnement Québec. De plus, environ la moitié des personnes interrogées indiquaient ne pas connaître les étapes à suivre pour immigrer, pour chercher un emploi ou pour faire reconnaître leurs compétences.

Qu’il soit ici ou dans son pays d’origine, un immigrant qui reçoit un certificat pour résider au Québec de manière permanente ou temporaire devrait être invité par courriel à s’inscrire à Accompagnement Québec par l’entremise de la plateforme Arrima. Il sera par la suite contacté par un agent d’aide à l’intégration qui lui concoctera un plan individualisé en fonction de ses besoins (francisation, emploi, etc.) et le dirigera vers un organisme sur le terrain.

Un service qui fait doublon

À l’été 2019, le ministre de l’Immigration d’alors, Simon Jolin-Barrette, avait bonifié le service Accompagnement Québec en ouvrant plus de bureaux régionaux et en augmentant l’effectif en région. Il réagissait ainsi aux critiques dans le rapport de la vérificatrice générale, qui reprochait au gouvernement de ne pas connaître les besoins réels des immigrants et d’échouer à les orienter vers les bons services.

Depuis la réforme, Accompagnement Québec a plus spécifiquement comme mission d’inciter les immigrants à s’installer en région et d’aider les employeurs à recruter ces derniers. Mais, sur le terrain, certains organismes se questionnent sur le rôle que joue le service.

À l’organisme Groupe Inclusia, au Saguenay, très peu d’immigrants — environ 5 % — ont été envoyés par Accompagnement Québec. « La grande majorité des gens qui viennent à nous, c’est grâce au bouche à oreille ou à des employeurs qui recrutent à l’international », explique la coordonnatrice, Sylvie Pedneault. Même si plusieurs rencontres ont lieu par année avec les fonctionnaires de Québec et les organismes de la région afin d’arrimer leur travail, elle constate qu’il y a quand même « des doublons ». « Nous, les organismes d’accueil, on a toujours fait des plans d’intégration pour diriger la personne immigrante vers les ressources appropriées. Mais c’est le rôle qu’Accompagnement Québec a pris », dit-elle. « Concrètement, ce que ce service fait de plus, je ne le sais pas. »

Le fait que les immigrants doivent eux-mêmes s’inscrire aux services d’Accompagnement Québec dans Arrima ajoute une certaine « lourdeur » pour eux, croit Mme Pedneault. « C’est comme une étape qui se rajoute dans leur parcours, alors qu’ils ont déjà un paquet d’autres choses à faire. Ce n’est pas optimal. » Cette lourdeur s’étend aussi aux organismes vers qui les immigrants sont de toute manière redirigés et qui ont la charge de les accompagner dans les méandres d’Arrima.

Pour plus d’efficacité, Sylvie Pedneault suggère qu’Accompagnement Québec s’occupe des personnes qui ne tombent pas dans les critères de financement de son organisme, comme les demandeurs d’asile, par exemple.

Des dirigeants d’un centre de francisation en région se sont également montrés très critiques à l’endroit de ce service gouvernemental. « C’est quoi, leur mission ? On ne le sait pas », a indiqué au Devoir l’un de ces dirigeants, qui demeure anonyme pour ne pas nuire à ses relations avec le MIFI. Il dit avoir contacté à maintes reprises les agents pour mieux connaître leurs services et savoir comment conseiller des immigrants qui ont des besoins excédant la francisation… en vain. « On dirait que personne ne travaille là. On ne sait pas ce qu’ils font. C’est très flou », avance cette personne. « Les organismes d’aide aux immigrants, on voit leurs actions sur le terrain, mais Accompagnement Québec… on ne sait pas trop. »

Peu d’accueils à l’aéroport

À l’aéroport de Montréal, le service d’accueil pour immigrants, notamment censé les diriger vers Accompagnement Québec, est un échec. Selon le rapport annuel de gestion de 2022-2023, à peine 9 % des immigrants adultes ayant transité par ce comptoir d’accueil se sont véritablement inscrits à Accompagnement Québec, ce qui rate complètement la cible de 75 % qui avait été fixée.

Selon le MIFI, la non-atteinte de l’objectif s’explique par le fait que les immigrants sont, depuis le printemps 2021, invités à s’inscrire en ligne directement sur la plateforme Arrima. Depuis 2020, le nombre de personnes accueillies par le service à l’aéroport est en chute libre, selon des données obtenues par la Loi sur l’accès à l’information. Les travailleurs étrangers temporaires, qui sont à peine quelques dizaines à être passés par ce comptoir, ne sont pas reçus « systématiquement » par le service d’accueil de l’aéroport. « Une réflexion plus large est en cours », lit-on dans le rapport.

Source: Un service de Québec dédié aux nouveaux arrivants rate la cible

Jen Gerson: The Conservative case for the CBC

Comments on immigrant communities and their media consumption from country of origin sources as a reason to revitalize the CBC. Her reform suggestions have merit:

It was at the recent Canada Strong and Free Network conference — formerly known by the much less awkward title the “Manning Centre” conference — in which I overheard one of those conversations that is so often considered taboo in tête-à-têtes that are more Liberal or NDP-adjacent. It was a discussion on immigration, and specifically, on the obstacles to cultural integration that rapid immigration can sometimes entail. 

The speaker noted with some dismay the number of satellite TV dishes affixed to the balconies of apartments in urban areas that tend to become the first homes of new arrivals to the country. With the advent of affordable global satellite television, those who had relocated to Canada could keep abreast of news at home, in the languages they were most comfortable with. This influx included not only the plethora of private television networks, but also their public counterparts: RT, IRA, CCTV — virtually every country in the world invests in some content offering, and makes that offering widely available both domestically and abroad. 

In liberal democracies, public broadcasting tends to value at least a degree of journalistic independence. In authoritarian nations, well, not so much. But they broadcast just the same. 

Of course there’s nothing inherently wrong with seeking news and entertainment from one’s homeland. Nothing could be more natural than the desire to seek out the familiar, especially while adapting to a new culture and a new home. My fellow conversationalist was not unsympathetic to that desire, yet those satellite dishes concerned him, nonetheless. Canada is welcoming a nearly unprecedented number of new immigrants at the same moment in which its sense of itself as a nation has, arguably, never been weaker. Or, as Justin Trudeau himself once put it “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.” 

If that’s so, how do we expect this influx of new Canadians to cohere to the vacant identity of their adopted homeland? Is the move to Canada a thing that exists in the body only; the spirit to remain entrenched in the values, language, news and entertainment of the citizen’s soul? His homeland? How does a nation as widely dispersed and malleable as ours, one that welcomes people from around the world, create some kind of pan-Canadian values and identity? How the hell do we actually work together?  

I don’t have an easy answer to that question, but I did note at the time that this individual had unwittingly articulated the best Conservative case for the CBC. 

And he had done it in a place where promises to “defund the CBC” generated unabashed whoops of glee. 

“Perhaps don’t defund the CBC” is a contrarian position in my circles, of late. Conservatives hate this institution — and I don’t use the word “hate” lightly. It may be too late to make an appeal for reform, caution or reason. Blood is high. 

They are angry that the CBC sued the Conservative party — and only the Conservative party — for a fair use of news material in political advertising. They are angry at an organization that seems to be ideologically driven to, and hell bent on, closing the Overton window on a range of policy positions and values that many of them care about. They resent being forced to pay for a public broadcaster that they feel has alienated them. 

While I think some of these positions are clouded by the poor judgment that inevitably accompanies anger, many of these grievances are valid. And, privately, I know at least some employees in the CBC will admit to it. The CBC is not what it ought to have been in recent years, and calls for it to be defunded are a predictable and inevitable consequence of adopting a set of cultural values that are openly at odds with a plurality of the taxpayers that fund it. 

The organization still does necessary work, and employs many hundreds of diligent and grounded journalists. However, at least some sections of the organization do come off as high handed and patronizing, as if the outlet sees its role as imposing a set of Canadian Values onto a benighted populace eager for the Call On High of the Annex, rather than as an institution whose fundamental role is to serve those very masses. 

Take the carbon tax, MAID, government spending, contentious protests, gender identity, sex work, safe supply, diversity and inclusion, homelessness, and crime — these are some of the most pressing and contentious issues facing Canadians today. These are complicated issues, often morally fraught, and offer rich opportunities for real debate, reporting, and investigation. I don’t think that’s what we’re getting from the CBC right now. That is a problem, and an abrogation of the CBC’s duty to inform and serve a geographically and ideologically diverse public. Hence the anger. 

However, I cannot pin this failure solely on the CBC. 

If our public broadcaster is not producing the kind of journalism that we want, need and expect, then the negligence lies also within ourselves. We taxpayers, political leaders, and citizens have failed to communicate to the CBC what we expect. And weak management, poorly guided by a vague mandate, has been unable to establish a clear vision of what the outlet needs to prioritize — and, more crucially, what it must deprioritize. 

What I see when I look at the CBC is a Byzantine hall, ruled by competing fiefdoms, and dug five stories deep into the forbidding earth. What I see is mandate creep.

Is there anyone in senior management who can seriously blank-face defend CBC Gem? Or CBC Comedy? Why is the CBC replicating widely available language learning apps with their own version, Mauril? Or how about its vertical devoted to first-person opinion pieces? In an era of Substack and Medium and X, is there market failure that a public broadcaster really needs to address, here? A real lack of opportunity to write articles like: After coming out as trans, my return to sex work has been unexpectedly rewarding.

I could go on, but you get the point. Is there anyone, anywhere, within the CBC hierarchy who can say: “No”? 

All of these efforts reek of a senior management that so lacks a sense of self direction that it instead tries to be everything to everybody, and then blames its lack of adequate funding when it fails to do anything particularly well. And that’s before we get into the management bonuses, and last minute budget top ups. This isn’t sustainable. And it’s why I don’t find arguments for increasing funding right now compelling — absent a clear mandate and strong internal management, the government could double or even triple the CBC’s funding and not create anything better; all we’d get is an even more sprawling bureaucracy trying to churn out more #content in categories that are already amply if not ably served by the private sector. 

So, yeah, I understand the emotion, here. I understand how gratifying it is for Conservatives who squeal with delight when Pierre Poilievre screams “defund the CBC.” Whatever that means. 

All I’d ask is for such people to consider that this is, indeed, an emotional response generated by feelings of grievance and alienation. It’s not a rational policy position. Shut down the CBC tomorrow, and Canada is not suddenly going to host 1,000 ideologically grounded private media organizations. That’s a fantasy, totally detached from a solid understanding of the modern media market. The only problem defunding the CBC solves is the continued public funding of the CBC. 

Local news — real reporting that involves sending actual people to write about quotidian court cases and city hall meetings week after week — is a very hard business case in an environment that generates revenue by virality and clicks. There are going to be some successes in this sphere, but not enough to replicate a tenth of even the current skeletal coverage. 

Privatizing the CBC will do nothing other than to create another failing private media outlet. And defunding or shuttering it outright is only going to eliminate what’s left of an already battered local news system at the very moment that the private media sector is heading into its senescence. This is going to contribute to already expansive news deserts, with citizens turning to things like Facebook groups and closed group chats in order to share local knowledge. 

Some of these quasi-outlets will be fine, and even useful. Ordinary journalism doesn’t require special training or a credential. 

But it does mean that more Canadians over time are going to grow increasingly reliant on sources of information that may or may not have any attachment to how the world around them actually functions. Not only is this going to have an impact on our concepts of a shared national identity, but in some cases, even consensus reality. 

We don’t have to peer too deep into the darkness of our hearts to get a sense of where this is going. Travel just a little ways outside a major city and you’ll quickly run into news deserts where a significant subsection of the population already believes that the Canadian government is controlled by Klaus Schwab for the benefit of Satanic, adrenochrome-swilling pedophiles. 

To put it more bluntly: Conservatives, it’s one thing to burn CBC’s downtown Toronto HQ. By all means, paint your bodies in the ashes and scream at the moon until she hears your victory. Revel in it. But then you’re actually going to have to govern people. How long do you think the current crop of “hang the elites” stand by you when you’re the elite

The CBC in its current state is not sustainable. It needs a radical overhaul that includes an extensive mandate review that sets clear expectations for content, tone, and objective outcomes. Personally, I’d cleave everything related to entertainment and leave that to die. The CBC ought to be an exclusively journalistic organization, with a particular focus on local news, beat reporting, and investigations. I’d take the CBC’s mandate out of the Broadcasting Act and create a standalone statute that enshrines objective journalistic standards and practices in law so internal committees can’t dick around with journalistic fads. (I have no objection to “activist” journalism, or concepts like “moral clarity” in private business, or even grant-supported niche outlets; but a national public broadcaster ought to adopt broadly unobjectionable and historically grounded journalistic standards when serving an audience that cannot escape footing the bill.)

I’d demand the CBC create a functional, independent newsroom in every city over 100,000 people in this country. I’d assign specific beats like health, upper courts, legislatures and the like, and I’d write those expectations straight into the mandate. 

Most importantly, I’d have both the CBC and its critics understand that it is one of the most important repositories of institutional knowledge in this country — it is not only a reservoir of Canada’s culture and history, but also an irreplaceable living resource for the craft and practice of journalism itself. I wish the CBC considered itself not as a competitor to private journalistic enterprise, but more like a public service, akin to a library. An institution whose role is to help foster regional journalistic talent — perhaps through workshops, internships, or even equipment or facility rentals. 

If a local journalism student wants to start a podcast in, say, Medicine Hat, the local CBC outlet ought to be a resource to help her make that project a success. The local CBC outlet ought to be her champion. 

In this lurid dream vision, I would make all the CBC’s written and audio-visual materials freely available to any Canadian media outlet. Further, the CBC should be allergic to private advertising. 

I would also put some serious thought into the CBC’s role as a guardian of this country’s digital and physical news archives. If much private media is about to collapse, we risk losing an extraordinary amount of our shared cultural heritage, unless some entity is willing to take on the care, organization, and access of historic documents and material. 

All the above is a napkin sketch for a sustainable CBC mandate. One that fosters an innovative private media sector while ensuring that Canadians will be reasonably well served by a grounded and objective information environment. If Canadians want to wander into QAnon conspiracy land, that’s not for me, or for any government, to restrict. However, in the face of market failure — and objective news reporting is one such imminent failure — there is room for the public sector to act. We should ensure that Canadians have real choices. 

Funnily, when I spelled out that vision of a CBC, most of the Conservatives I spoke to at the conference in Ottawa could get behind it, or some version of it. And that didn’t surprise me. Most Conservatives in this country are not libertarians or even, frankly, true populists. Most, I think, grant that there is some role for a federal government to play in the promotion of a Canadian culture and identity, particularly where the preservation of history and institutions are concerned. I am aligned to the role of a free market in media, as in anything else (like and subscribe!), but I would remind everybody that the media industry doesn’t exist in a pure free market in the Platonic world of ideal forms, and never has. There are bad ways to intervene in it (ahem, the Online News Act) and there are good ways — ways grounded in historic success, both here and in other countries. Public broadcasting is tried and true, which is why almost every country has some version of it in accordance with its national values, needs, and insecurities. 

Ironically, the cultural conditions that prompted the creation of the CBC in 1936 are more prevalent now than at any time previous in living memory. There is more need now for a shared sense of Canadian identity. We need a revitalized social understanding about how to mediate access to information and power in a democracy. I would remind Conservatives of this, and I would ask: if you destroy the CBC, would you have to replace it with something else? I would ask you to put a pin in the anger, and consider how Canada and her people will be best served after the impending collapse of traditional media infrastructure. Lastly, I would remind you of all those satellites on all those apartment blocks and ask: if the CBC, or something like it, isn’t going to fill the gap, who will? 

Source: Jen Gerson: The Conservative case for the CBC

Ottawa to propose new asylum rules to allow for faster deportations

Of note. This has been a longstanding issue for many governments, the excessive multiple processes that clog the system. Predictable and not entirely illegitimate fears by immigration lawyers but current system is neither sustainable nor fair:

The Liberal government is proposing to make changes to Canada’s asylum claim system which could speed up the deportation process for rejected applicants from the country.

The proposed amendments were quietly announced two weeks ago in the 2024 federal budget and come as Canada deals with a record number of asylum seekers.

“Budget 2024 also proposes to introduce changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to simplify and streamline the claims process in support of faster decisions and quicker removals,” it reads.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller’s office would not provide additional information to Global News, with his press secretary Bahoz Dara Aziz citing “parliamentary privilege.”

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) did not provide clarity either, instead issuing a statement that closely resembled what was in the budget.

IRCC says the new measures will “improve the efficiency of the asylum system without compromising fairness or compassion for those in need of protection

“Whenever lawyers hear the government say the word ‘streamline’ or make things more efficient, we always know that people’s rights are about to get sacrificed on the altar of administrative efficiency,” said immigration and refugee lawyer Chantal Desloges in an interview with Global News.

“The government is being very tight lipped about what they’re planning to actually change, which also makes me a little bit nervous,” Desloges added.

Since March of this year, 46,736 people have applied for asylum in Canada, according to the IRB. That is a 62 per cent increase from the same period in 2023, while the backlog stands at 186,000, according to the agency.

An increase in temporary immigration has also been linked in part to Canada’s housing crisis. Earlier this month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau warned the situation needs to be brought “under control,” saying temporary immigration has “grown at a rate far beyond what Canada has been able to absorb.”

As the numbers of applicants surge, so have wait times for asylum seekers.

It can take years for cases to be heard by the IRB.

How hard is it to remove people?

The Canada Border Services Agency has struggled to remove applicants whose claims have been rejected or withdrawn.

As of this February, the CBSA issued more than 28,000 “active warrants” to “failed refugee claimants.”

“We as a country need to invest in the refugee determination process so that they get a fair opportunity to have their case [and] their fear understood and a decision made,” said immigration and refugee lawyer Warren Creates.

“The ones who fail, whose cases are rejected, should be removed. I think justice requires that.”

Ottawa has pledged $743.5 million over five years to the CBSA, IRCC and the IRB to try to deal with the backlog of 186,000 asylum claims. More than 141,000 were filed last year alone.

“The IRB is resourced to handle 50,000 intaking claims a year,” Creates said. “They’re not resourced for the 140,000 that came last year. … To tread water, they need to triple their budgets and their adjudication.”

The proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are part of a series of new measures announced by Ottawa.

The immigration minister has reinstated the visa requirement for Mexican nationals, introduced a cap on international students, and more recently reduced the amount they can work to 24 hours per week.

Up to now, Miller has ruled out changing the asylum criteria which could make it more difficult for claimants to remain in Canada.

Source: Ottawa to propose new asylum rules to allow for faster deportations