Le sentiment d’appartenance des immigrants au Québec s’effrite par rapport au Canada

Not surprising given Loi 21 and other initiatives:

Les débats sur la laïcité ont permis au Canada de marquer des points dans la guerre d’usure avec le Québec pour la loyauté des immigrants racisés. Le sentiment d’appartenir à la communauté québécoise n’a pas décliné entre 2012 et 2019, mais cet « élan » s’est néanmoins affaibli par rapport à la volonté d’être canadien, indique une nouvelle étude.

Ce déficit d’appartenance à la province s’est aussi étendu aux minorités non religieuses et à celles qui sont francophones durant cette période. Elles étaient pourtant moins susceptibles d’être touchées par les deux « événements focalisateurs » sous la loupe de cet article publié récemment dans la Revue canadienne de science politique que sont le projet de charte des valeurs et le projet de loi 21 sur la laïcité de l’État.

Les chercheurs ont mesuré l’évolution de l’appartenance à travers trois enquêtes qui coïncident dans le temps avec ces grands débats de société, soit en 2012, 2014 et 2019. « Au début de la période étudiée, on voit que, chez les immigrants non religieux ou francophones, il n’y a pas de préférence marquée entre le Québec ou le Canada. L’appartenance à l’un ou l’autre est aussi forte », explique Antoine Bilodeau, professeur de science politique à l’Université Concordia et coauteur de l’étude avec Luc Turgeon.

Ces perceptions évoluent, avec un creux en 2014, pour ensuite stagner envers le Québec. Mais pendant ce temps, le sentiment d’appartenance envers le Canada grandit, et cet effet est généralisé à tous les immigrants racisés, pas seulement ceux qui sont religieux ou qui ne sont pas francophones.

« Cela indique que les groupes minoritaires ont perçu ces débats comme une remise en question plus large de la relation avec la majorité. Ce qui est en trame de fond de tout ça, chez certains partisans [de la laïcité], mais beaucoup chez ses détracteurs, c’est que ces politiques reflètent le malaise du Québec avec la diversité grandissante », détaille-t-il.

Mais ce lien n’est pas causal avec une certitude absolue. Les chercheurs constatent plutôt que l’aiguille a bougé en faveur du fédéral sur le cadran de l’appartenance et attribuent cette modification à des facteurs déjà bien démontrés. Même si la transformation n’est pas totale, elle correspond dans le temps avec ces moments clés et elle est cohérente avec la littérature scientifique.

Un certain nombre d’études au Québec laissaient déjà entendre que les débats sur les symboles religieux avaient nourri un sentiment d’exclusion, mais elles ne permettaient pas de faire cette comparaison avant et après les propositions législatives.

Les deux auteurs, cette fois, ne peuvent « que conclure que les débats sur l’interdiction des symboles religieux à travers les propositions législatives qui ont pris place en 2014 et en 2019 ont contribué à détériorer la relation des immigrants racisés avec la communauté politique québécoise ou, plus précisément, ont contribué à creuser l’écart dans le sentiment d’appartenance à l’avantage du Canada », écrivent-ils dans l’étude.

Deux modèles

« Au fond, la perception est que le modèle fédéral est plus flexible dans sa définition de qui il reconnaît comme citoyen à part entière », résume le professeur, qui étudie ces aspects depuis nombre d’années. Et les débats sur la laïcité sont « venus consolider ou accentuer cette perception ».

Les deux coauteurs citent d’ailleurs l’ancien premier ministre Jacques Parizeau, qui s’inquiétait en 2013 que le projet de charte des valeurs du Parti québécois fasse la part belle au fédéralisme, qui allait pouvoir ainsi se présenter comme le véritable défenseur des minorités.

« Il [Jacques Parizeau] disait “vous allez perdre de vue la dynamique de compétition”. L’étude lui donne raison », explique M. Bilodeau.

Encore plus frappant aux yeux du coauteur de l’étude, la perte du sentiment d’appartenance vis-à-vis du gouvernement québécois « est causée par ses propres actions », plutôt que, par exemple, la passivité ou l’incapacité à rattraper le fédéral.

Autre fait intéressant, le sentiment d’appartenance des immigrants racisés a été mesuré par deux aspects : l’attachement et le sentiment d’être accepté. Le concept d’appartenance est ainsi mieux compris dans sa dimension relationnelle, une relation à deux sens.

« C’est un peu comme demander “est-ce que je veux faire partie du groupe ? [attachement] Puis, est-ce que j’ai la perception que le groupe veut que j’en fasse partie ? [sentiment d’acceptation]” », détaille M. Bilodeau.

On pourrait penser que c’est surtout le sentiment d’acceptation qui a été touché : « Intuitivement, on dirait, ce geste me montre qu’ils ne veulent pas de moi. » Mais il y a, selon le professeur, un effet boomerang sur le désir de faire partie de la communauté, sur le sentiment d’attachement. « Non seulement c’est que je sens, qu’ils ne veulent pas [que j’appartienne au groupe], mais ça me fait remettre en question ma propre volonté d’être Québécois par rapport à “je veux être Canadien”. »

Des expériences vécues

« J’aimerais beaucoup me tourner vers le sentiment d’appartenance envers le Québec, mais on nous fait sentir qu’on n’y appartient pas. Alors, il faut se tourner ailleurs », explique d’ailleurs en entrevue Jana, une jeune musulmane. Le Devoir a choisi de ne pas publier son nom de famille, car la Montréalaise est encore mineure.

Pour elle, ce sont assurément les débats sur la laïcité qui ont entamé son sentiment d’appartenance : « Avant, je m’identifiais comme Québécoise, mais, avec les nouvelles lois, j’ai senti que ça a créé deux classes différentes : ceux qui peuvent réaliser leurs rêves et les autres, qui ne le peuvent pas. »

« Moi, je voulais devenir avocate pour défendre l’équité sociale, mais j’ai l’impression que je ne peux pas choisir cette carrière sans sacrifier ma religion », dit la jeune femme, qui porte le hidjab.

La Loi sur la laïcité de l’État, connue d’abord comme projet de loi 21, interdit le port de signes religieux chez les agents qui incarnent l’autorité de l’État, y compris les juges et les procureurs de la Couronne.

Jana pourrait exercer à titre d’avocate en pratique privée, reconnaît-elle, mais elle a l’impression que certaines portes lui sont déjà fermées avant même qu’elle entame des études de droit.

Pour Garine Papazian-Zohrabian, professeure de psychopédagogie à l’Université de Montréal et psychologue clinicienne, cette étude va dans le même sens que ce que d’autres travaux ont démontré : « les approches coercitives freinent le sentiment d’appartenance », a-t-elle déjà écrit sur plusieurs tribunes.

« Je vois aujourd’hui les conséquences de la loi 21 [Loi sur la laïcité de l’État] dans le milieu enseignant », dit Mme Papazian-Zohrabian. Elle voit avec grande déception les embauches de personnel non légalement qualifié dans les écoles, « alors qu’on prive nos élèves de bonnes enseignantes » parce qu’elles portent le voile.

« On pousse les gens à se recroqueviller sur eux-mêmes et à trouver une place uniquement dans leur communauté. Symboliquement, on ne peut plus parler d’intégration », dit-elle.

Mme Papazian-Zohrabian a émigré du Liban et elle est d’origine arménienne, « petite-fille de rescapés d’un génocide », donc à même de comprendre l’importance de l’identité, remarque-t-elle.

Les politiques et le discours sur l’immigration ont créé « une dynamique de plus en plus polarisée », selon la spécialiste. Beaucoup d’immigrants ont pourtant « choisi le Québec ou le Canada parce que c’est une société progressiste et une société de droit. Quand ils se sentent attaqués ici, ça crée de la détresse chez eux ».

Source: Le sentiment d’appartenance des immigrants au Québec s’effrite par rapport au Canada

Denmark considering banning protests burning Quran and other religious texts

Hard to argue that book burning is a freedom of speech issue as there are other ways to express views than unnecessarily inflaming tensions (although some tensions will always be inflamed or politicized as the Satanic Verses and the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons illustrate):

The Danish foreign ministry said whilst protecting freedom of expression is crucial, such protests benefit extremists and pose a security threat.

Copenhagen is looking at legal means to intervene in some circumstances, including protests outside embassies.

Sweden’s prime minister also said work on a similar process has begun there.

Both Scandinavian countries have come under pressure in recent weeks, after authorities gave permission for a series of controversial protests where Islam’s holy book was destroyed, stoking diplomatic tensions with several Muslim-majority nations.

In its statement, Denmark’s foreign ministry said it wants to explore intervening in some protests where “other countries, cultures, and religions are being insulted, and where this could have significant negative consequences for Denmark” – including security concerns.

But the Danish government emphasised free speech was a fundamental value and any change must be done “within the framework of the constitutionally protected freedom of expression and in a manner that does not change the fact that freedom of expression in Denmark has very broad scope”.

The statement also specifically acknowledged the impact these controversial protests have had on Denmark’s international reputation, repeating the government’s earlier condemnation of burning religious texts.

These protests have reached a level where Denmark “is being viewed as a country that facilitates insult and denigration of the cultures, religions, and traditions of other countries” in many parts of the world, it added.

In a separate statement, Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said a similar process was already underway and confirmed he had been in close contact with his Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen.

“We have also started to analyse the legal situation already… in order to consider measures to strengthen our national security and the security of Swedes in Sweden and around the world,” he wrote on Instagram.

Both statements followed several high-profile incidents where the Quran was burned or stamped on in recent weeks.

In June, an Iraqi Christian refugee living in Sweden, burned a copy of the religious text outside Stockholm’s central mosque.

The man was then given permission to destroy a Quran for a second time last week, which led to Sweden evacuating its embassy staff from Baghdad after the building was stormed and set fire to by protesters

Following this, last week two Danish far-right activists stamped on a Quran and set it alight in a tin foil tray next to an Iraqi flag on the ground outside Iraq’s embassy in Copenhagen.

Source: Denmark considering banning protests burning Quran and other religious texts

Annual public service report to PM should prompt ‘serious conversation’ about bureaucracy’s future, says former PCO clerk Wernick

Civil service renewal is ‘fairly low down on the political radar screen,’ says bureaucracy expert Andrew Griffith. 

Begs the question, if nobody in Parliament is paying attention, what is the value of the report? Part of the problem, as in many (most?) such reports, is the lack of frank language on failures and challenges and general bureaucratic tone (been responsible for comparable reports).

My comments on the relative success of government in increasing representation among the equity groups part of the article:

Michael Wernick, the former clerk of the Privy Council Office, says the annual report on the public service of Canada, released on July 19, should serve as a “jumping-off point” for a “serious, more grown-up conversation about the state of the public service going forward,” especially since the government has lost traction and focus on public-sector capability, but he says the report is usually ignored by Parliament.

“You want to tell a positive story. It’s a rare opportunity to push back against the usual negative feedback loops where people only pay attention to things that go wrong, and highlight some of the hidden stories and what’s going on and tell us the bigger picture,” Wernick explained to The Hill Times after last week’s massive cabinet shuffle. “The risk is always getting it right—you want it to also be candid about where there were issues, and you want it to sort of set up a conversation about the state of the pubic service ideally.”

Anita Anand (Oakville, Ont.), who most recently served as defence minister, was appointed as Treasury Board president in Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s (Papineau, Que.) cabinet shuffle on July 26. Her arrival into the role comes not long after John Hannaford’s appointment as Clerk of the Privy Council following Janice Charette’s retirement.

Charette officially ended her time in the role and in the public service on June 24, telling The Hill Times that “anything that’s on the prime minister’s desk is on my desk; anything that he’s dealing with, I’m dealing with.”

Wernick told The Hill Times that, during his time in the top job, he signed off on annual reports four times between 2016 and 2019.

Wernick said his point was not to be critical of the report, given that “it’s a difficult balancing point.”

The former top bureaucrat called it “frustrating” that Parliament passed a law requiring an annual report on the state of the public service “and then has never shown any interest in it.”

The government first introduced the annual report in 1992, a requirement under section 127 of the Public Service Employment Act, according to the Prime Minister’s Office.

“I tabled four of them, and was never, ever asked to go to a parliamentary committee and discuss the report or the state of the public service,” said Wernick.

Wernick also said that there was nothing in the report about the service review which was alluded to a few years ago, and that digital government projects are “waiting in a queue.”

“And that’s where finance comes in—if you were going to be serious about public-sector capability, you’d have to spend money,” said Wernick. “You’d have to invest in training and leadership development, you’d have to put some money into it and buildings and equipment … it won’t come for free. And so far, this government has lost any sort of focus and traction on public-sector capability.”

“The idea of having a serious discussion at parliamentary committees about the public service would be a good start,” said Wernick, alluding to a Globe and Mail opinion article he penned earlier this year where he argued that the government “should work with Parliament to create a new Joint Committee of the House of Commons and Senate on the Public Service” as well as create a “permanent Better Government Fund in the care of the Treasury Board.”

“I’m not sure that the timing is great, which goes back to the cabinet shuffle, where we’re in this phase of the government where the hourglass sands are running out, there’s less than two years left, two budgets, maybe about 200 days of parliamentary time,” said Wernick. “The last two years of a mandate of a government that’s 10 points behind in the polls is probably not where you’re going to see bold ideas on the public sector.”

The disruptions caused by the pandemic were “enormous,” said Wernick, and the opportunities for some parts of the public service that hybrid work creates “are interesting.”

“Their promise in the strike settlement to add seniority to the algorithm for laying people off could be very relevant two years from now,” said Wernick. “If I was a younger public servant I’d be quite worried.”

Any return to the size of the public service when the Liberals took power in 2015 would involve tens of thousands of job losses, said Wernick. 

“Is this government going to try to tap the brakes in its last two years? I don’t know,” he said. 

But Wernick also noted that this government, at this point in its mandate, “wants to deliver stuff.”

“Climate change, green transition, hugely ambitious immigration numbers, housing, reconciliation, the defense policy review and implementing something out of that, the review of the foreign service—they’re going to run out of time in June of 2025, which is not so far away,” said Wernick. 

Data shows growth in public service, progress in diversity and inclusion

In terms of the diversity goals, Andrew Griffith, a former director general for Citizenship and Multiculturalism who keeps a close eye on public service survey results and reports, said that “virtually, for all visible minority groups, their relative share in promotions has increased.”

There has been significant growth in the size of the federal public service recently, with the report noting that the number of employees grew from 319,601 in March 2021 to 335,957 in March 2022.

The number of executives grew from 7,972 to 8,506 during that time period, with the number of deputy ministers increasing from 37 to 41. The number of associate deputy ministers fell slightly, from 39 in March 2021 to 36 a year later.

In the report’s “year ahead” section, Charette notes that the government’s agenda on diversity and inclusion “must be inclusive” and must advance commitments around reconciliation, accessibility, combating transphobia and better support for 2SLGBTQIA+ communities.

Charette also writes that the government must continue to prioritize the recruitment and retention of persons with disabilities, and “ensure employees in religious minority communities feel safe and supported in their workplaces.”

Griffith told The Hill Times that “the overall pattern of the public service becoming more diverse with better representation is there, at both the executive level and non-executive level.”

Griffith also said that based on the data he sees and analyzes surrounding the bureaucracy, the visible minority category as a whole is doing better in the last six years than the non-visible minority community—which applies to both men and women.

According to the report, which outlines disaggregated employment equity representation and workforce availability, the number of women in the public service increased from 127,043 at the end of March 2021, to 132,299 one year later.

The number of Indigenous Peoples in the public service increased from 11,977 to 12,336 over the same time period, with the number of persons with disabilities increasing from 12,893 in March 2021 to 14,573 in March 2022.

In terms of visible minorities, the total increased from 43,122 to 47,728, with Black employees increasing from 8,754 to 9,809. Non-White Latin Americans and persons of mixed origin both saw increases of 0.1 per cent in the public service population.

Chinese, Japanese, Korean, Filipino, and South Asian/East Indian employees also saw increases within the bureaucracy’s ranks, as well as Non-White West Asians, North Africans or Arabs, Southeast Asians, or other visible minority groups, according to the report.

At the executive level, the percentage of women increased from 52.3 per cent to 53.2 per cent, persons with disabilities increased 5.6 per cent to 6.5 per cent, and members of visible minorities increased from 12.4 per cent to 13 per cent.

Public service renewal ‘fairly low down on the political radar’

When asked about recent changes both at the top level of the public service with a new clerk, as well as a new Treasury Board president in Anand, Griffith said he thought “sometimes one reads a bit too much into these changes.”

“Public service renewal isn’t [something] that directly affects [most] Canadians,” said Griffith. “It’s fairly low down on the political radar screenthis is largely managed through the bureaucracy—there are checks and balances as there always are, but I don’t really think that any of these changes will drastically modify the path that the current clerk was on, and that likely the new clerk will have more important issues that take up his time.”

Wernick noted that the Liberals left Innovation Minister François-Philippe Champagne (Saint-Maurice-Champlain, Que.), Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland (University—Rosedale, Ont.) and Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault (Laurier-Sainte-Marie, Que.) where they already were in cabinet, but “it doesn’t explain moving Anand out of defence, frankly, because now you’ve got to bring a new person in in the middle of a defence policy review.” 

Wernick also said going through the disruption of the pandemic and now trying to adapt in some places to hybrid work possibilities, there’s now a government “in the late stages, pedal to the metal, trying to deliver stuff.”

“So it’s going to be hard to pay attention to its actual capabilities,” said Wernick, who added that he agreed with what is flagged in the report in terms of organizational health, burnout, mental health, and diversity.

“But there’s not a lot in there about the basic capabilities of the public service,” said Wernick.

‘I know getting here has not always been easy,’ writes Charette on hybrid work

The report also highlights the shift in the past year towards a hybrid work model, a change that made headlines for months and raised the ire of many public servants both in mainstream media and on social media. 

“Once we were able to safely welcome more employees back into the workplace, I outlined my expectations for deputies, including that they encourage employees to test new hybrid work models, wrote Charette in the report. “The shift to a hybrid model was about putting our effectiveness first and making a change that would best enable us to support government and serve Canadians, while giving employees flexibility to support their well-being.”

Direction on the common hybrid work model was released in December 2022, which set out guidelines requiring that employees work on-site at least two to three days per week.

“I know getting here has not always been easy,” wrote Charette, noting that the public service is the largest employer in the country and is made up of hundreds of thousands of public servants in a wide range of roles across Canada and abroad.

Source: Annual public service report to PM should prompt ‘serious conversation’ about bureaucracy’s future, says former PCO clerk Wernick

Lederman: What a former principal’s suicide tells us about what our workplaces owe us

Good balanced take on the Bilkszto/TDSB/Kojo Institute case.

So many bad things can happen at work. Among the worst is being subjected to racist treatment. Harassment of any sort is up there too. The workplace should be a safe space. The lucky among us think of our jobs as a vocation, and our place of employment as a sort of second home.

Another one of the worst things that can happen at work is being wrongly accused of being a racist. Such an accusation – even if it is challenged, disproved, dismissed – is a scarlet R that can be career-ending. Perhaps even life-ending, as we have learned with the tragic case of former Toronto District School Board principal Richard Bilkszto.

Mr. Bilkszto, according to a statement released by his lawyer, died by suicide this month at the age of 60. Earlier this year, he had filed a lawsuit against the TDSB (which has not been tested in court) alleging he was bullied and harassed during anti-racism training sessions in the spring of 2021 conducted by an outside consultant, KOJO Institute founder Kike Ojo-Thompson. This happened after Mr. Bilkszto – who used to teach in Buffalo – challenged the workshop leader’s statement that Canada was more racist than the U.S., according to the statement of claim.

Mr. Bilkszto said it would have done “an incredible disservice to our learners” to return to the classroom the next day and teach that Canada “was just as bad as the United States.”

The Toronto Star reports that this comparison was not initiated by Ms. Ojo-Thompson, but by other participants. And that her comment was a personal one about the racism she had experienced in Canada versus her time in the U.S.

Mr. Bilkszto’s lawsuit alleges that he was implicitly referred to as a racist and white supremacist, and that senior TDSB staff did not stop the harassment.

The Minister of Education is now investigating. Ontario’s Workplace Safety and Insurance Board previously found that the facilitator’s conduct was “abusive, egregious and vexatious, and rises to the level of workplace harassment and bullying.”

Of course, suicide is a complex matter. It is impossible for an observer to know exactly why Mr. Bilkszto ended his life. We don’t know about other possible factors, or whether this incident was directly responsible.

His lawyer, Lisa Bildy, says it was. “Unfortunately, the stress and effects of these incidents continued to plague Richard,” her July 20 statement read. “Last week he succumbed to this distress.”

The Ontario Principals’ Council said it was “deeply saddened and disturbed” by Mr. Bilkszto’s death: “Employers have an obligation to provide a safe working environment and to protect their staff from bullying and harassment.” That did not appear to happen for Mr. Bilkszto. And you can bet that it’s not happening for other people wrongly accused in other workplaces, in organizations that are themselves terrified to be labelled as racist.

Employers have an obligation to fairly investigate, to not make an example of someone without evidence, and to offer support for people who have suffered as victims of discrimination or harassment, as well as those accused. Rather than being automatically shunned by their peers and bosses, the accused should also be considered during this difficult process; they may require mental health support. Charged with being racist bullies, they themselves might be victims of bullying.

Mr. Bilkszto appears to have done the right thing: he spoke up, informed by his many years as an educator and what he had seen with his own eyes. I believe he had an obligation to express this view, for the learners, as he put it.

His experience is not encouraging for others with something to contribute in a workshop, particularly on the understandably sensitive issue of race.

Beyond the absolute tragedy of Richard Bilkszto, there is another potential victim here: diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) training. You can already see the outrage brewing: not only are these sessions not worthwhile, they could be dangerous, detractors are saying, using this heartbreaking story as evidence.

This week, Ms. Bildy tweeted: “Many people have silently endured woke struggle sessions in the workplace, and it has felt like an assault on their conscience and humanity. It’s certainly not helping race relations in this country. Time to stop walking on eggshells and find a more unifying approach.”

I sat in briefly on a DEI workshop this week, one focused on Indigenous issues. It was run by a facilitator who was smart, sensitive and serious. The information was hard to take at times, as it should be. And it was eye-opening, as it should be.

DEI training, when done right, is essential. As for Ms. Bildy’s “woke struggle sessions” charge: We need to be awake to the struggles that Black, Indigenous and people of colour people face – experiences that some of us white people have the privilege of not having personally endured.

What’s not okay is if participants are shamed, especially well-meaning people who are doing their best. And trying to make a sincere point – a valid one, according to the lawsuit.

Richard Bilkszto deserved better. We all do.

Source: What a former principal’s suicide tells us about what our workplaces owe us

54% of African student visa applications denied by the US

Comparable differences to Canada and likely most OECD countries. Advocacy and interest based report:

African students who apply to study at universities and colleges in the United States experience the highest visa refusal rates of all international students applying to study in the US with more than half of all applicants rejected in 2022.

The refusal rate of 54% of student visas in 2022 is up from 44% in 2015, according to a report titled The Interview of a Lifetime: An analysis of visa denials and international student flows to the US, from the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, and Shorelight, two US advocacy groups that promote policies in support of immigrant students.

While the refusal rate for African students applying for visas is higher than for students belonging to other geographical categories of visa applicants, it is roughly in line with an across-the-board rise in refusal rates, which suggests that the United States is becoming a less welcoming place to foreign students.

By 2030, just seven years from now, young Africans are expected to constitute 42% of the world’s youth population, and by 2050 are expected to number 1.1 billion.

The trends outlined in The Interview of a Lifetime suggest that the United States is poised to lose out in the competition for students – just at the time that the American colleges and universities will be in the grips of what demographers call the ‘demographic cliff’, the drop each year of some 500,000 students from the cohort born following the 2008 financial crisis – note the report’s authors, Dr Rajika Bhandari and Jill Welch, both senior advisers to the Presidents’ Alliance on Higher Education and Immigration, and Shorelight’s leading managers, Shelley Landry, a senior director of government affairs, and Hilary O’Haire, the executive director of analytics.

Rejection rate on the rise

According to the report, since 2018, the total number of students from Africa enrolled in American colleges and universities has grown from 47,251 to 49,308. Over that same period, however, the rejection rate has grown six percentage points, from 48% to 54%. As a result some 92,051 potentially qualified African students were denied a visa. The authors of The Interview of a Lifetime describe them as 92,051 ‘Missed Opportunity Students’.

In technical terms, these prospective African students failed to qualify for the F-1 Visa. The F-1 Visa category allows foreign students to enter and study full-time in institutions that are certified by the US government and is mandatory for immigrant international students.

Negative public narrative towards immigrants

The report contains evidence that American immigration officials are becoming more apt to refuse student visas overall. Between 2021 and 2022, for example, the refusal rate for South Americans rose from 20% to 30%, while the rise in numbers of Australians and Pacific islanders being denied study visas rose even more starkly: from 8% to about 25%. Rejection rates from Europe and North America (which includes Mexico) have also risen but by only a few percentage points.

Although the report has not identified the specific African countries of origin whose students were heavily affected by the visa denials, the researchers found that since 2018 refusal rates have consistently been higher for Western and Central Africa than for Eastern and Southern Africa.

In 2021, for example, the refusal rate for Western and Central Africa was 57% and 64%, respectively, while for Eastern and Southern Africa the rates were 43% and 10%. Last year, the rates for Western and Central Africa were 71% and 61%; for Eastern and Southern Africa the rates were 48% and 16%, respectively.

“But when Southern Africa is removed from the equation, the visa denial rate jumps to 57%, suggesting that most of the denials were concentrated in other parts of Africa,” noted the report.

At least in terms of approving foreign student visas from Africa, as University World News reported last June, the situation in Canada is much the same. Refugees and Citizenship Canada rejected 59% of the visa applications from English-speaking Africans and 74% from French-speaking Africans seeking to study in Canada’s colleges and universities.

But the question remains as to the reasons behind African students being denied opportunities to study in the US universities compared to their peers from the rest of the world. The report, however, suggested that it might be a reflection of emerging US national policies that are fuelled by a negative public narrative toward immigrants.

While President Joe Biden’s administration is significantly more open to immigration than was that of former US president Donald J Trump, the tenor of the American debate over immigration has not moved much from when Trump described Haiti, El Salvador and African states as “shithole countries”.

Yesterday, for example, the Republican controlled House of Representatives passed the Visa Overstay Enforcement Act of 2023 which imposes new penalties, including fines and/or prison terms of six months on individuals who overstay their visas.

Last June, 31 Republican lawmakers in Washington backed a group of workers in the high-tech industry who are suing the Federal government over changes the administration made to the F-1 visa program that would allow foreign students to remain in the country and work for up to three years after they graduate.

The problem with interviews

Emmanuel Smadja, the chief executive officer and co-founder of MPOWER Financing, a Washington DC-based company that provides educational loans to international students, says the visa denial problem may be systemic.

First-hand accounts from African students suggest that they face challenges securing visa interviews and according to the report, some are having to jump through hoops just to travel to other countries at considerable expense. Outside South Africa, most US visa interviews for students in Sub-Saharan Africa are mainly held in Accra, Lagos and Nairobi.

In their analysis, the authors of the report faulted some of the grounds that are used by the US consular officials to deny African student visas.

The report cited lapses such as students being ill-prepared for the visa interview or failure to demonstrate a strong connection with the US. A few tense minutes of a visa interview should not be used to determine their academic future, as too often African students encounter challenges securing visa interview slots.

Doubts about funding

Drawing insights from MPOWER, Bhandari’s team noted that many African students, mostly from Sub-Saharan Africa, were denied visas even when they are qualified and have funding.

The report highlights the issue of 3,000 students from Sub-Saharan Africa that were accepted for graduate studies at a top US university last year but only 60% were granted visas despite being admitted and having secured the necessary funding.

Further, there are indicators that African students were denied visas for not demonstrating that they had sufficient funds to support their studies in the US. Concerns had also been raised about fraud but the Presidents’ Alliance, a coalition of 450 US university leaders, had been quoted pointing out that in most cases, African students are the victims, but not the perpetrators of the fraud.

In an interview with The PIE News, Farook Lalji of Kenya-based Koala Education Consultants said that “applying for a university abroad means paying visa fees, a deposit to the university, paying for a medical and other related costs” and that the “fear of being denied a visa after all that is a factor in people falling for fake schemes that come with an alleged guarantee of getting a visa”.

He advised students to make sure they were dealing with licensed agents. “If you must deal with a briefcase or suspicious agent, then do not pay until the job is done, just like it happens with other things in life. In this case do not pay until you have obtained all the information about the university and have obtained all necessary documents,” he warned prospective students.

On the issue of visa denial for lack of adequate funds, Bhandari and associates noted that discussion forums of groups that serve African international students are rife with worries about students who have met every admissions and financial requirement and are seemingly well-prepared for the high-stakes visa interviews but are nonetheless denied visas.

Presidents and vice-chancellors concerned

American university presidents and vice-chancellors are concerned by the high rates of visa denials and share perceptions that it is harder for students in certain countries to acquire a visa than in other countries.

“Some higher education officials reported that students from some African nations, for example, are more likely to receive a student visa when applying in a non-African country, such as Australia, to study in the US,” stated the report.

Is a shift in policy possible?

Unfortunately, whereas visa data and enrolment datasets point to current demands for a US education by students from African countries, the report says there are no indicators as to whether the US visa policy will shift in favour of such students in the near future.

Aware of Africa’s emerging demographic trends, some countries such as France and China, are aggressively recruiting African students, while the interest shown by US university presidents and vice-chancellors are being frustrated by visa denials.

In that context, Bhandari and associates raised the issue as to whether the US is missing out on top academic talent from Africa.

Quoting Rebecca Winthrop, the director of the Center for University Education at the Brookings Institution, the Washington-based think tank that conducts research analysis on education and public policy issues, the study team noted that the growth in the world’s labour market will in the years ahead be in Africa.

“As other parts of the world begin to age, Africa will grow its population and today’s children will be the talent tomorrow’s global companies will be recruiting,” stated the report.

In its vision of more recruitment of African students into US universities and colleges, the Presidents’ Alliance and Shorelight are urging the US authorities to issue new guidelines that would reduce visa denials for African students.

For instance, they are recommending that competency in English should not be a reason for refusing a visa to a foreign student who wants to attend for instance a low-level institution, or a community college in the US.

“Consular officers should leave questions of academic choice and qualifications to be decided between the student and the institution, instead focusing on evaluating whether the student meets entry requirements,” stated the report.

The argument is that denial of a visa should not occur based on English-language competency, as it is the purview of the universities and colleges to evaluate language proficiency and to provide English-language training programmes if necessary.

The report criticised visa denials based on the inability to provide proof of multiple years of funding, given that in the US many students and their families pay for their education as they go on with their studies.

“Proof of funding for the entire duration of the academic programme is not reasonable and should not be a requirement for a visa,” stated the report.

Consular officers should ‘stop speculating’

Further, the report recommends that post-graduation work interests should also not be grounds for visa denial. The issue is that, despite the updated US foreign affairs manual that makes it clear that consular officers should stop speculating about international students’ intentions in the future but instead evaluate their intent at the moment of the interview, many African students continue to be denied a visa because of that outdated clause.

The report says clear guidelines should be issued on how to evaluate international student visa applications for forcibly displaced students from their countries’ of origin, not only in the case of the African students, or their counterparts from the Global South, but throughout the world.

Amid efforts to get rid of perceptions of discrimination, the Presidents’ Alliance and Shorelight are urging the US government to provide transparent and clear information to students about visa denials.

“The issue is that when prospective students are denied visas, they are often left to guess what aspects of their application may have led to the denial,” stated the report.

The two bodies have also urged the US Congress to modernise immigration law and, more specifically, to expand the criteria on how to reduce visa denials, taking into account that the US domestic demographic trends and workforce shifts point to the need for an inclusive approach to attract diverse global talent.

But despite such robust appeals, it is not clear as to whether the negative public narrative toward immigrants is about to change in favour of students from Africa.

Source: 54% of African student visa applications denied by the US

Sun Editorial: How to create a crisis in housing

Sun nails it more directly but avoids the option of freezing or reducing levels:

Hello, newly minted Housing Minister Sean Fraser and congratulations on your promotion. Ditto Marc Miller, also recently arrived in the Immigration portfolio after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s seismic shuffle this week.

The left hand of Immigration seems to be unaware of what the right hand of Housing is doing. So shake hands and start working together.

The Trudeau government has what it calls an “ambitious” target of bringing in 465,000 new permanent residents in 2023, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025.

According to its National Housing Strategy, the federal government is committed to building, “up to 160,000 new affordable homes” over the next 10 years.

You don’t have to be a math genius to see the problem. The government is committed to bringing in 1.4 million people over the next three years and has a plan to build only 160,000 new homes. That leaves approximately 1.2 million newcomers looking for homes. Certainly, the private sector will fill many gaps – if they’re allowed to.

We already have a housing crisis, with people under-housed or homeless and those who can’t afford a mortgage in this over-inflated economy the government has created.

No one is arguing that this country shouldn’t bring in newcomers. Canada was built on immigration. It’s our economic lifeblood. But the numbers have to add up. And these don’t.

Fraser said recently he would, “urge caution to anyone who believes the answer to our housing challenges is to close the door on newcomers.”

Fair enough. Now show us your logical and practical plan to house them.

Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland recently turned down Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow’s reasonable request for more federal funding to help deal with a massive influx of asylum seekers who were living on the streets.

Freeland set an adversarial tone for every big city. The federal government will bring in hundreds of thousands of newcomers to this country, dump them on cities, shortchange those communities and tell them to deal with it.

It’s not just housing. Where’s the funding for new schools, community centres and healthcare? The government is creating a crisis.

Trudeau needs to put his money where his mouth is – and fund those newcomers before they, too, are living on the streets.

Source: EDITORIAL: How to create a crisis in housing

For minister Sean Fraser, immigration and housing are more than just numbers games

Of note. The blatant hypocrisy of Minister Fraser of proposing to make the citizenship oath self-administered while stating:

“On Canada Day, new citizens from nine different countries took their oaths at a Blue Jays game. I had my daughter with me—a seven-year-old hugging a bunch of new Canadians, pure joy on their faces. Thousands of people were cheering. The near-universal reaction was to welcome.”

Oblivious to the contradiction… as well as immigration levels, his old portfolio, and housing availability and affordability, his new portfolio:

On the off chance you overhear a Canadian bragging, it’s usually to say that this is the greatest country in the world. It might violate our national modesty policy to add that we’re now also one of the most desirable, but the data’s there: in 2022, we welcomed close to a million newcomers (a record) and, a year prior, unseated the U.S. as the number-one destination for international workers. People want to come to Canada, and Canada really wants them here.

In June, staring down the ongoing labour shortage, the federal government announced a revamped federal express-entry system, complete with shiny new expedited pathways to permanent residency for U.S. H-1B visa holders and immigrants with sought-after expertise in fields like health care, tech and, crucially, the trades. Prior to a surprise cabinet shuffle by the Prime Minister in late July, the man responsible for delivering on the government’s ambitious target—500,000 immigrants annually by 2025—was Sean Fraser, then the minister of immigration, refugees and citizenship.

Fraser, a trained lawyer and loyal Nova Scotian, spent his whole life watching talent flee his home province for more promising opportunities elsewhere. His old office is facing a backlog 800,000 applications deep—not to mention newly urgent questions about Canada’s affordability, thanks in part to our bonkers real estate market. Those same questions follow Fraser into his new role as minister of housing, infrastructure and communities. When Maclean’s spoke with him in the weeks leading up to his new appointment, Fraser was convinced that Canada is the place to be, warts and all.

According to Statistics Canada’s “population clock,” Canada hit 40 million people just before 3 p.m. EST on Friday, June 16. Where were you when you heard the news?

I think I saw it on social media at some point; I wasn’t tracking it. My mind is on whether people get reunited with families and whether businesses can access workers.

So no plaque? No balloons?

I hate to disappoint. We did have a cake for my two-year-old’s birthday yesterday. He’s getting too big too quickly.

You’re 39; I’m 35. I don’t know about you, but I’ve cited the 30 million–ish factoid as long as I’ve been alive. Is it hard to wrap your head around this new milestone?

Looking back at my earliest citizenship ceremonies, my speeches often included something like, “There’s not one way to be Canadian, but 38 million different ways.” I’ve had to shift that. But Canada’s been ascending the ranks of countries people most want to move to for economic opportunities. The U.S. and Germany used to take the top two spots. It’s not a race, though.

Immigration may not be a race, but your office is banking on many, many more people becoming permanent residents. Like, 500,000 more, every year.

People have to be careful when trying to understand those numbers. It’s not uncommon for half of the “new” permanent residents in the annual count to have already been here as temporary ones—some are temporary foreign workers or international students. Last year, we added 437,000 permanent residents. We’re looking at a gradual increase to 500,000 by 2025.

More than ever, the immigration conversation centres on labour—or how Canada will replace the huge wave of retiring workers. You recently introduced a category-specific entry strategy, with preference given to workers in specific industries, like health care. How does this approach differ from the old one?

We need to respond to the skills gaps resulting from the changing economy and retiring workers. (For what it’s worth, 50 years ago, there were seven workers for every retiree in this country. In Atlantic Canada, where I am, it’s now closer to two.) The federal express-entry system scores applicants based on factors like education and language skills. The new parameters also take the highest-scoring applicants in in-demand sectors—more doctors, more homebuilders and more tech workers.

Back in June, you unveiled the country’s first-ever tech talent strategy—its actual name—to create a steady pipeline of American-dwelling H-1B visa holders to Canada. Are you attempting a reverse brain-drain?

The move wasn’t driven by little-brother syndrome. It was a real-time response to layoffs at some U.S. tech giants. If you’re on an H-1B visa and you lose your job, you either have to find a new one or leave within 60 days. Some of those workers might want to stay in the North American market. We’d be happy to have them.

You’re also courting digital nomads—people whose jobs allow them to work from anywhere in the world. What’s your elevator pitch when people ask, “Why work from Canada when you could work from home?”

Come here for up to six months to test drive Canada while still working for a foreign employer. If you receive a valid job offer from a company here, you can apply for a work permit. The real value proposition, though, is the chance to become one of us. Don’t underestimate how powerful that is. People born to Canadian parents sometimes take our daily rewards for granted: being able to go to the doctor when you get sick and earning a meaningful income if you work hard and have skills to offer.

Bringing people to Canada en masse isn’t a success unto itself; they need to be able to thrive when they get here. Many citizens and permanent residents are without family doctors, they’re being crushed by housing prices—even groceries. It’s not actually as simple as “hard work pays off” anymore.

You have to look at the counterfactual if you’re going to say it’ll be more difficult for newcomers and citizens to thrive in this country if you add more people.

That’s not what I’m saying.

When I was an MP candidate in 2015, the biggest controversies in my province were the closures of River John Elementary School and the mental health unit at Aberdeen Hospital, one of the largest regional hospitals in northern Nova Scotia. One psychiatrist left and it became too unsafe to operate the entire unit. Look at a local machine shop that hires foreign workers, and you’ll realize that the job of every tradesperson on the floor can depend on a linchpin employee. Before we get into what we need to do to accommodate those arriving in Canada, we should recognize the drastic consequences our communities will suffer if we adopt a negative approach toward newcomers. So, with that giant preamble out of the way—

I’m going to interrupt you here. I realize that, with these new targets, you’re specifically looking for, say, construction professionals to build the houses people need to live in, which will increase overall affordability.

I can tell you that, 365 days a year, I will choose the problem of having to rapidly build more houses because so many people want to move to my community over losing schools and hospitals because so many people are leaving.

Fair, but it’s not an either-or. Righting the housing market will take time. Immigrants are arriving now in a system that already has massive cracks in it.

We’ve woken up to the fact that we need to use our immigration policies to help solve some of our social challenges rather than exacerbate them. Yes, we’re bringing in homebuilders, but we’ve also got new regional strategies, like the new Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot, which would spread people out more evenly, so they don’t all land in Ontario.

And the settlement services?

Generally speaking, there’s federally funded language training and employment assistance. Other services will go as far as to help you open a bank account or sign your kids up for soccer. There is no silver bullet, but the good news is, when you look at the children of newcomers, their outcomes are more or less on par with kids whose parents were born here.

I appreciate that this is a highly complex long game, but in Toronto, where I live, city officials have been dealing with a 500 per cent increase in the number of asylum seekers in the shelter system. I can’t count how many stories I’ve read about trained doctors driving Ubers. Immigration detainees, some of whom may not present a meaningful risk to public safety, are languishing in provincial jails. This is also Canada.

These issues need to be addressed. We’re not used to receiving this many asylum claims or irregular border crossings, which was a real challenge at Roxham Road. One of the men who delivered food for my son’s birthday was a dentist trying to get qualified to practise in Nova Scotia. It frustrates me. Each of those problems requires a unique solution. We’re also going to do what, I think, most serves Canada’s long-term interests: embrace ambitious immigration in targeted areas to meet the needs of the economy.

Do you ever think that having an impenetrable gratitude mindset stops Canadians from grappling with serious systemic issues?

I’m not going to tell you that Canada is perfect—not by a long shot. When I speak at citizenship ceremonies, I often talk about the Charter values that bind us, but also the times that we fell short of them. We just passed the 100th anniversary of the Chinese Exclusion Act, which prevented Chinese people from coming here—many of whom already had loved ones here who helped to build Canada. Still, many countries can’t openly confront their challenges because they’re not a liberal democracy. We are. Looking at the other side of the coin, there’s a lot to be grateful for.

Apparently, your office now uses “advanced analytics” to lower processing times. Is AI deciding who gets in and who stays out?

Let me be clear: an officer, a human being, makes the final decisions in all cases. I will add that, during the pandemic, we digitized most of our paper files. We didn’t raise a “Mission accomplished!” banner, but people were excited.

Isn’t technology great?

Yeah, when it works.

Where does the Fraser clan hail from?

We fled Scotland during the Highland Clearances 250 years ago and washed up on the shores of Nova Scotia 10 minutes from New Glasgow, where I live now. My parents are in Merigomish, which has a couple hundred people, eight of whom are related to me. It’s the kind of place where we come out of the woods to go hunting, to put things in perspective.

I also heard you play the bagpipes—a part of your heritage.

Thanks to my grandfather. He was born in Canada but very much a classic grumpy old Scotsman. Come hell or high water, I was going to play the pipes.

Have you really mastered any tunes? If you’re not good at the bagpipes, uh…

They’re beautiful when somebody’s playing them well. I can play most of the traditional tunes, like “Sleepy Maggie.” I once played a New Year’s Eve show with an AC/DC tribute band. I did the bagpipe part of “It’s a Long Way to the Top.”

Now for a bit of Maclean’s history: we used to have an award called Parliamentarians of the Year. In 2021, you were a finalist for Best Orator, alongside Alain Therrien of the Bloc Québécois and Pierre Poilievre. You won.

I enjoyed the back-and-forth that I had with Pierre. I wouldn’t be surprised if, for a while, I took more questions from him than any other member of the House of Commons. Anyway, it’s nice to be recognized for your contributions.

Speaking of, at a televised event back in May, you were introduced as “Mr. Sexy” by Hedy Fry, a fellow Liberal MP. Is this an official title? Is there some kind of internal ranking everyday Canadians aren’t aware of?

God bless Hedy—I think she made that up on the spot. So no official award. My friends are having more fun with that than they ought to. I fear it may stick.

Did the Prime Minister get express entry into this competition?

When you’re up close, the guy looks like a movie star. I hope that, whatever his appearance, people will remember his government for the problems it solved and the people it helped.

Well, most of us would rather be more valued for our brains than our looks.

That’s right.

Are there any citizenship ceremonies that stand out to you as especially poignant?

On Canada Day, new citizens from nine different countries took their oaths at a Blue Jays game. I had my daughter with me—a seven-year-old hugging a bunch of new Canadians, pure joy on their faces. Thousands of people were cheering. The near-universal reaction was to welcome.

Source: For minister Sean Fraser, immigration and housing are more than just numbers games

Ragbag: Did I just become a citizen of a country [USA] that doesn’t want me? [power of citizenship ceremonies]

Reminder of the various paths people take and the questions they have when taking up citizenship (likely more of an issue for those on the left who tend more to over-think). But a nice vignette on the USA citizenship ceremony and what it signified to those taking the oath.

While DG Citizenship and Multiculturalism, had an opportunity to witness a US citizenship ceremony; while different from the Canadian ceremony in some details, the overall message of inclusion and belonging was the same. Hard to imagine the USA doing away with the in person oath unlike the unthinking politicians and officials in Canada:

When the news that the Supreme Court had ruled in favor of doing away with race-conscious college admissions, I was on a plane, traveling to Texas to be sworn in as an American citizen. By the time we landed, my texts and social media feeds were consumed by the ruling. While other passengers hopped out of their seats to grab overhead bags, I sat stunned. Was I really going to go through with raising my right hand to swear that, should the law require it, I would bear arms to protect a country that keeps telling me it’s not sure if it wants to protect me? 

Let me back up. For the last 29 years, I’ve resided in the U.S. — as a student, an arts administrator, a curator, a writer, and most recently, a business owner. I’ve lived in New York, Boston, Philadelphia and Austin. I have been a permanent resident of the U.S. since 1994, but Montreal has always felt like home to me.

Some of my life’s biggest changes have happened during this time. I became a parent. I got married. (In that order.) I was quite comfortable with my permanent resident status — much like the comfort that comes with a non-committal relationship, which I know a lot about. But after nearly three decades, I am no longer comfortable not having a vote in the country where I am raising a child and growing a business. I’m no longer comfortable not having a say in how my body, my child, the people I work with, my friends, neighbors and family are cared for.

Why has it taken me nearly 30 years to make this decision? The most honest answer is that I don’t know if I feel safe here. Because I am a Black queer woman. Because I have been detained by U.S. Border Control. Because an immigration officer once told me that Americans lynch Canadians. Because guns. Because a growing scarcity mindset has made it harder for people to be kind to each other. But the decision to become an American citizen moves beyond me— anchored to the belief that after nearly three decades, it is my responsibility and privilege to shape a country for the people who I care for, and for those who care for me. This belief let me begin the citizenship process.

Along the way, my resolve in this belief would continue to be tested, along with my fears about living in this country.

* * *

Six months after completing an online questionnaire that asked questions like Have you EVER been a habitual drunkard? I was invited to an in-person interview. When the officer, seemingly making small talk, asked, “Aren’t you moving the wrong way? Do you not like free Canadian health care?”

A trap! I thought, laughing nervously. “Well, these things are complicated,” I said, trying my hand at witty banter. But he stayed quiet.

I aced my verbal exam by answering six questions in a row correctly. Some were easy: What is the ocean on the West Coast of the United States? Others were a little trickier: What is the supreme law of the land? And after I was asked —  twice— “If the law requires it, are you willing to bear arms on behalf of the United States?” I was invited to return the following week for a swearing-in ceremony. 

I flew back east to my husband and child who were visiting family in New Jersey, before returning to Texas by myself. While still on the plane, I learned of the Supreme Court’s decision to ignore the far-reaching impacts of systemic racism. The announcement continued to test my fears and my resolve. But I got off the plane to pick up a rental car to make the hour-and-a-half drive to San Antonio, where I would be sworn in.

My drive in the rental — a red pickup truck — gave me plenty of time to think about how I got to this point. I drove with the windows down. From time to time, I checked my rearview mirror.

* * *

My parents emigrated from Trinidad to Montreal in the 1960s. Because Trinidad was still a crown colony at the time, my father actually entered Canada on a British passport. As a child, the fact that my parents left where they were from, for somewhere new, was such a non-thing — in line with the experiences of many of my friends’ parents, who’d come from Italy, China, Ukraine, Portugal. (And that was just on our block.) I simply believed that moving away was something you do when you grow up. Even my name is evidence of the role moving away plays in my family’s history. Lise is a common French-Canadian — not French — name. And Ragbir is a common Indo-Caribbean — not Indian — name. Both names allude to the far-reaching and ongoing impact of colonialism as we give power to borders and trust a fiction that has shaped histories and lives.

“Hello everyone! Are you all ready to become American citizens today?”

In the 1980s, as Quebec politics increasingly shaped the provincial economy, my parents applied for Permanent Resident status in the U.S., in an effort to keep their options open. Like many West Indians, their siblings had dispersed across the globe, with many ending up in the U.S. — New York, specifically. Throughout grade school, I can’t remember a summer, Easter, or Canadian Thanksgiving when we didn’t pack the car to make the seven-hour drive from Sherbrooke Street to Flatbush Avenue via I-87.

In high school, I started making the trip without my parents, to visit cousins and see shows by artists like The Pharcyde, De La Soul and KRS One. As such, New York became the backdrop to my coming of age. New York wasn’t like Montreal. At parties in Brooklyn, I wasn’t the only Black person. Standing in line at Gloria’s roti shop, I wasn’t the only kid with Trini parents. So when my parents were approved for permanent resident status after waiting nearly 15 years, I jumped at the chance to move south. Within months, my parents let their status wane. They never took up residency and remain in Canada to this day.

* * *

On the drive from Austin to San Antonio, I saw a range of bumper stickers that continued to test my fear and resolve: “Country girls don’t retreat, they reload.” “Dump Joe and the Hoe.” “I’ll keep my guns, freedom, and money. You keep the change.”

My seatbelt felt tight as I drove.

In a strip mall in the San Antonio suburbs, people meandered through the parking lot of an immigration office carrying official-looking envelopes and little American flags. The majority of us in attendance were people of color, as were the immigration officers who were patient, and I daresay, joyful.

After being herded through a metal detector, I was asked to hand over my green card. “You’re taking it? Like, for good?”

“That’s right. You don’t need it anymore,” the officer said with a smile. I didn’t tell him I’ve been carrying my green card with me every day since 2015. Without it, I felt vulnerable, even as I made my way to the ceremony room.

Inside, nervous-looking people were taking selfies, or reading the letter from the President that we each found on our seats. I did neither.

I walked into the Texas heat carrying my little American flag. People looked at me as though I’d just won a prize.

“Hello everyone! Are you all ready to become American citizens today?” asked a cheerful man from the podium. He looked to be my age. Dark hair. Olive skin. He identified himself as a supervisor. The room full of people nodded as if on cue, and I felt like I was the only one having mixed feelings.

He ran through a list of dos and don’ts. (Do raise your right hand when told. Don’t record anything.) He’d obviously done this about a million times and clearly loved it. His enthusiasm was infectious.

He led us in a rehearsal of the oath. Then, perhaps sensing the collective anxiety, he coaxed a room full of about-to-be Americans into doing the wave, like we were at a baseball game or a Beyoncé concert. We had to do it twice because the first time we messed up. You know, nerves. But by the time we were done, everyone was laughing and smiling at each other and we felt like we were in this wild thing together. He didn’t miss a beat — he launched straight into the ceremony.

“Can you all please raise your right hand?” The words were a blur, but I said “I do” at the right time and the woman next to me bounced up and down, her blonde bob swinging above the straps on her summer dress. She went to hug me, but my face said, That was nice and all, but please don’t.

One by one our names were called to receive our naturalization certificate. When the supervisor handed me mine I thanked him and said, “You were really good. You made that so pleasant and easy. And you were just so kind.”

“Well, thank you,” he said. “I try.”

I walked into the Texas heat carrying my little American flag. People looked at me as though I’d just won a prize. I didn’t have the urge to hug strangers out of sheer joy, so part of me felt like a fraud. Another part of me, however, was proud —I’d moved through my fear to stand on this side. I did this thing that people have died for. I did this thing that gave me an extra coat of armor — for better or worse.

Around me, families cheered and cried and hugged and laughed. I choked down the knot in my throat and made my way through the crowded lot. In my truck, I locked the doors, placed my certificate and flag on the passenger seat and took a snapshot to send to family and friends, most of whom knew about my mixed feelings. One friend suggested I listen to Jimi Hendrix’s version of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” which I did, on repeat. The rendition is perfect dissonance: a balance of hope and frustration and beauty and pain. The certificate and flag sat in the passenger seat while I drove back to Austin.

* * *

I have always believed that my parents’ choice to leave the island of Trinidad for the island of Montreal had a very matter-of-fact, straightforward quality to it. And maybe it was that way for them. In fact, for millions of people, leaving where you’re from is what you do. In 2020, it was estimated that more than 280 million around the world left their place of birth — because it was expected of them, or it was necessary, or they had no choice.

But officially leaving wasn’t straightforward for me. The decision to become a U.S. citizen wasn’t like the decision my parents made. Yes, the world is different now. For one, Trinidadians no longer have automatic British passports like my father did. But change doesn’t end there.

In addition to the blow to Affirmative Action, in the same week, the Supreme Court shot down President Biden’s proposal to forgive student debt and ruled that businesses are allowed to discriminate against members of the LGBTQ community. In one week, we saw how much this country is changing — and how far we need to go.

In a recent conversation with my parents, my mother said that while she understands why I did it, she struggles with the idea that I became a citizen of a country where some of the laws seem unjust. My father, on the other hand, said that if he could, he would do exactly what I did. “I think the U.S. is through a rough time—maybe like growing pains—but they will get back

This is not an argument for, or against, becoming an American citizen. I know this is a privilege that many have lost their lives trying to attain.

He added that when he left Trinidad in the ’60s, he had initially planned to go back some day. “I didn’t want to stay in Canada,” he said. “For decades, Trinidad was my home. But now Montreal feels more like home.”

I wonder if the same thing will happen to me. Maybe, like him, it will take time.

Before I’m told to go back to where I came from, let me be clear: This is not an argument for, or against, becoming an American citizen. I know this is a privilege that many have lost their lives trying to attain. I know that my citizenship lets me move about the world with an ease unknown to billions of people. I know that legally, my citizenship lets me voice my opinion without risk. But with the Supreme Court rulings that we’ve seen in the last year, for someone like me — even with all the privilege that comes with being an American — the decision to dig deeper into this country is complex, even as I stand on this side of my fear, equipped with all the privileges that come with being an American.

When I got home, I read the letter from President Biden. In addition to acknowledging the courage it takes to start a life in a new country, the letter declares that America is a nation of possibilitiesand that the country has flourished because of immigrants.But I was most struck by this line: “Thank you for choosing us and for believing that America is worthy of your aspirations.”

Maybe one day the world won’t have borders, education will be available to everyone, and regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, age or ability, we will all be treated equally. But until then, I raised my right hand and took an oath to protect this country because I want to believe that my voice will add to the chorus of change. Because I want to believe that as we move forward, we can all be protected. I don’t know how long this will take, or even if it’s possible. But as a new American citizen inspired by an immigration supervisor, I have to try.

Lise Ragbir writes about race, immigration, arts and culture, and relationships. She was born and raised in Montreal, Quebec, and now makes her home in Austin, Texas.

Source: Did I just become a citizen of a country that doesn’t want me?

Globe editorial: The Trudeau cabinet doesn’t need new faces. It needs new ideas

Immigration money quote from editorial (Globe going all in on immigration given series of articles and commentary):

Fixing this will require a change of philosophy. The Liberals need to ask themselves whether bringing the population equivalent of 5½ Reginas into the country over three years is the best idea during a period of sagging labour productivity and a widespread housing shortage.

Full devastating editorial:

ernment.

Source: Globe editorial: The Trudeau cabinet doesn’t need new faces. It needs new ideas

Keller: It’s time for Canada to take its foot off the immigration gas pedal

Indeed as I and others have been arguing for some time with respect to Temporary Foreign Workers and productivity, along with a more serious discussion regarding immigration policy and programs:

The guy who cut my hair last week taught me something about the Temporary Foreign Worker program: It’s even looser than I thought.

Fixing that, and a number of other things that aren’t quite right about the immigration system, comes down to the Trudeau government. So, don’t hold your breath.

After Sean Fraser was shuffled from Immigration Minister to Housing Minister on Wednesday, he said Canada can’t “close the door on newcomers.” As if that’s what the government’s critics are calling for. Is it possible for Canadians to discuss a serious economic issue, seriously? Or is polarizing name-calling all that our politics has left?

The Liberals have a habit of crafting marketing strategies before policies, and then having policies become hostage to the talking points. Immigration is such a case. We’re about to find out whether the Liberals can make a course correction, or whether they’ll double down on the polarizing talking points, attacking suggestions for reform as so much xenophobia.

The Liberals have raised Canada’s immigration targets, year after year, while also making it ever easier for businesses to recruit low-wage, not-so-temporary temporary foreign workers, and schools to enroll hundreds of thousands of overseas students – many of whom sought student visas in part for the chance to become low-wage, not-so-temporary temporary foreign workers.

One of the negative consequences is that the national housing squeeze has been made worse, with a big jump in postpandemic arrivals pushing high prices higher and low vacancy rates lower. It’s not political. It’s just arithmetic.

The Liberals could fix things – not by stopping immigration but by scaling it back, and making it more targeted to highly skilled economic immigrants. The latter is supposed to be the core mission of our immigration system. Returning to that common-sense approach would benefit Canadians and the economy.

And now, back to my neighbourhood barbershop. The place was empty when I walked in on a Friday afternoon, so I dropped into a chair and started chatting with the barber. He spoke excellent English with a Spanish accent, and I asked where he was from.

“Mexico,” he said.

How long had he been in Canada?

“One year and seven months.”

Why did he come to Canada?

“I looked online for jobs, found one I wanted and applied.”

Temporary Foreign Worker program?

“Yes.”

He gave me a good haircut (as good as can be when the subject has little more than half a head of hair) and a better insight into one part of the immigration system.

It’s perfectly reasonable for Canada to have a system for filling temporary gaps for highly skilled labour. That’s what the TFW program is supposed to do.

But that’s mostly not what it’s doing. Instead, it’s offering low-pay, low-skill and low-productivity employers a way to recruit overseas, at low cost, rather than having to search harder at home, or offer higher wages, or invest in technology and training to increase efficiency.

The government of Canada’s TFW Job Bank has around 10,000 postings from employers searching for a temporary foreign worker. Most jobs offer a salary of less than $40,000. Nearly all pay less than $60,000, which is below the Canadian average.

There are, for example, 17 employers looking for barbers, from Edmonton to Hamilton to Montreal, with pay starting at $15 an hour.

There are also some high-wage jobs. A Vancouver health care provider is looking for five family physicians, at a salary of $300,000 to $350,000. A veterinary clinic is offering up to $190,000 for an emergency vet. eBay Canada in Toronto is seeking a software engineer, at a salary of $160,000 to $180,000.

But the TFW database is mostly low-wage work.

Home Hardware in Woodstock, Ont., is seeking two cashiers at $16.55 an hour. A Mac’s Convenience in Edmonton is looking for one cashier at $15 an hour. City Avenue Market in Port Coquitlam, B.C., needs a cashier, at $17 an hour.

A Tim Hortons in Sherbrooke, Que., wants seven “assistant waiter/waitress,” at $15.25 an hour. Western Pizza in Regina has four vacancies for servers, at $14 an hour.

All of those low-wage jobs, along with most others I looked at, were listed as full-time and permanent. These aren’t temporary positions, even though that’s what the TFW program is notionally about.

And I haven’t touched on the larger but more opaque group of foreign workers: those who come on a student visa, work at low-wage service jobs, and then use Canadian educational credentials plus Canadian work experience in hopes of landing permanent residency in the country.

If everyone on that path was a graduate in engineering, computer science or other highly paid fields, the system would make sense. But a large share of the visa students are not.

As I wrote earlier this week, our plans to use the various immigration streams to raise GDP per capita are being undermined by too heavy a focus on filling low-wage, low-skill jobs.

We can make our immigration system better. But first, we need an honest conversation about what our immigration system aims to do. And what’s not working.

Source: Opinion: It’s time for Canada to take its foot off the immigration gas …