What this year’s ‘exceptional circumstances’ mean for 300,000 Canadians who got their passports late

Good detailed analysis of the numbers and the lack of accountability with respect to its delivery failures along with the application of exemptions from the fee-remission policy just implemented in 2021:

Ottawa has failed to issue passports within the required timeline to almost 300,000 Canadians in the first year of a new fee-remission policy brought in by immigration officials to ensure service standards are met.

According to the Service Fees Act, when an individual pays for a government service and there’s an unreasonable delay, the department involved must return a portion of the fee.

In April 2021, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada rolled out its remission policy for fees to apply to a program designed to attract foreign youth to travel and work in Canada; for the citizenship ceremony where someone takes the oath; and for passports.

Passport applicants, however, were not entitled to refunds this year due to the short nature of timelines and “exceptional circumstance” of the COVID-19 pandemic that officials say falls under a provision in the law enacted in 2017. Those circumstances are defined as situations outside the department’s control and include:

  • “Unforeseen” system disruptions;
  • Natural disasters;
  • Emergency situations that cause a closure of an office, a reduction in the service capacity or a surge of applications outside the department’s control;
  • Labour disruption.

Yet the number of people who would have qualified for fee remissions offers a glimpse at the extent of the delays at beleaguered passport services as Canadians look to travel extensively again.

Since the spring, Canadians have been camping outside Service Canada offices across the country to get new travel documents for planned trips as lives returned to normal for many, with border and public health restrictions relaxed. 

Public anger prompted Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to create a task force in late June to address unprecedented delays in government services, especially in the processing of passports and immigration applications.

“We know service delays, particularly in recent months, are unacceptable,” said Trudeau. “We will continue to do everything we can to improve the delivery of these services in an efficient and timely manner.

“This new task force will help guide the work of the government to better meet the changing needs of Canadians and continue to provide them with the high-quality services they need and deserve.”

According to data obtained by the Star, the immigration department, which oversees Passport Canada, failed to promptly deliver passports to a total of 295,789 Canadians in the year between April 2021 and 2022. Of those, 217,139 received their travel documents between one and 10 days late, while 78,650 got theirs 11 days or more past the standard times.

The passport service standard was set at 10 business days for in-person applications; 20 days by mail; end of next day for urgent service; and two to nine days for express service. Applicants who got their passport one to 10 days late would have been eligible for a 25 per cent refund, while those experiencing a delay of 11 days or more were supposed to get 50 per cent.

The number of passport applications that missed the target time surged from 1,648 in April 2021 to more than 23,000 last August to 55,117 in January, before falling to 40,343 this April.

The data provided by immigration officials did not break down further in terms of how an application was received. However, in the 2020-21 fiscal year, 81 per cent of all in-person passport applications were processed within 10 business days and 78 per cent of mail-in applications met the 20-day target.

A five-year adult passport application currently costs $120; a 10-year is $160. If all 300,000 applicants eligible for remissions were applying for a five-year adult passport, more than $11.2 million might have been returned for the substandard service. 

Under the fee-remission policy, immigration applicants would be notified if their application was not processed within the established service standards and a refund would be issued based on the calculation method applicable for the fee paid.

Immigration department spokesperson Nancy Caron said this year’s remissions would have started by July 1, but have been postponed due to the pandemic, as the policy does not apply to applications processed in “unusual or exceptional circumstances” that may disrupt regular operations or result in “unforeseeable and significant influx of applications.”

“Remissions are not retroactive and applications received prior to the exceptional circumstances being lifted will not be eligible for remissions,” explained Caron, adding that exceptional circumstances are in effect for passport applicants with applications submitted between April 1, 2021, until at least Sept. 30.

For the International Experience Canada Program, which allows young people from other countries to travel and work in Canada, 766 applicants saw delays of one to 28 days beyond the 56-day service standard in the first year of the remission policy; they qualified for a 25 per cent refund of the $153 application fees. Another 222 applicants, who waited 29 days or more, would receive 50 per cent in remission of the paid fee.

In contrast, only 14 citizenship applications met the remission criteria, where days between a positive decision and first citizenship ceremony notice must be more than four months.

Remissions under these two programs totalled just under $50,000.

During debates on the federal budget that passed in June, the immigration department had asked for exemptions from fee remissions for a string of programs: authorization to return to Canada, rehabilitation for criminality and serious criminality, restoration of temporary resident status, and temporary resident permits.

However, clauses relating to the exemption were defeated by the standing committee in finance and were removed.

Caron said uniform and predictable processing times and service standards cannot be established for those programs as they are highly dependent on third parties such as foreign judicial systems and international public safety organizations.

“Due to the high complexity and discretionary nature of the decisions associated with these applications, few can be considered straightforward,” Caron told the Star, adding that officials are still assessing the status of those programs to ensure compliance with the Service Fees Act.

Source: What this year’s ‘exceptional circumstances’ mean for 300,000 Canadians who got their passports late

Korea: Only 4 out of 10 multicultural children go to college [compared to 7 out of 10]

About 43.9 percent of children from multicultural families were young adults in 2021, according to a study conducted by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family. The figure has increased by 8.3 percent from the previous survey in 2018, which stood at 35.6 percent.

Meanwhile, only 40.5 percent of children from multicultural families were admitted to colleges. The number is significantly lower than the college entrance rate of the overall population, which was 71.5 percent.

In addition, children’s satisfaction level with family relationships has deteriorated. The percentage of multicultural children who answered they do not talk to their father at all increased from 7 percent in 2015, to 8.6 percent in 2018, and 10.5 percent in 2021. With their mothers, the tally also increased from 3.4 percent to 10.5 percent to 11.9 percent in the same period. (Yonhap)

Source: [Graphic News] Only 4 out of 10 multicultural children go to college

COVID-19 Immigration Effects – May 2022 update

My latest monthly update.

May numbers are similar to April as the first months of the pandemic resulted in drastic shutdowns and reductions across the suite of immigration-related programs.

The number of TR2PR transitions continued to decline. While in 2021, these transitions (some double counting) averaged about 68 percent of all Permanent Residents admissions, in 2022 this share had dropped to about 51 percent, suggesting a decreased “inventory” and/or a conscious government decision too redress the balance and address backlogs.

Temporary residents (IMP and TFWP) continued reflected an ongoing return to pre-pandemic levels along with the seasonal changes in agriculture workers. The number of not-stated IMP has increased, from forming about 9 percent of all IMP in 2021 to about 23 percent in 2022, possibly reflecting coding issues.

International students, applications and permits, reflect normal seasonal patterns. As noted, given the number of media and other reports regarding private colleges being used more for immigration than study purposes (and related exploitation), IRCC needs to consider seriously disaggregating post-secondary study permits data to separate out public and private sector institutions.

Citizenship looks on track to continue whittling away at the backlog of about 400,000 (as if June 1st).

The number of Ukrainians arriving in Canada, mainly under the Canada-Ukraine authorization for emergency travel remains significant, comprising half of all visitor visas in April and May.

Britain’s Surprisingly Diverse Tories

Significant, with interesting contrast with the base:

Fed up with Boris Johnson, Britain needs a new prime minister. It’s so fed up, in fact, that the next prime minister may look nothing like Johnson—that is, white, male, privately educated. The last time the Conservatives held a leadership contest, in 2019, the field of 10 contenders contained just one person of an ethnic-minority background and only two women. This time is remarkably different. Of those originally in contention, half were of ethnic-minority backgrounds and half were women. Until today’s initial selection, Britain could have had in Rishi Sunak or Suella Braverman its first Asian prime minister, in Kemi Badenoch its first Black prime minister, or in Nadhim Zahawi its first Kurdish and Muslim prime minister. (Zahawi has been eliminated, but Sunak, Braverman, and Badenoch remain in a field of six hoping to advance to the final stage of voting, slated for September 5.)

That such milestones could be achieved by a distinctly right-of-center party may seem odd—ironic, even—given the international left’s perceived patent on diversity and multiculturalism. But in Britain, the Conservatives have the best track record of political firsts, including the first Jewish prime minister in Benjamin Disraeli and the first female prime minister in Margaret Thatcher. Sajid Javid, whose recent resignation as health secretary led to the flood of Tory ministerial departures that toppled Johnson, was not only the first British Asian to put himself forward for the position of prime minister in 2019 but also the first ethnic-minority chancellor and home secretary. The Conservatives have produced the first female home secretary of an ethnic-minority background, the first Black chairman of one of Britain’s major political parties, and the first Muslim to attend the cabinet.

Conservatives haven’t always championed diversity in this way. Although the party elected its first lawmaker of Asian descent, Mancherjee Bhownaggree, in 1895, it would take nearly a century to do so again, this time with the election of Nirj Deva in 1992. Britain didn’t get its first British Asian woman in the House of Commons until in 2010 (when two were elected at once). Only five years ago did a British Asian ascend to one of the great offices of state for the first time (with Javid’s appointment as home secretary in 2018).

I reached out to Sunder Katwala, the director of British Future, a think tank that specializes in ethnicity and identity, to understand why the Conservative Party in particular has led Britain to this historic moment and what it reveals about the country’s sense of self.

“The pace of change of this development is absolutely extraordinary,” he said. In his view, this Conservative field represents “probably the most ethnically diverse contest for party leadership that has been seen in any major party in any democracy. For a party of the right of center, it’s off the scale.”

Diversity, after all, is generally regarded as a progressive shibboleth, not a Tory one. But as Katwala told me, this shift in representation among Conservatives did not happen organically but was the result of a years-long effort spurred by the former Conservative leader and prime minister David Cameron. When Cameron took over in 2005, the party claimed just two ethnic-minority members of Parliament, and he set out to ensure that his party more closely resembled the modern Britain it hoped to lead.

The next year, Cameron introduced a priority list of female and ethnic-minority candidates to be selected, many for safe Conservative seats. By the next election, the number of Conservative female MPs had risen from 17 to 49, and ethnic-minority MPs had increased from two to 11. Today, those figures stand at 87 and 22, respectively. By diversifying his party “at the top and from the top,” Katwala said, Cameron succeeded in transforming its image as a seemingly more inclusive and representative party, even if, in reality, it continued to lag behind the Labour Party in the diversity of its parliamentary caucus. In the House of Commons, more than half of Labour’s nearly 200 MPs are women and 41 are of ethnic-minority backgrounds—although Labour has so far failed to elect a woman or minority leader.

But Cameron’s diversity from above has not trickled down, and the Tory grass roots remain overwhelmingly male and white. Nor has the change of image necessarily resulted in more minority votes. During the last general election, the Conservatives stayed stuck at roughly 20 percent of the ethnic-minority vote compared with Labour’s 64 percent.

According to the party’s critics on the left, the Tories’ embrace of diversity among their senior ranks has hardly made Conservative politics more progressive either. Many of the party’s ethnic-minority leadership hopefuls are, in fact, among its most hard-line politicians on policy issues such as immigration, Brexit, and the rights of transgender people. The multicultural composition of the current leadership field seems only to have consolidated support for the Johnson government’s harsh plan of deporting asylum seekers to Rwanda in a bid to deter illegal migration—a policy all of the candidates back.

Faiza Shaheen, an economist specializing in inequality and social mobility and a former Labour Party parliamentary candidate, told me that the prevailing belief in progressive circles is that increased diversity naturally leads to policies that benefit the most disadvantaged communities. She regards this belief as misguided because the benefits have not materialized—rather, the reverse. “You have this weird conundrum when you have more Black and brown people in senior, powerful positions, but policies that disproportionately hurt people of color,” she told me. Shaheen also pointed out that although the Conservative Party has made progress in achieving more ethnic diversity, social class and economic status remain significant dividing lines between those with access to power and those without.

Another part of the paradox of the Tory leadership contest is that although the contenders themselves are representative of a more diverse Britain, the voters will be that far less diverse electorate of roughly 200,000 Conservative Party members. Still, notes Katwala, many of the leadership contenders’ personal stories offer an optimistic, patriotic view of Britain that goes down well with the party faithful.

“There is no doubt at all that the Conservative Party membership can vote for an Asian or Black candidate,” he said. “The only people who doubt that are liberal progressives who are projecting assumptions and stereotypes onto the Tory Party membership, and maybe onto the voters that switch to the Conservatives at the general election, to say, ‘They won’t do that.’”

The latest leadership polling of party members, which puts Badenoch and Sunak among the top contenders to the front-runner Penny Mordaunt, shows that they’d have very little hesitation about doing so.

Source: Britain’s Surprisingly Diverse Tories

Germany: Thousands of immigrants could gain regular status

Of note, further change:

The German government is hoping to give over 130,000 migrants trapped in legal limbo the chance to stay permanently, as part of an overhaul of Germany’s immigration system.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz‘s government on Wednesday agreed on a package of reforms that will open the prospect of residency rights to people who have lived in Germany for more than five years with a so-called Duldung, or tolerance status.

“We are a diverse immigration country. Now we want to become a better integration country,”  Interior Minister Nancy Faeser, of Scholz’s center-left Social Democrat SPD, wrote on Twitter. “I want to actively shape migration and integration instead of reluctantly administering them as I have done for the past 16 years,” she continued in reference to the previous conservative government’s policies.

A Duldung is normally issued to people who have been refused asylum but who can’t return to their home country for various reasons: These might include the threat of war or arrest in their home country, pregnancy or serious illness, or because they are studying or in job training in Germany. Legally, however, they remain obliged to leave the country and live under the threat of deportation.

Asylum gray zone

A Duldung is only valid for a short time, and people can be granted the status several times in a row often with no prospect of being allowed to work. Under the new scheme, proposed by Faeser, people who have had a Duldung for five years  could be eligible for a one-year “opportunity residency” status, during which time they have to prove a willingness to integrate: which in practice would mean learning German and finding a job capable of securing their income.

Such migrants would have to meet certain conditions: Anyone convicted of a serious crime, applied for asylum under a false identity, or who had submitted multiple applications, would be barred from the option. There are exceptions to the criminal conviction rule: crimes that were punished with a low fine or in a young offenders’ court will be overlooked.

Karl Kopp, director for European affairs at the refugee rights organization Pro Asyl, said he has met many people caught in this legal limbo. “Imagine you have tolerance status, you have family, you have children in school here who speak fluent German, who grew up here,” he told DW. “And at some point all you want is a status that makes it clear that you belong to this country. All you want is for the uncertainty to stop.”

“Many others live with a concrete fear for years: The police are going to come to deport them,” he said. “This drains them of energy and causes a lot of suffering.”

Kopp also said he knew of many cases of people with tolerance status who have job training places, and their employers have to fight to allow them to stay in the country.

The government integration commissioner, Reem Alabali-Radovan, wrote on Twitter that the new legislation would be a bridge to a better life for around 135,000 people in Germany. “We are reshaping Germany as a modern immigration country. A first important step: With the right of residence, there will finally be fair prospects for all those who have been living here on a tolerated basis for 5+ years. We are also opening up access to integration courses for everyone.”

Opposition politicians have voiced criticism. Alexander Throm, domestic policy spokesman for the Christian Democratic Union (CDU), said that the government’s plans would create “massive incentives” for illegal immigration to Germany. “On top of that, the coalition is undermining asylum law with this initiative,” Throm told the RND news network.

“There has to be a difference between whether an asylum procedure ends with protection status or whether an asylum application is rejected,” he added. “But if a rejected application also leads to being allowed to stay in Germany permanently, then the asylum procedure itself becomes largely pointless.”

Green Party co-leader Omid Nouripour defended the measure, claiming that it would help ease Germany’s acute shortage of skilled workers. “We are opening new prospects for people,” he told the Funke media network. “Part of that is a modern immigration law based on a points system. For that reason, it’s right that this draft law will also consolidate regulations from the skilled labor immigration law.”

Baby steps towards integration

Refugee organizations have applauded the government’s general approach, but remain skeptical of the execution. “We welcome the intention to give over 100,000 people a regular status,” said Kopp of Pro Asyl. “But we also point out a few problems where we think the legislation needs to be more precise.”

For one thing, Kopp says it’s too tough to force people to try to fulfill the necessary conditions for residency within a year or risk falling back into tolerance status.

“We’d like to see more humanitarian flexibility,” he said. “It could easily be that someone goes out looking for a job but doesn’t succeed because of the economic situation.” He also said he’d like to see the new law include a provision stopping the threat of deportation for anyone eligible for residency under the new scheme.

Integration Commissioner Alabali-Radovan stressed that this current package was just “the first milestone,” and that more plans would be implemented before the end of the year, including measures allowing migrants better access to the job market and naturalization.

Source: Germany: Thousands of immigrants could gain regular status

The visa hurdle: Why conference applicants from the global south can’t always clear it

Of note as Canadian media is covering this issue as well:

Tanaka Chirombo was afraid he wouldn’t make it to the 24th International AIDS Conference taking place in Montreal later this month.

Chirombo lives in Malawi, and his life work revolves around HIV. His interest in the virus began with his father, who delighted him with made-up stories as a boy. His dad contracted HIV but delayed seeking medical help because of the stigma of the disease and the cost of treatment. It progressed into AIDS, and he passed away when Chirombo was 4 years old.

Tanaka Chirombo of Malawi, whose life work revolves around HIV, was at first rejected for a Canadian visa to attend the international AIDS conference in Montreal this month. “The main issue was me coming back from Canada,” he says. “They thought I was going to stay in Canada.” He did find success with a follow-up application.

As Chirombo grew up, he witnessed others in his community die of complications stemming from AIDS. When he was a teenager, he volunteered at a clinic, where he mentored a 10-year-old girl with HIV. He helped her secure treatment, but it came too late and she too passed away.

It’s these issues — of battling stigma and getting people the care and information they need — that are at the heart of Chirombo’s HIV advocacy today. As the board chair of the Global Network of Young People Living with HIV, he works to help young women who are HIV positive by reducing discrimination and improving access to HIV services.

So when this year’s International AIDS Conference was announced, he knew he wanted to be there. “I would love to meet stakeholders in Montreal to be able to get funding to expand our projects,” Chirombo says. In fact, he’s serving as the meeting’s youth representative and is on the organizing committee as a co-chair for the Global Village and Youth Programme Working Group.

But to go to Montreal, he needs a visa. For someone from a low-income country like Malawi, getting permission to travel abroad can be an expensive obstacle course. It ran Chirombo about $1,100. “I spent money for the online application,” he explains, “and then had to book a return flight ticket to South Africa to do the biometrics,” referring to fingerprinting. He sent a copy of his passport and a letter describing the international conferences he’d attended before.

Within two weeks, the answer from the Canadian government arrived. Chirombo’s visa application was denied. “The main issue was me coming back from Canada,” he says. “They thought I was going to stay in Canada.”

The letter he received stated, “I am not satisfied that you will leave Canada at the end of your stay as a temporary resident … based on your personal assets and financial status … the purpose of your visit … [and] your current employment situation.” None of it made sense to him.

“I don’t think I would ever live abroad because I want to be able to change the landscape in my country — the country I love the most,” Chirombo says. “That’s the whole reason I’m doing this sort of work.”

The rejection was really hard on him.

“When I read that letter, I was sad first thing,” he recalls. “I went online, I thought I could write a post to bring out my anger. But then I deleted it. I was like, ‘No, that’s irrational for me to do something like that.’ But basically, I just slept. It was the easiest way to get over the pain of being rejected.”

Since that initial denial, Chirombo submitted a revised visa application. He attached additional bank statements, his return ticket and letters of support “to be able to show my commitment that I’m still going to go back home.”

A couple weeks later, Chirombo heard that his visa had been granted — and just in time since the International AIDS Conference begins on July 29.

Kareem Samsudeen Adebola, an advocate for youth who are HIV positive in Nigeria, was initially rejected in his application for a Canadian visa to attend the upcoming international AIDS conference. Adebola says when he takes note of everyone who’s been rejected for a visa, the feeling can be boiled down to a single word — “inequality.” His second visa application was accepted.

Kareem Samsudeen Adebola

Chirombo’s experience isn’t unique. Kareem Samsudeen Adebola is the deputy national coordinator for the Association of Positive Youth in Lagos, Nigeria, where he works to reduce stigma and provide access to public health services to young people living with HIV. He too lost his father to AIDS-related complications when he was a boy. Adebola has HIV as well and has been on antiretroviral therapy for close to 20 years. He does his advocacy work today in his father’s memory. “I have to fulfill his dreams that AIDS could not allow him to fulfill,” he says.

Like Chirombo, Adebola wants to attend the International AIDS conference in Montreal to connect with scientists in the field and network with global experts. But within a week of submitting his visa application to Canada, it was denied for the same reason as Chirombo’s initial rejection.

Adebola says when he takes note of everyone who’s been rejected, the feeling can be boiled down to a single word — “inequality.” Adebola says that “it saddens my heart when I think about people from countries who can’t attend.” Fortunately, his second visa application was accepted.

Not every visa applicant is as lucky as Chirombo and Adebola. Researchers, scientists and medical professionals from the global south (which encompasses low- and middle-income countries) are among those who simply can’t attend professional meetings abroad because their visas arrive too late or not at all. It’s a problem that many from high-income countries never even think about.

Dr. Ulrick Sidney Kanmounye of Cameroon — currently a research fellow at Geisinger Health System specializing in cerebrovascular neurosurgery — detailed his inability to receive a Schengen visa to travel to Europe and attend the World Health Assembly (the annual meeting of the World Health Organization in 2019 while living in Cameroon. “The truth is that I lost more than just money,” recounts Kanmounye. “I lost faith in those that organize these events in high income countries.”

Dr. Mohamed Bella Jalloh, recalls how in 2018, as a recent medical school graduate, he traveled from Sierra Leone to Côte d’Ivoire to apply for a Belgian visa to attend the InciSioN Global Surgery Symposium. Jalloh was denied for “no definite reason.” He says, “They just sent back my passport without any further explanation.”

In January 2019, Dr. Dian Blandina (currently with the organization People’s Health Movement) received her EU residency card. Two years earlier, when she had only her Indonesian citizenship, she was invited to speak at the International Association of Health Policy meeting in Thessaloniki, Greece. Although her visa was approved, the process was costly and took a month and a half. Blandina nearly missed the conference.

After that, she stopped trying to attend international meetings. “It’s just not worth the trouble for attending just one event,” Blandina says, “especially if I’m not [an] organizer or a presenter. Almost all my colleagues back home feel the same.”

Then there’s Dr. Mehr Muhammad Adeel Riaz. Earlier this year, working as a junior doctor at the Allied Hospital in Faisalabad, Pakistan, he was invited to attend the 75th World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland. “Having the chance to attend and advocate on behalf of my community at this high level [meeting] was a dream come true,” he emailed NPR. He received a scholarship to cover his visa fees, roundtrip airfare, accommodations and food.

But his request for a visa was rejected. According to the Swiss Embassy: “the information submitted regarding the justification for the purpose and conditions of the intended stay was not reliable.” It made Riaz feel as if having a passport from Pakistan was a failing on his part, and he regrets missing the opportunity to meet global health professionals “to increase the visibility of my work as a young global health advocate,” he says.

These types of experiences are discouraging. Dr. Ankit Raj, a junior resident at Sawai Man Singh Medical College in Jaipur, India, says the interview process for a visa feels designed to intimidate. “The questions are highly specific, detailed and often beyond the scope of purpose of visit,” he explains. “The entire process often feels like a criminal interrogation and the applicant ends up feeling guilt ridden toward the end of the interview.”

As for the upcoming International AIDS Conference, organizers are working with the Canadian authorities to clarify what’s needed to avoid visa rejections for global south applicants. And they’re offering scholarships and fee waivers to make it cheaper to attend. If attendees can’t come in person, they can log into the proceedings virtually.

But Madhukar Pai, an epidemiologist at McGill University, says virtual participation is far from ideal. “What happens to all of the side room discussions, the coffee, the chat at the bar at night?,” he asks. “How do you network, make deals, get opportunities, all of those intangible benefits of in-person meetings?”

And this exclusion of people from lower resource countries means, according to Pai, that it’s often attendees from higher income countries who make the decisions that can shape funding and the research landscape. It’s an issue compounded by disparities in COVID vaccination status, especially earlier in the pandemic, that allowed many people from higher income countries to receive two shots and a booster and to travel with ease, while many in low- and middle-income countries struggled to get even a single dose.

“The fact that we left behind people without even the first shot worries me a lot because they will always struggle to go anywhere,” Pai says. In his view, the impact on global health gatherings is profound. “People from the global south might be relegated to a secondary status,” he says. If we’re not careful, he adds that “we will dramatically worsen the inequities already in global health.”

The problem isn’t new, explains Adnan Hyder, vice-chair of the Board of Health Systems Global, a group that promotes health policy. “The historical tendency was always the high-income countries were able to put forth resources to attract those meetings,” he says.

The locations of these gatherings matter. When Kanmounye and a research team from Harvard University’s Program in Global Surgery and Social Change looked at publicly available data, they found that conferences hosted in low- and middle-income countries were more likely to have diverse participants. In addition, “hosting a conference in Latin America, Africa or Asia significantly increased participation of researchers from the region and minimally impacted high-income country attendance,” he says. NPR reached out for confirmation to a few organizations that host global health meetings, but they all replied that they don’t track how many people from low- and middle-income countries are denied visas to attend their conferences.

“Frankly speaking, the decision-making around where to host those meetings was not as sensitive to the concerns that we are talking about today,” says Hyder. “But I think over the past decade or so that has improved. We have a long ways to go, but I think the intention is there for equity.”

He cites the biannual symposium that his organization hosts. In 2018, it was held in Liverpool, and the World Health Organization voiced concerns over colleagues having their visas denied. This fall, it will take place in Bogotá , Colombia.

But if the locations of meetings like these remain largely unchanged, some worry about the voices that won’t be heard. The people whose visas are denied are often from the very countries where many global health concerns are most acute.

“Unless you are fully immersed and living and breathing in a country for years, you will not [know] what lies below, which is so much deeper, more complex,” says Michelle Joseph, an orthopedic surgeon and an instructor in Global Health and Social Medicine at the Harvard Medical School. “You may have theoretical knowledge, you don’t have lived experience. And lived experience takes years and that’s only afforded to those who live and reside and work in that space. And those are the voices that require amplification.”

Voices like Tanaka Chirombo from Malawi. At this point, all that’s left is for his Canadian visa to be printed out, pasted into his passport and returned to him. He leaves for Montreal in less than two weeks.

Source: The visa hurdle: Why conference applicants from the global south can’t always clear it

Legally Becoming a Ukrainian Citizen Now “Even More Difficult” – KyivPost – Ukraine’s Global Voice

More on the proposed changes:

Ukraine is one of only about 26 nations that does not allow dual citizenship. In recent times, including immediately before the February invasion, there were calls to change the citizenship laws to reflect the modern reality of what citizenship could mean in Ukraine.

Proponents argued that some foreigners, by merit, deserved citizenship: Such as foreigners who came to Ukraine and volunteered in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, deserved the right of obtaining Ukrainian citizenship without relinquishing their other passport. Other arguments were more pragmatic: millions of Ukrainians live outside of Ukraine, many send money home which contributes to the roughly 10% of pre-war GDP of Ukraine, and have obtained foreign passports which should not deprive them of their right to being Ukrainian.

Likewise, arguments were made that the current citizenship laws put Ukrainians living under occupation, such as in the Donbas, in legal limbo if they have chosen, or been forced, to receive a “DNR” or “LNR” passports. The hundreds of thousands, or perhaps millions, of Ukrainians in Crimea may have less appetite for returning home to Ukraine if they felt that they would be discriminated against for having received Russian passports – said some.

Earlier this week, President Vladimir Zelenski tasked Prime Minister Denis Shmygal with investigating how best an exam of the Ukrainian language could be introduced for those seeking to obtain Ukrainian citizenship. The President’s instructions came following a public petition that had been signed by over 25,000 Ukrainian citizens.

What will happen next with the legislation is unclear, but given the strongly patriotic public sentiment now in Ukraine, it is likely that the language exam will be introduced in the near future.

Source: Legally Becoming a Ukrainian Citizen Now “Even More Difficult” – KyivPost – Ukraine’s Global Voice

Nicolas: L’escalade du mot en n

More good commentary, with the practical suggestion of having a simple warning regarding language, just as programs provide warnings regarding violence, sex, and language:

Je serais incapable de dire quand on m’a lancé le mot en n au visage pour la première fois. Je sais qu’en prématernelle, l’insulte faisait déjà partie de ma réalité. Je sais aussi qu’au primaire, un élève avait décidé de me harceler de manière continue avec le mot, pendant plusieurs semaines.

Au début, l’enseignante à qui je l’avais dénoncé m’a demandé de l’ignorer : « Il cherche l’attention, c’est tout. » Ensuite, alors qu’on était en file à la bibliothèque de l’école, je lui ai crié d’arrêter. Là encore, l’enseignante m’a reproché — à moi, et à moi seulement — de faire du bruit et m’a conseillé de mieux gérer mes émotions. Quelques jours plus tard, l’élève a recommencé dans la cour d’école, à la récréation. Je lui ai foutu mon poing sur la gueule.

C’était la première (et la dernière) fois que j’utilisais la violence physique pour régler un problème. Je devais avoir sept ou huit ans. Là encore, c’est moi — et moi seulement — qui ai été punie par l’école. Mais mon message avait fini par passer. L’élève en question n’a plus recommencé. Il ne me restait plus qu’à vivre avec… tous les autres utilisateurs du mot.

Je me souviens que le coup de poing m’a prise moi-même par surprise. J’étais une petite fille très menue, et je ne savais pas que j’avais ça en moi. Avec le recul, je vois aussi qu’il y a eu toute une « procédure d’escalade », disons, avant que les choses en arrivent là. Le coup de poing n’aurait jamais existé si les adultes impliqués dans l’affaire avaient pris leurs responsabilités d’adultes plutôt que de me reprocher de trop tenir à ma dignité humaine.

Je ne raconte pas ce souvenir pour attirer l’attention sur ma petite personne ni parce que je me trouve particulièrement à plaindre. Au contraire : je suis assez entourée d’(ex-)enfants noirs québécois pour savoir que ce que je raconte est complètement banal. Et que des histoires comme celles-là, il en existe des milliers.

Même si le Québec d’aujourd’hui n’est plus celui des années 1990, bien des enfants continuent de recevoir ce mot à la figure — et toute une autre litanie d’insultes racistes — à l’école, dans la rue ou ailleurs. Ces incidents mettent bien sûr les parents d’enfants noirs dans des situations émotionnellement très difficiles à surmonter. Je ne compte plus mes amis qui m’ont raconté avoir eu à répondre aux questions de leurs très jeunes enfants, souvent d’âge préscolaire, au retour à la maison. « Maman, pourquoi ma peau est sale ? Papa, pourquoi est-ce que notre famille ressemble à des singes ? Maman, pourquoi est-ce que mes cheveux sont laids ? Papa, c’est quoi un n… ? »

Ces parents-là, ce sont des parents comme tous les parents. Des parents qui cherchent à protéger leurs enfants. Des parents qui, comme n’importe quel parent, peuvent écouter la Première Chaîne de Radio-Canada dans la voiture en revenant de la garderie.

Ces parents peuvent ne pas avoir envie de répondre, en plus de tout ce qui les préoccupe déjà, à un « Maman, Papa, pourquoi est-ce que le monsieur répète n… à la radio ? » Ou peut-être sont-ils eux-mêmes d’ex-enfants noirs bien de chez nous, qui préféreraient ne pas réentendre cet après-midi-là un mot lié à tant de souvenirs. Un simple avertissement en ondes leur permettrait de changer de poste — et ceux qui souhaitent écouter pourraient continuer à le faire.

On ne parle pas ici de censure, mais d’un simple avertissement. Vous savez, le genre d’avertissements que les journalistes font avant d’aborder des sujets difficiles en ondes depuis presque toujours. Le genre de précaution qu’on prend naturellement avant de montrer des images de guerre, de violence, des pensionnats pour Autochtones, de raconter dans le détail un crime sordide ou de parler de suicide. Ou même le type de périphrase qu’on utilise sans y penser avant de parler trop explicitement de sexualité à heure de grande écoute.

Les journalistes et animateurs des grandes télés et radios généralistes pensent toujours à leur public, qui inclut nécessairement des parents et leurs enfants qui les écoutent dans la voiture ou à la maison. On s’assure d’amener le public avec soi dans sa quête d’information. On choisit ses questions, ses mots et ses angles en fonction de ce qu’on imagine être les besoins et les sensibilités du public. Cette passion pour le public, elle nourrit l’amour du métier.

C’est une évidence, mais il semble qu’il soit nécessaire de le dire : les personnes noires, les parents noirs, les enfants noirs font partie du public.

Il semble que lorsqu’elles pensent aux familles à la maison, aux enfants dans la voiture, certaines personnalités médiatiques n’ont pas encore le réflexe de s’imaginer qu’ils puissent être noirs. Ou bien, peut-être s’imagine-t-on encore mal quelles sont les réalités de ces familles et de ces enfants au Québec.

Si ce souci du public incluait vraiment tout le public, il n’y aurait jamais eu de plainte au CRTC. L’ombudsman de Radio-Canada aurait pu régler la question à l’interne lorsqu’on lui a soumis la question, démarche qui là aussi n’aurait pas été nécessaire si l’émission Le 15-18 avait réagi autrement au courriel initial du plaignant.

La plainte elle-même n’aurait pas été nécessaire, d’ailleurs, si des personnes autrement sensibles aux vécus de bien des Afro-Québécois avec le mot en n avaient été présentes dans l’équipe de l’émission — non pas pour censurer la discussion, mais pour suggérer de faire attention à la façon dont on traitait le sujet.

On peut regretter la « procédure d’escalade », l’implication d’une structure fédérale telle que le CRTC, et ce qu’elle implique pour l’indépendance des salles de presse. Il faudrait aussi admettre que cette escalade n’aurait jamais existé si toutes les personnes impliquées à chaque étape de cette affaire s’étaient saisies autrement de leurs responsabilités, plutôt que de reprocher à un auditeur de trop tenir à sa dignité humaine.

Comment et pourquoi, donc, en sommes-nous arrivés à cette décision coup-de-poing du CRTC ?

Source: L’escalade du mot en n

Augmenter l’immigration ne réglera pas la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre, maintient Jean Boulet

Quebec takes a very different tack than the rest of Canada.

Will provide an opportunity for some interesting comparative analysis on outcomes between the consensus in English Canada in favour of ever increasing immigration and the more restrictive approach of Quebec.

In the longer term, Quebec’s importance in relation to the rest of Canada will continue to decline and at some point, there will likely be less support for maintaining the number of Quebec MPs:

Québec tient coûte que coûte à maintenir ses seuils d’immigration aux niveaux actuels malgré une pénurie de main-d’oeuvre qui n’est pas près de se résorber.

En entrevue bilan avec Le Devoir, le ministre du Travail, de l’Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale justifie l’intention de son gouvernement de maintenir le rythme d’accueil actuel, malgré l’accumulation des postes vacants — on en comptait plus de 224 000 au premier trimestre de 2022. « Moi, j’ai toujours dit : “les seuils ne bougent pas” », répète-t-il.

« On a encore du travail d’intégration, d’amélioration des problématiques de surqualification. […] C’est : “en prendre soin” », ajoute le ministre, en écho au leitmotiv électoral de sa formation politique en 2018.

En mai, le ministre Boulet avait ouvert la porte à réviser à la hausse le plafonnement des entrées migratoires. Une étude du démographe Marc Termote lui recommandait alors d’augmenter les seuils de 8000 nouveaux arrivants en cinq ans. Après avoir qualifié cette analyse de « raisonnée et raisonnable », M. Boulet avait finalement rebroussé chemin sur Twitter.

« Je me suis mal exprimé et j’ai été mal compris lorsque j’ai été questionné par des journalistes. Ce n’est pas acceptable de recevoir 58 000 immigrants chaque année », avait-il écrit.

La conversation sur ces seuils a repris de plus belle cette année. Alors que la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) privilégie le statu quo, le Conseil du patronat du Québec recommande d’accueillir au moins 80 000 immigrants annuellement, et même de « tendre vers » les 100 000. Le Parti libéral du Québec (PLQ) s’est déjà mouillé : un gouvernement piloté par Dominique Anglade irait jusqu’à 70 000 entrées par année en début de mandat.

En matière d’immigration, la CAQ privilégie une renégociation de l’entente Canada-Québec, qui régit le partage des compétences entre les deux ordres de gouvernement. Elle se positionne aussi en faveur du rapatriement des programmes de réunification familiale et de travailleurs étrangers temporaires, parce que le gouvernement fédéral « est incapable de livrer », insiste Jean Boulet.

« Les admissions sont faites par Ottawa, et les seuils ne sont même pas atteints à ce moment-ci », soutient-il. Selon l’élu responsable de la région de la Mauricie, les solutions à la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre se trouvent partout : travailleurs de plus de 65 ans, personnes judiciarisées, personnes en situation de handicap… Il suffit de les attirer avec les bons incitatifs.

Quelques options

Chez les travailleurs expérimentés, soit ceux qui ont passé l’âge de la retraite, la popularité du marché de l’emploi donne confiance à M. Boulet. Ils étaient plus de 194 000 travailleurs de 65 ans et plus le mois dernier, soit 20 000 de plus qu’il y a trois ans. Intrigué par le potentiel de productivité de cette tranche de la population, le ministre n’exclut pas d’agir pour repousser l’âge de la retraite. « On est en réflexion constante », dit-il.

Le ministre Boulet a déjà laissé entendre que la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre était là pour de bon, du moins à moyen terme. En s’appuyant sur les calculs de démographes, il anticipe un « creux historique » en 2030.

« C’est un phénomène qui devient de plus en plus aigu, qui a été accentué par la pandémie. Et ça va continuer », admet-il au téléphone.

L’élu caquiste n’est « pas du tout défaitiste ». « Notre taux d’emploi chez les 15 à 64 ans, il est quand même le plus élevé au Canada », soulève-t-il. Le nombre de prestataires de l’aide sociale s’est d’ailleurs abaissé de 23 % de janvier 2018 à janvier 2022, se réjouit le ministre.

Des enfants derrière la caisse

Une seule chose tracasse Jean Boulet : le recours aux moins de 14 ans sur le marché du travail. La Loi le permet, mais cette tendance s’est trop accélérée au goût du député de Trois-Rivières. « Le travail des jeunes ne doit jamais nuire à la persévérance scolaire. […] Pour moi, je l’ai déjà mentionné, ce n’est pas normal qu’un jeune de 11 ans travaille », lance-t-il.

Québec ne détient pas de statistiques sur l’emploi des plus jeunes. Statistique Canada non plus. Mais M. Boulet constate un rajeunissement du bassin d’employés. « Il y a des cas, par exemple dans des restaurants, où des jeunes de 11 ans peuvent travailler dans des cuisines près d’équipements qui peuvent comporter un certain danger », s’inquiète-t-il.

Pour mieux « encadrer le travail des enfants », le ministre envisage de légiférer, si son parti est reconduit au pouvoir en octobre.

La plateforme caquiste sera rendue publique au cours des mois prochains. Déjà, le PLQ a présenté la sienne, qui prévoit un congé de cotisations au Régime de rentes du Québec pour les 62 ans et des places en services de garde à 8,70 $ « pour tous ».

Québec solidaire (QS), le Parti québécois (PQ) et le Parti conservateur du Québec (PCQ) n’ont pas non plus déposé leur programme électoral. QS s’est toutefois engagé à obliger les entreprises à offrir quatre semaines de vacances par année à leurs employés après un an de services. Le PQ prévoit notamment dans son « projet national » de « réformer le processus de reconnaissance des diplômes ». Le PCQ souhaite, entre autres, revoir à la hausse le crédit d’impôt au prolongement de carrière des travailleurs d’expérience.

Source: Augmenter l’immigration ne réglera pas la pénurie de main-d’oeuvre, maintient Jean Boulet

Paving the way to Australian citizenship [for New Zealand]

Of note, a long-standing irritant being resolved:

By Anzac Day next year, New Zealanders living across the Tasman should get a better deal, after Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and her new Australian counterpart Anthony Albanese announced long-awaited changes to their rights.

It will mean an easier route to citizenship, as well as voting rights, putting them on par with Australians living here – ending more than two decades of inequality.

Under the current rules, Australians get permanent residence the moment they land in New Zealand and they automatically have the right to become citizens after five years. All they need do is pass a character test and a basic English language test, and have lived in New Zealand for at least eight months of each of those five years.

Most Kiwis are in Australia on a special category visa, brought in by John Howard’s government in 2001. Their path to citizenship is not so easy – they have to apply on the same basis as any other migrant, it is costly, and it is not guaranteed.

Leanne Carlin, who moved to Australia with her husband Richard and two daughters eight years ago, describes it as a “very weird thing”.

“You can come over here, you can live here as long as you like, you can work here but you’re not automatically a permanent resident,” she tells The Detail.

Kiwis, of course, pay taxes. But they cannot access unemployment benefits, student loans or disability payments, they can’t join the Australian Defence Force, police or fire service, and they cannot vote.

Carlin says they knew what they were in for when they decided to leave Whakatāne and take a chance on a new life in Brisbane in 2014.

“We didn’t expect anything from Australia. When you go to live in a foreign country, I don’t think you should expect them to take special care of you.

“But New Zealand and Australia have this trans-Tasman travel arrangement, so if you’re going to have an arrangement then make it an equal arrangement.”

When the 2001 changes came into effect, New Zealanders already living in Australia were considered permanent residents and could apply for citizenship, and they could access basic social services like welfare payments in the meantime.

Those who arrived after 2001 have had no direct pathway to citizenship.

“The Howard government was of the view that people were using New Zealand as a backdoor to Australia,” says Stuff‘s political editor Luke Malpass.

Malpass was in Sydney last week when Ardern and Albanese announced they had agreed, in principle, to end the situation where people are effectively left permanent temporary residents.

There are promises of a more “harmonised, reciprocal” regime.

Malpass explains to The Detail how relations soured between Australia and New Zealand and reached a low point in 2014 when the so-called 501 deportations started.

“The Aussies got into a habit of not really giving New Zealand anything that didn’t have any political upside,” he says.

“Even if it was bad for the relationship – they basically took the relationship for granted – they said we’ll go ahead and do it anyway.”

Last week’s announcement was a turnaround in attitudes to New Zealanders, both in the treatment of 501s and the citizenship issue, says Malpass.

Ardern has been calling for greater acknowledgement of the contribution New Zealand expats are making to Australia. She’s also pointed to the low rate of New Zealanders who become citizens compared with other nationalities.

According to the 2021 census, about one third of the 530,000 people born in New Zealand and living in Australia are citizens there. This compares to three quarters of expat Fijians being Australian citizens and the same figure for Britons.

After eight years in Australia, Carlin and her family are now on the path to citizenship through her husband Richard, who met the criteria for the skilled independent visa and was able to apply for permanent residency.

Carlin says her family has a good life in Brisbane and she’s happy to become an Australian citizen.

“It’s a means to an end,” she says.

Source: Paving the way to Australian citizenship