Gaza evacuees question Canada’s policy for who it will help evacuate

Interesting difference in immediate family definitions (USA also includes parents in their definition).

Of course, given that the government’s immigration policies are based on (weak) demographic arguments regarding the impact of an aging population, including parents would further accentuate these impacts.

It will also be interesting to have analysis of the breakdown between long-term Canadian Palestinian expatriates and those who were caught during visits to family:

…

Unlike America, which, according to the UN refugee agency, typically includes parents in the legal definition of “immediate family,” Canada’s definition in the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act extends only to spouses and common-law partners, dependent children and grandchildren.

That means, for now, Canada has not offered to add parents, in-laws and siblings to its list of potential evacuees.

In any event, Abumiddain’s father isn’t willing to leave without his brother. The pair have long worked the farm together, and Abumiddain’s uncle would otherwise be alone.

If Canada widened its legal definition of immediate family, it would allow the family to stay together and remain united, said Abumiddain, who hasn’t been able to contact his dad since he left Gaza.

The Canadian Council for Refugees has advocated for a broader definition to allow people who escape to find refuge with their loved ones in Canada.

“You may have those who are trying to exit whose immediate support network may be a more distant relative,” said co-executive director Gauri Sreenivasan.

It’s important that the government recognize the unique composition of modern families and their support systems, and avoid narrow definitions, Sreenivasan said.

“I think this is a time for us to to be generous and identify what are the opportunities to get people who are trying to leave to safety, including their families.”

…

Source: Gaza evacuees question Canada’s policy for who it will help evacuate