Immigration article of interest March 2026

Articles and opinions related to immigration that I found of interest in March (bit overly long):

  • IRCC Management/OAG International Students
  • General
  • Quebec perspectives
  • Refugees and Asylum Seekers
  • Other

IRCC Management/OAG International Students

Understandably, considerable coverage and commentary over the lack of management and integrity of the international student program contained in the OAG report. A key question, which we will probably never know for sure, is whether public service identified risks to the political level, and if so, was any critical advice toned down, and if so how much, as it moved up to the deputy level. And of course while the federal government is responsible, this does not let provincial governments, education institutions and business communities for pushing for higher levels:

Canada’s international student program blasted by auditor for failing to address ‘integrity concerns’

Canada’s Immigration Department failed to crack down on study permit applicants and holders flagged for potential fraud and non-compliance — and did not even know if those with expired permits had left the country, a government audit has found.

Between 2023 and 2024, more than 153,000 post-secondary international students were identified as potentially non-compliant with study permit rules, but officials had funding to probe only 2,000 cases annually, according to a report released Monday by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada.

The department began 4,057 investigations, but 41 per cent of these cases could not be closed because the students did not respond; another 50 cases were identified as non-compliant and requiring further follow-up.

“While there were some adjustments made to improve the integrity of the program, what’s concerning for me is that the department isn’t acting on the information that it has,” Auditor General Karen Hogan told a news conference.

“There are so many things that were raised by the department themselves, and then no follow-through.”

The international student program has been under close scrutiny since 2023, when borders reopened after the pandemic and international enrolment surged past one million. Runaway growth in the temporary resident population — including foreign workers and asylum seekers — was blamed for the affordable housing crisis, straining public resources such as health care and rising unemployment.

It prompted then prime minister Justin Trudeau’s government to cap the number of international student applications and reduce new study permits issued by 35 per cent in 2024 and another 10 per cent in 2025. New measures were also introduced to tighten eligibility for postgraduation work permits, address fraud and strengthen program integrity.

The audit findings, however, don’t appear to help boost public confidence in these reforms.

“There’s enough to still frighten people about what’s going on and question the integrity of our immigration system,” said York University Prof. Roopa Trilokekar, who focuses on government policy on international education.

The fast-growing international student program was the result of aggressive recruiting by the post-secondary education sector due to years of provincial underfunding and by unregulated foreign agents looking to profit from signing up students.

Under Ottawa’s two-step immigration pathways that favour applicants with Canadian education credentials and work experience, migrants increasingly look at studying in Canada as a back door to working and earning permanent residence here.

According to the audit, officials identified 800 approved study permits issued between 2018 and 2023 where applicants had either used fraudulent documentation or misrepresented information to gain entry to Canada. Most of them later applied for other immigration permits once in the country, and half have been approved.

“The absence of having a warning or something on their file to say fraudulent documentation or misrepresentation was used in the initial application means you weren’t able to then apply rigour on the second application,” Hogan cautioned….

Source: Canada’s international student program blasted by auditor for failing to address ‘integrity concerns’

Globe editorial: Ottawa hasn’t learned its lesson on immigration

…Lena Metlege Diab, the immigration minister, has said she accepts the Auditor-General’s recommendations. She needs to clearly articulate a path to return the international student program to its original purpose – not as a ticket to citizenship, but to allow foreigners to study here temporarily. 

Canada shouldn’t promote study permits as a pathway to permanent residency, and it should restrict the hours students can work off-campus. While the lax issuing of student visas in recent years has been useful to employers seeking low-cost labour, and post-secondary institutions keen to fill budget holes, it has distorted the program.

The immigration department needs to be able to quickly root out cases of misuse and fraud to ensure the system’s integrity. This requires closer scrutiny of renewals of people already in the country and better coordination with the CBSA.

After years of mismanagement of the immigration file, the Liberals have lost any benefit of the doubt. Immigration is an essential ingredient in Canada’s success, but it can’t be run on the honour system.

Source: Ottawa hasn’t learned its lesson on immigration

With hindsight, former immigration minister says he would have capped international students sooner

Justice Minister Sean Fraser, who was in charge of immigration during some of the years Auditor General Karen Hogan found instances of fraud in Canada’s international student program, said with hindsight, he would have acted sooner to fundamentally change it.

The Opposition Conservatives have been calling for his resignation, along with that of current Immigration Minister Lena Diab and Fraser’s immediate successor Marc Miller, from Prime Minister Mark Carney’s cabinet.

“With the benefit of hindsight, I would have liked to actually change the program fundamentally and say the federal government is placing a cap on this, and letting provinces allocate their share of the cap to different institutions,” Fraser told CBC News on Wednesday.

However, he also said the federal government was negotiating as part of “a good-faith relationship with the provinces who were requesting additional access to immigration programs at the time.”…

Source: With hindsight, former immigration minister says he would have capped international students sooner

General

Clark: Time to plan for the return of sane immigration

Reasonable and need for a longer term immigration and population policy, one that avoids the mistakes of the “more the merrier” approach that got us here:

…Most importantly, the system to select economic immigrants, which should aim to recruit highly productive newcomers that raise Canada’s standard of living, has been balkanized with a series of programs to fill alleged labour shortages, often with lower-wage workers.

Immigration means recruiting a big part of the population of the future. It can make the lives of Canadians born today dramatically richer or poorer. 

Now, the recruitment is essentially on hold – probably for two more years. The short-term goal is to pause population growth. In the meantime, there is a compelling need to focus on what immigration should be over the long term, and plan for it. 

The country is going to need it.

Source: Time to plan for the return of sane immigration

Globe editorial: The two Tory mindsets on immigration

Captures the dynamic:

…But if the Conservatives need added motivation, here are two: the demagogic tone makes it all too easy for the Liberals to ignore the long list of reforms that the Opposition has proposed, and makes it much harder for any centrist voter to contemplate supporting the Tories.

Many of the reforms proposed by the Conservatives are worth debate, including but not limited to: closing a loophole that courts have used to avoid the deportation of migrants convicted of serious criminal offences; barring asylum claims from anyone who is a national of the European Union or a G7 country, or who transited through such a country to come to Canada; and greater transparency from the immigration system. The party does not lack for ideas; it does not need to indulge in weak rhetorical legerdemain.

And there’s no need to confect issues if embarrassing the Liberals is your goal; the unadorned facts will get the job done. Such as the backlog of asylum claims sitting at 299,960 at the end of January, down fractionally from the record high of 300,154 at the end of 2025. At that rate, the backlog should be cleared sometime in 2155.

What has happened that one-sixth of all new asylum claims in 2025 were from just one country, India – a flawed democracy, but a democracy nonetheless? Why is it that asylum claims from India have surged from 379 in 2015 to 17,835 last year, an astonishing 4,505 per cent rise? And why is it that just 22 per cent of asylum claims from Indian nationals that were finalized in 2025 were successful, about a third of the overall success rate?

Those questions, and many others on the immigration file, are serious issues that the Liberals should be compelled to address. The thoughtful Conservative Party could do that, if the rage-baiting Conservative Party would just get out of the way.

Source: The two Tory mindsets on immigration

Rempel Garner: Big Immigration must be reined in. Parliamentary power must be restored.

General tendency over the years to diminish the distinction between citizens and non-citizens (e.g., public service employment, Iranian victims of Iran’s shooting down of a Ukrainian airline) but agree that this decision goes too far and will likely further reduce public confidence in immigration:

…But given the hull-buckling groans emanating from most Canadian social welfare programs, the deep deficits most Canadian governments are running, and the disarray that Canada’s immigration system is already in, Prime Minister Mark Carney has a duty to prevent ideologically-homogenous activists from using the Kanyinda framework to block reasonable reforms or make the system even more dysfunctional than it already is.

There are many other reasons to prevent further blurring of the distinction between citizen and non-citizen using the Kanyinda framework. It will be virtually impossible for any level of government to disincentivize abuse of the asylum system if there are endless legal options for unverified claimants (or outright fraudsters) to access social services they were never intended to receive. Blurred boundaries on who is eligible to receive benefits will, beyond the obvious sustainability problems, make it even harder to prioritize those truly vulnerable groups.

For many members of the public, this lack of distinction will be perceived as a lack of fairness. In turn, there will be even less public appetite to extend social welfare benefits to asylum claimants, or for immigration writ large. Further legal erosion of the difference between citizen and non-citizen will only serve to continue to diminish the value of Canadian citizenship and accelerate the fragmentation of our already diffuse national identity.

Perhaps most importantly, Kanyinda adds a thick layer of judicial overreach to an existing spread of rulings that have already severely eroded both Parliamentary supremacy in setting immigration law and the federal government’s ability to enforce it. Changes in 2012, which prevented non-citizens who made fraudulent asylum claims from receiving taxpayer-funded supplemental health benefits (like vision care) while awaiting removal from the country, were almost immediately struck down by the Federal Court (R. v. Pham, 2013 SCC 15). This led to the now-frequent practice of judges giving more lenient sentences to non-citizens convicted of serious crimes in order to avoid consequences for their immigration status.

Parliamentary Committee testimony during the review of the immigration provisions in the current Bill C-12 suggested its reforms would immediately be challenged in court by Big Immigration. Justice Wagner’s tone in Kanyinda suggests that this lobby will be successful. Allowing this trend to go unchecked by the federal government will only further engrain the Canadian public’s sense that they are losing control, and in turn, further erode support for immigration. It will also suggest that the federal Liberals’ willingness to prevent asylum system abuse only goes so far as the court’s willingness to accept their reforms.

At present, Canadian immigration law and Canadian public support for immigration is predicated upon the principle that it is legal, fair and necessary to treat different non-citizens differently than citizens for the purposes of immigration selection and entry into Canada. This concept is reinforced by Section 91(25) of the Constitution Act, 1867, which gives Canada’s Parliament the main power to set immigration laws.

And so the public expects that they can turn to and rely on the federal government and Parliament to both support a strong Canadian national identity, manage a fair and orderly immigration system, and secure our nation’s borders. But the Kanyinda framework shows that Canada’s Supreme Court is willing to fixate on the increasingly tone-deaf voices of Big Immigration and directly challenge these foundational principles.

The Charter has a built-in fail-safe for potential extreme situations such as these, and the government and Parliament have other tools at their disposal to rein in an overzealous judiciary.

It’s now up to Mark Carney to provide clarity on how much more judicially-inspired immigration dysfunction his government will tolerate before he directs it to act.

Let’s pray that his patience has boundaries, and that the judiciary and Big Immigration doesn’t further test their limits.

Source: Big Immigration must be reined in. Parliamentary power must be restored.

Douglas Todd: B.C. voices did speak up against Trudeau’s migration policies, but were ignored

Unclear how much of this commentary made it into ministerial briefing material (my assumption is that some of it did):

…At least a dozen noted people responsibly ignored the Canadian taboo against criticizing Ottawa’s immigration policy — and ran the risk of being labelled “xenophobic,” “racist” or “nativist” by the Liberals and their allies.

They included some of the labour economists McCallum consulted a decade ago, such as the University of B.C.’s David Green, Carleton University’s Christopher Worswick and Waterloo’s Mikal Skuterud.

In 2016 Green, Worswick and UBC’s Craig Riddell published an important article in Policy Options, which was highlighted by Postmedia. They were critical of then-immigration minister Ahmed Hussen, who was trumpeting his “ambitious plan” to drastically increase migration rates to build the economy. The economists cautioned that “immigration cannot be relied upon as a source of higher per capita incomes.”

Again, in 2019, Green expanded upon his remarks, saying the rapid rise in low-skilled workers entering Canada would likely lower the earnings of existing workers.

In 2017 Simon Fraser University political scientist Sanjay Jeram, along with former immigration department official Andrew Griffith, flagged that a national debate was needed on immigration economics. Jeram said Canadians’ individual financial well-being would shrink as corporations brought in low-skill immigrants to make up for alleged labour shortages.

“Earlier, in 2016, SFU economist Herb Grubel had cautioned high migration rates were not compatible with welfare societies, ultimately imposing a “fiscal burden” on taxpayers.

By 2021, the newly retired head of B.C.’s civil service, Don Wright, took advantage of his new-found freedom to write that Ottawa’s immigration policies were contributing greatly to the abandonment of the “broad middle-classes, by allowing real wages to stagnate.”

By last year, when Trudeau resigned after plummeting popularity, Canada’s GDP per capita, which measures economic growth per person, had dismally inched up only two per cent in a decade. In the same period, U.S. GDP per capita jumped 20 per cent.

International student alarms

As the Liberals were cranking up the number of foreign students, Kwantlen’s Polytechnic University’s Shinder Purewal told Postmedia in 2016 that Canada was marketing study visas around the world, creating a giant for-profit business, with hidden costs to taxpayers.”

“The University of Toronto’s Jane Knight, a specialist in higher education, was cited by Postmedia in 2013, saying Canada’s foreign-student programs were already losing their humanitarian ideals, becoming fixated on “self-interest” and “prestige-building.”

While politicians and post-secondary officials applauded how foreign students spent on retail goods and rent and created teaching jobs, most scholars harbouring critical thoughts felt it safer to stay quiet.

By 2019, however, B.C. immigration lawyer Sam Hyman and consultant Laleh Sahba were among those telling Postmedia how uneasy they were about a Statistics Canada report that up to one in three study-visa holders were not going to school. They described how many international students were being advised by dubious agents they could bypass school to work in Canada while pursuing the dream of permanent resident status…

Source: Douglas Todd: B.C. voices did speak up against Trudeau’s migration policies, but were ignored

Quebec perspectives

Lisée | Enfin, la pause démographique!

Not surprising that Lisée would take this position but it has been increasingly made in English Canada as well:

…Oui, mais la croissance ? Des économistes estiment que tout cela va réduire la croissance du produit intérieur brut total. Les organisations patronales affirment que tout cela est une catastrophe pour les entreprises, car l’augmentation de leur production est freinée par leur incapacité d’importer des salariés. En effet, mais cela les force à se tourner vers l’augmentation de leur productivité, l’automation et la robotisation. Ce faisant, la richesse totale n’augmente pas aussi vite, mais la richesse par habitant, oui. Pour résumer : si vous êtes un produit intérieur brut, c’est une mauvaise nouvelle. Si vous êtes une personne, c’est une bonne nouvelle.

L’incidence de l’intelligence artificielle. Nous entrons dans une phase totalement imprévisible de destruction de l’emploi par l’intelligence artificielle. Les experts débattent de la réalité, de la rapidité et de l’ampleur de ce bouleversement. Chez nous, l’Institut du Québec estime que 18 % des emplois québécois y sont vulnérables, taux qui grimpe à 24 % chez les jeunes. Il est donc impératif que nous ne soyons pas en surplus de population et de main-d’œuvre.

“Savoir s’adapter. Selon les scénarios démographiques, certaines régions vont décroître (Montréal, le Saguenay, le Bas-Saint-Laurent, la Gaspésie, l’Abitibi, la Côte-Nord) et toutes les autres vont croître. Plutôt que de tenter de renverser la tendance, l’État a intérêt à l’accompagner. Le télétravail et la régionalisation des tâches gouvernementales sont des outils permettant d’amortir le choc dans les régions à risque.

La pyramide des âges. Il y a davantage de vieux et moins d’enfants. On peut s’en désoler. Ou penser qu’il y aura enfin assez de places en CPE pour tout le monde, qu’on pourra réduire le nombre d’élèves par classe et mieux accompagner chacun de nos bambins.

La croissance, économique ou démographique, n’est pas un projet en soi, sauf pour les adeptes du gigantisme. Le projet est la qualité de la vie de chacun, l’épanouissement individuel et collectif, la poursuite du bonheur. On est neuf millions, on peut y arriver.”

Source: Chronique | Enfin, la pause démographique!

Nicolas: politiquement viable, et nous

Difference between raising issues and concerns and fanning the flames:

…Bernard Drainville et Paul St-Pierre Plamondon nous ont donné à la fin de la semaine un autre exemple d’un ton acerbe qui, il me semble, aurait été politiquement non viable il n’y a pas si longtemps. Au sujet de la décision de la Cour suprême du Canada sur l’accès des demandeurs d’asile aux CPE, le chef du PQ nous a assuré vendredi que les « milliards de personnes dans le monde qui auraient intérêt à immigrer au Québec pour améliorer leur qualité de vie ne peuvent avoir le même statut et le même droit à bénéficier des services publics que les citoyens québécois ».

Je ne peux pas croire qu’un homme comme lui ne sait pas qu’il attise les peurs en parlant de « milliards » de personnes, tout en étant dans l’erreur factuelle grossière. Je ne crois pas non plus que Bernard Drainville ignore que sa proposition de retirer aux demandeurs l’accès au filet social nous mènerait tout droit à la crise sociale, laquelle finit toujours par être plus coûteuse à l’État, en plus d’être catastrophique sur le plan humain.

Mais l’important, au bout du compte, c’est peut-être moins de répondre à chaque élément de ce type de discours que de ce type de discours que de se demander pourquoi et auprès de qui il résonne, et à quel coût. Le ton et le contenu de ces propositions politiques pourraient redevenir non viables. Ça dépend beaucoup de nous, et de la société que l’on se souhaite.

Source: Chronique | Le politiquement viable, et nous

Lisée | Accueillir toute la marmaille du monde

On the recent Supreme Court decision and that judges and their blurring of distinctions and rights between citizens and non-citizens:

…La Cour suprême du Canada ne partage pas cet avis. Dans sa récente décision qui ordonne au Québec d’ouvrir les portes de ses centres de la petite enfance aux bambins des demandeurs d’asile, même si leur demande n’est pas encore jugée valable, même s’ils n’ont pas de permis de travail, elle indique finalement que le Québec a le devoir d’offrir des places à toute la marmaille du monde. Le fait qu’il n’y a pas suffisamment de places pour tout le monde déjà présent sur le territoire — malgré le fait que la Coalition avenir Québec a, dans les huit dernières années, créé chaque année plus de places que tous les gouvernements précédents — ne lui fait pas un pli sur la toge.

Les juges ne sont pas de vulgaires comptables. Ils n’ont pas, par principe, à se préoccuper des conséquences budgétaires de leurs décisions. Ils vivent dans un monde parallèle, le monde juridique, où des droits existent ou n’existent pas. Aux élus de se débrouiller ensuite avec l’intendance.

On pouvait cependant penser que des distinctions existaient entre, d’une part, les citoyens canadiens et les résidents permanents, et, d’autre part, les personnes qui ne le sont pas. Cette distinction existe dans la plupart des démocraties avancées, y compris dans les pays scandinaves, où seuls les citoyens ont droit à la totalité du filet social. Mais le Canada, grâce à ses juges, est exceptionnel.

“La Charte des droits de Pierre Trudeau est entrée en vigueur en 1982. Il n’a fallu que trois ans, avec l’arrêt Singh en 1985, pour que la Cour enterre la distinction entre citoyens et non-citoyens. Voyez, a-t-elle écrit, à son article 7, la Charte indique que « chacun a droit à la vie, à la liberté et à la sécurité ». « Chacun » signifie toute personne présente sur le territoire.

En 1989, elle est allée plus loin en déclarant que les non-citoyens pouvaient être considérés comme un groupe discriminé en vertu de l’article 15 de la Charte, qui ne les mentionnait pas. Mais il y avait le mot « notamment » avec la liste des groupes, donc ils ont fait leur entrée.

Par conséquent, comme tout citoyen, un sans-papiers ou un demandeur d’asile peuvent se prévaloir de la totalité des droits d’appel si on leur refuse le statut de réfugié. Tant pis si ça prend huit ans. Tant pis si ça coûte des fortunes. Tant pis si ça rend humainement déchirant de retourner des gens chez eux après tout ce temps. Tant pis si, dans d’autres pays, ils font ça en quelques mois.

“Le remède ? Je vais vous faire sourire. Il faudrait changer la Constitution pour écrire « chaque citoyen » au lieu de « chacun » et enlever le mot « notamment ». Il y a un plan B : faire l’indépendance et insérer ces précisions dans la constitution du nouveau pays. Je vous laisse choisir la solution qui vous paraît la plus rapide.

La décision de vendredi, usant d’une logique intersectionnelle (femmes + asile), étend logiquement ce principe d’inclusion à l’ensemble des éléments du filet social. Je n’ai pas de doute que les juristes trudeauistes sont à l’œuvre pour contester, forts de ce nouveau précédent, toute différenciation restante entre les services offerts aux citoyens ou ceux offerts aux autres, touristes compris. J’exagère ? Voyez ce que disait Justin Trudeau sur son blogue en 2008 : « Si des extraterrestres venaient sur Terre et choisissaient le Canada comme société d’accueil, ils seraient protégés par la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés. »

Source: https://apple.news/AFGco-VIyTOOiFK17kprz3g

Refugees and Asylum Seekers

Iranians converting to Christianity ‘the easiest way’ to get asylum in Canada

As always, those desperate or motivated will find a way:

At a downtown Vancouver church, a Christian baptism takes place during a recent Sunday service. Amid the incense and infants dressed in white getting ready to receive the holy water is a group of four Iranian nationals also waiting to receive adult baptisms.

As with past baptisms, some of them will likely not return to the church after receiving their baptismal certificate. It is simply a means to an end — claiming asylum.

When a parishioner congratulates one of the newly baptized Farsi speakers, mentioning Iran’s significant Christian and Jewish populations, as well as Muslim, they reply in heavily accented English.

“I hate Muslims.”

While not quite the Christian message one might have expected, the conversion of Iranians to Christianity has been an increasingly popular trend over the past decade (one study suggests as many as 1.2 million Christian converts in Iran alone)…

Source: Iranians converting to Christianity ‘the easiest way’ to get asylum in Canada

Omidvar: Behind every refugee statistic is a personal and painful moment. Don’t lose sight of that

Good reminder that behind the statistics, there are people. But not all refugees are in the same situation that she and others were in, as recent increases indicate:

…That is why I find it troubling when refugee movements are reduced to numbers or political talking points. Governments understandably debate capacity, border management and the integrity of asylum systems. These are legitimate policy questions.

But behind every statistic is a deeply personal moment: the hurried packing of a bag, the quiet goodbye to a home that may never be seen again, the crossing of a border with little certainty about what comes next.

Most refugees did not imagine their lives unfolding this way. Most are not explicitly political actors or activists. They are teachers, engineers, shopkeepers, students – ordinary people like you or me. But in my life I’ve learned a crucial lesson that has stayed with me: No matter what, you cannot isolate yourself from the politics that are raging around you. Politics affects the way we all live. This is why I am today a “political” person.

Canada has been shaped by successive waves of people who arrived through moments of upheaval – from postwar Europe to Southeast Asia, from the Balkans to Syria. Many came with little more than resilience and hope. But over time, they became Canadians. They built businesses, strengthened institutions, raised families and contributed to the social and economic life of the country that welcomed them. I am one of those people.

Today, Canada is once again debating immigration and refugee policy with intensity. We are tightening numbers, making it more difficult for refugees to find safety in Canada. This is not just a signal of concern about our capacity and management, but also a real reflection of a growing political narrative that constrains our compassion. It threatens to make us lose sight of the human stories at the heart of these debates.

Granted, none of the contributions refugees eventually make are visible at the moment they cross a border. At that moment, refugees often look like uncertainty itself. They arrive tired, anxious and unsure about whether the world will make room for them.

But the refugee story does not end at the border. In many ways, it is where the next chapter begins. 

When I see images today of Iranians gathering at the Turkish border, I do not see strangers; I see families standing at the threshold of the same uncertain journey that my own familybegan almost five decades ago. And I am reminded that the line between an ordinary life and exile can appear faster than anyone expects – and that what happens next for them goes beyond those people, and into politics.

Source: Behind every refugee statistic is a personal and painful moment. Don’t lose sight of that

Other

Banerjee: Not all immigration paths are equal: Some immigrants thrive, while others struggle, in Canada’s two-step system

Good detailed comparative analysis:

…The tax data show that permit type, not Canadian experience alone, shapes the economic success of two-step immigrants. While high-performing groups — such as PGWP holders and ICTs — enjoy high, growing wages by benefiting from Canadian education or employer-driven entry, others — inc|luding WHMs and SPOU holders — face persistent economic disadvantage. Permit conditions, dependence on a partner for status and concentration in low-wage job sectors or geographically remote jobs likely compound vulnerability for the latter. The lack of transparency and coherence across temporary migration pathways makes these inequalities worse.

Policymakers should respond with co-ordinated actions in the short and medium term, drawing on the mandates of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) as the federal lead; Statistics Canada, and Employment and Social Development Canada for data and labour-market information; and provincial and territorial governments for post-secondary oversight and settlement programming. Settlement agencies, post-secondary institutions and employer partners are also critical delivery partners….

This analysis focused only on immigrants who successfully transitioned to permanent residency. This excludes many temporary residents who failed or are failing to secure permanent status — a major source of precarity within the IMP. Moreover, our data end in 2014. Since then, the IMP has grown dramatically, particularly through the PGWP stream, and the profile of international students has shifted toward college-level programs with weaker labour-market prospects (on entry of IMP permit holders to 2021 by stream, including the PGWP, see Vosko, 2025).

Recent federal policy changes compound these pressures. Since 2024, PR targets have been reduced and transition rules tightened. Many temporary residents now attempt to manage uncertainty by switching between permit types to extend their stay — a strategy that often disrupts employment and prolongs temporary status. Unless the federal government rebalances the relationship between temporary and permanent immigration, these trends will deepen structural inequities and erode the economic benefits.

Source: Not all immigration paths are equal: Some immigrants thrive, while others struggle, in Canada’s two-step system 

Jeziorek: Canada’s immigration system is going digital, and accountability must keep pace

Somewhat ironic as the OAG report on international students highlights the lack of accountability of current systems:

…Keeping automation accountable

Canada already has several oversight mechanisms in place, including algorithmic impact assessments required by directives on automated decision-making. 

These measures represent meaningful progress toward responsible digital governance. However, as immigration administration becomes increasingly automated and platform-based, additional safeguards are needed to ensure accountability keeps pace.

Possible measures include expanding public documentation about automated triage systems, introducing independent review processes and ensuring clear pathways for human review. Such steps would better align digital modernization with Canada’s existing oversight frameworks for automated decision-making.

Canada’s immigration system is often described as rights-basedand grounded in equity, fairness and inclusion. Maintaining public trust in that system depends on ensuring administrative decision systems remain transparent, contestable and accountable.

Automation and platform-based administration are reshaping Canada’s migration. Efficiency alone cannot sustain public trust. As Canada modernizes immigration administration, accountability must be built into digital systems as deliberately as the technologies themselves.

Source: Canada’s immigration system is going digital, and accountability must keep pace

Canada is letting rural employers hire more temporary foreign workers. Economists say it’s a misstep

Government does not appear to have learned from previous lobbying and changes:

Ottawa is introducing new measures to let rural employers hire more low-wage workers through the temporary foreign worker program, a move businesses say is needed to address ongoing labour shortages but economists and advocates warn is a step in the wrong direction.

Employers in “eligible rural regions” will be permitted to staff up to 15 per cent of their workforce with low-wage, temporary foreign workers, up from 10 per cent, the federal government announced Friday.  The new measures will be implemented as early as April 1, 2026, until March 31, 2027.

“Some rural communities continue to face acute labour shortages due to low unemployment rates, and ongoing difficulties attracting, recruiting, and retaining workers,” said a statement from Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC), which oversees the temporary foreign worker (TFW) program….

The TFW program’s new rules are “a step in the wrong direction,” said Christopher Worswick, an economist at Carleton University in Ottawa, adding that the federal government is giving into pressure of employer groups when the focus should instead be on permanent immigration. In 2024, Ottawa started reining in immigration after years of rapid population growth largely driven by a surge of international students and temporary foreign workers who arrived during the pandemic. 

Leaning on low-wage TFWs reinforces a system where short-term labour fills permanent needs, leaving deeper challenges in attracting and retaining workers unaddressed, Worswick said. Migrant workers whose status is tied to a single employer often fear speaking out about low wages and poor conditions, creating a power imbalance that benefits employers seeking a compliant workforce.

Without the program, businesses struggling to hire would have to raise workers’ wages and improve working conditions to attract applicants, or invest in new technology to save money, he added.

“When there’s a shortage of a good, demand is greater than supply so you should see upward pressure on price until demand equals supply,” he said. “The labour market is basically the same thing.”

In other words, “if you can’t hire somebody, then what economics would say is you should re-advertise at a higher wage.”

But industry groups maintain that restricting access to TFWs could force businesses to scale back or shut down entirely, particularly in rural and remote areas where hiring challenges are most acute. They say the new rules will give employers more flexibility to fill persistent labour gaps and keep operations running when local workers are not available….

Source: Canada is letting rural employers hire more temporary foreign workers. Economists say it’s a misstep

Saunders: Canada’s border is broken, but not the way Trump thinks. Here’s how the next government can fix it

Good long and thoughtful commentary:

…There has to be a sensible Canadian space between Trumpist mass deportations and closed borders on one hand, and on the other the current reality of a set of policies and institutions that make Canadian governments unable to control who enters the country.

Luckily, there seems to be an awkward political consensus around this. Both the federal Conservatives and the major Liberal leadership candidates appear to be united (though they might not admit it) around a common set of aspirations: a return to a focus on permanent, citizenship-focused immigration of intact families and a reduction of temporary migration to a minimum; immigration targets tied to economic conditions and population-growth needs; a refugee policy driven by genuine humanitarian need and not by irregular border crossings or opportunism.

Those goals won’t easily be attained with mere tinkering of the sort that governments this century have engaged in. Rather, they require a set of systemwide reforms. After interviewing a dozen former immigration officials and experts, I found a strong consensus on the changes that would make the system work:…

Source: Canada’s border is broken, but not the way Trump thinks. Here’s how the next government can fix it

Visible minorities vastly underrepresented in the boardroom, new disclosures suggest

Early and incomplete data but dispiriting:

Canadian companies may be making progress on gender diversity, but a Financial Post analysis suggests that the boardrooms of some of the biggest businesses in the country have much further to go when it comes to including members of visible minorities, Indigenous peoples and people with disabilities.

That analysis is based on a relatively new source of data. Starting this year, publicly traded companies incorporated under the Canada Business Corporations Act (CBCA) are required to report, among other things, the number of women, Indigenous people, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities on their boards and in their senior-management ranks. The disclosures must be made for their annual shareholder meetings.

The Post looked at companies on the S&P/TSX 60 stock-market index that were both incorporated under the CBCA and had filed management information so far in 2020 — a total of 23 companies — to gather a preliminary picture of the state of corporate diversity. Disclosure was not entirely consistent from company to company and the findings and assessments presented here are based on self-reported information about proposed or current slates of directors, at the time the filings were made.

Combined, however, the Post found that, out of the 23 boards and 255 director positions total, only 14 directors — or approximately 5.5 per cent — identified as belonging to a visible minority. The Post also found only three Indigenous directors (or about one per cent of all directors in the sample) and two directors with disabilities (less than one per cent) among the 23 boards.

Fourteen of the companies reported they did not have a member of a visible minority on the board, while 20 companies reported no Indigenous peoples and 21 reported no persons with disabilities as directors. Eleven companies had no representation from any of those three groups on their board.

By comparison, 22.3 per cent of Canada’s population identified as a visible minority and 4.9 per cent as an Aboriginal person during the 2016 census. And according to Statistics Canada, as of 2017, 22 per cent of Canadians aged 15 and older had one or more disabilities.

All 23 firms included in the Post’s analysis had at least one director who identified as a woman, and 31 per cent of all directors on the Post’s list of companies were women.

Representation of the federal government’s four diversity groups in senior management varied, but were not much better for the 23 companies as a whole.

Discount retailer Dollarama Inc. reported two of its six executive officers (33 per cent) and two of its nine directors were women (22 per cent), but that members of the federal government’s other three designated groups were in zero of those positions. It was similar for e-commerce company Shopify Inc., which reported two of its seven executive officers and two of its six directors were women, but that no other groups were represented.

“We recognize our areas for improvement and are actively working with our Diversity & Belonging team to ensure stronger representation across our senior leadership and Board by hiring and retaining diverse talent,” a Shopify spokesperson said in an email.

Big banks and insurers in the S&P/TSX 60 index were excluded from the Post’s analysis [banks covered under the Federally Regulated Sectors EE reporting]. While some report diversity information (Royal Bank of Canada had said, among other things, that 46 per cent of its executives in Canada were women and 19 per cent were visible minorities), they are incorporated under financial legislation and not subject to the recent CBCA changes. Companies that are incorporated provincially were likewise excluded.

Ratna Omidvar, an independent senator from Ontario, said she was not surprised by the Post’s findings. Omidvar, who was a well-known diversity expert before being appointed to the Senate in 2016, was previously among lawmakers backing an ultimately unsuccessful push to force public companies to set internal diversity targets.

“Certainly I recognize the government has to not over-regulate corporations, because we want them to survive and thrive and make money and lift all our boats, et cetera,” Omidvar said. “But the lifting of all boats is clearly not happening, so we need something else.”

The recent changes to the CBCA also put companies in a position to “comply or explain” in reporting on their diversity policies and targets, the latter of which most of the companies looked at by the Post did not have for members of visible minorities, Indigenous people or persons with disabilities.

For example, the Desmarais-family-controlled Power Corp. of Canada (which reported two of its 13 directors were women, but zero were from any of the other three groups) said in its 2020 management circular that it had not adopted a target regarding the representation of the four groups on the board “as the Board believes that such arbitrary targets are not in the best interests of the Corporation.”

Still, there is a “prevailing view” in the corporate world that diversity is a good thing, which helps create momentum for efforts such as the recent CBCA amendments, according to Rahul Bhardwaj, the president and CEO of the Institute of Corporate Directors.

“It’s a journey for organizations to enhance their diversity,” he added.

While it is the first year for the new federal disclosure requirements, securities regulators were already requiring companies to report figures and targets regarding the number of women on boards and in executive positions. A recent report on the approximately 230-company S&P/TSX Composite Index found the percentage of women on its boards had increased to 27.6 per cent in 2019 from 18.3 per cent in 2015.

Corporate Canada’s latest disclosure requirements, intended to further improve corporate transparency and diversity, are also now in place at a time when firms are pledging to do their part to fight racism following the death of George Floyd, a Black man who was killed while in police custody in Minnesota. Four officers are now facing charges in connection with the killing.

Directors should be aware of the narrative of the day, what people living in the communities in which they operate are thinking, and what customers are feeling, because those directors are setting strategy, according to Omidvar.

“So I would say those are competencies that should be even more hotly searched for and located when corporate directors are appointed to boards,” she added.

Some companies are now redoubling their diversity efforts. On Wednesday, the formation of the new Canadian Council of Business Leaders Against Anti-Black Systemic Racism was announced, as well as the launch of the BlackNorth Initiative, which is aimed at increasing the representation of Black people in Canadian corporate boardrooms and executive offices.

Wes Hall, the founder and chair of the council, and the executive chairman and founder of shareholder services firm Kingsdale Advisors, noted companies were fine when they began actively trying to solve their gender-diversity issues.

“We believe that if you now add another segment of the population to your board, it’s probably going to make your business even better,” Hall said. “So why not do it?”

Source:  Visible minorities vastly underrepresented in the boardroom, new disclosures suggest

Canada should welcome America’s ‘dreamers’ – Bloemraad and Omidvar

Good advocacy piece by Senator Omidvar and Irene Bloemraad of University of California:

The U.S. public is sympathetic to their plight. Most Americans favour legalizing undocumented residents. Multiple attempts have been made to pass a DREAM (Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors) Act that would open a road to citizenship. But Congress has repeatedly failed to pass the bill, leaving only the coinage of “dreamers” to refer to those it would have helped. There is no chance of new DREAM Act legislation in the near future.

As a stopgap measure, the administration of former president Barack Obama introduced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Under DACA, undocumented young people received work authorization for two years and were shielded from deportation. The program was open to those who arrived in the United States before the age of 16, had no police record, were in high school, had graduated from high school, or had been honourably discharged from the U.S. military. To date, about 750,000 people have become “DACAmented.”

These are precisely the people who Canada looks for in its immigration program. The economic advisory council to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recommended Canada focus a growing immigration strategy on business talent and international students. The DACA kids are young, with a lifetime of economic contribution in front of them. They are fluent in English, went to U.S. schools, have North American work experience – often in companies that can be found on either side of the Canada-U.S. border – and some have university degrees. To get DACA status, they had to be screened for security threats and criminal background, making them a pre-vetted group.

These young people hold incredible promise for Canada. They are exceptional people. It is not easy to go to college or university when you are undocumented. But within the flagship University of California public system, hundreds of dreamers are pursing higher education in degrees ranging from math to sociology.

In 2014, Sergio Garcia became the first undocumented lawyer certified to the California bar. That same year, Jirayut Latthivongskorn became the first undocumented medical student enrolled in the University of California, San Francisco. For each of these dramatic against-all-odds success stories, there are thousands of other ordinary immigrant kids who just want the security of citizenship, a good job and a stable home.

Unfortunately, their American dreams have never appeared more remote. Mr. Trump campaigned on an explicit “America First” message. Since taking office, he has advanced plans to build a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border and sought to temporarily halt refugee admissions. The White House has not yet made an explicit statement on the DACA program but, at best, the program will end. At worst, the government will use the information collected from those who applied to begin mass deportations.

Canada is already seeing the arrival of asylum seekers from the United States. If DACA is ended, a flood of new arrivals is possible. Canada cannot take all of these young people, but a targeted program of 10,000-30,000 would allow Canada to select the very best matches with Canadian society and the economy.

As immigrants to Canada, they could be a special addition to economic-stream migrants, or fall under a new program akin to that for international university students.

Offering a Canadian dream to DACA recipients might also be positive for foreign relations. Mr. Trump faces a problem in how to deal with the country’s undocumented population. Deporting millions would be politically, logistically and socially impossible, but rendering their lives difficult is a distinct possibility.

Canada has long benefited from the flow of people educated and raised in the United States, who left for a variety of reasons. Today, the United States is among the top-10 source countries of permanent residents. Looking further back, an estimated 40,000 draft dodgers fled conscription during the Vietnam War, representing what the Immigration Department called “the largest, best-educated group this country ever received.” Dreamers could be a close second.

Source: Canada should welcome America’s ‘dreamers’ – The Globe and Mail

‘Can I get a tax receipt?’: Tax confusion muddles Syrian refugee sponsorship efforts

Interesting wrinkle and will be interesting to see how it is resolved:

As the Toronto office of Lifeline Syria scrambles to accommodate thousands of refugees, the question the charity’s chair Ratna Omidvar and her team hears most often is: “Can I get a tax receipt?”

In many cases, the answer is no.

Canada has so far welcomed more than 13,500 refugees since the Liberal government’s program began last November. Of that total, close to 5,000 have been supported by private sponsors.

Refugee support initiatives such as Lifeline Syria say allowing donors to receive a tax receipt when they are donating to a registered charity and suggesting a particular family to receive support would encourage more donations, ease the government’s burden and make integration easier. Currently, charities can issue tax receipts to donors who indicate they’d like their donation applied to a specific area of interest, such as refugees, but not when the donation is directed to a particular family.

“The more Canadians step up and promote charities, the less the government is going to have to do these things,” says Estelle Duez, a tax lawyer at LaBarge Weinstein in Ottawa.

“As Canadians, we are used to the notion that when we make a charitable donation, (we) will get some kind of tax relief,” says Paul Clarke, executive director of Action Réfugiés Montréal. He says despite the extraordinary support Canadians have shown for Syrian refugees to date, questions around tax deductibility dissuade some people from sponsorship.

Mark Blumberg, a Toronto lawyer who specializes in non-profit and charity law, says the Canada Revenue Agency could make donating and sponsoring easier by clarifying the rules. Although money given to a registered refugee charity is normally tax deductible, Blumberg says the situation becomes more tricky when a donor instructs the money should go to a specific person or family, sometimes referred to as a “general direction” or “directed gift.”

The CRA’s position is that “All decisions regarding use of the donation must rest with the charity.” In other words: it cannot issue a tax receipt if a donor wants the charity to give the funds to a specified person or family, because “such a gift is made to the person or family and not to the charity.”

Exceptions add to the confusion. For example, a “general direction” to use the gift for a “particular program” is acceptable, provided “no benefit accrues to the donor” and the gift “does not benefit any person not dealing at arms’ length with the donor.”

If the CRA provided greater leeway, “there’d be more people making donations,” says Blumberg. He cites the partial receipting of tuition costs at religious day schools.

Source: ‘Can I get a tax receipt?’: Tax confusion muddles Syrian refugee sponsorship efforts

Private sponsors build a nation – and leave a legacy: Omidvar

Ratna Omidvar’s suggestions on refugees:

How can Canada regain its leadership as a country of compassion again?

  • Consider annual targets for refugee intake as floors and not as ceilings. Given the volatility in the world today, in Syria and in many other places, it seems that we must be flexible and nimble.
  • Make family reunification a cornerstone of refugee policy by working with the Canadian Syrian community and by expanding the notion of families as more than the nuclear unit. Recognize that displacement makes for chaos with families scattered across Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey and others left behind in Syria.
  • Match the public enthusiasm for private sponsors. As private sponsorships rise, so should government-assisted refugees.
  • Enhance participation of private sponsors by considering a tax credit or clarifying eligibility for charitable receipts.
  • Expedite the arrival of refugees who are privately sponsored. The long wait periods of four to five years has been absurd and damaging. Once refugees are selected, there is a strong case to bring them to Canada immediately. A delay in resettlement is not good for sponsors, who plan for a year-long sponsorship based on current schedules, jobs, residences and family situations. Delays can unravel plans and sap goodwill. But most importantly, waiting works against the security and well-being of these future Canadians who are in limbo in fragile, sometimes hostile conditions.

All nations have their moments of regret and shame, but we never regret moments of compassion. One such moment was Canada’s response to the Indochinese refugee crisis.

Another moment is on us today. Canada has a unique opportunity to show ourselves and the world what we are made of.

Can Tories repeat past success in wooing the ethnic vote?

Further to my earlier post Visible Minority Candidates in the 2015 Election: Making Progress, good range of comments by Myer Siemiatycki, Thierry Giasson, and Ratna Omidvar on whether or not the Conservatives can maintain their inroads (most recent polls suggest not).

We will see who is right Monday night:

Opinion is divided as to whether the Conservative Party will be able to repeat its success in drumming up support in the ethnic and newcomer communities in next week’s federal election.

In 2011, the strategy was to “broaden the support of the party and reach out to visible minority communities,” says Myer Siemiatycki, a professor of political science at Ryerson University. “We saw a very concerted and aggressive outreach by the Conservatives.”

That effort proved to be successful. According to an Ipsos exit poll, 42 per cent of immigrants to Canada voted Conservative. The party won 43 per cent of the vote of immigrants who had been in the country for more than a decade. In that same poll, only 37 per cent of people born in Canada voted for the Conservatives.

But this time around it may not work as well, Siemiatycki says. Issues like the niqab, terrorism and security and the Conservatives’ stands on what they have described as “barbaric cultural practices” as well as policies on Syrian refugees, family reunification and citizenship have irked many and perhaps driven away some ethnic or multicultural voters.

Because of that, Siemiatycki gives Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservatives a failing grade when it comes to wooing multicultural and ethnic Canadians this campaign. Charm won’t be enough in this election, he says. As for the Liberals and New Democrats, Siemiatycki ranks their performance as neck and neck, giving both parties a resounding A for their efforts.

While neither party does the kind of narrowcasting the Conservatives are famous for, they have gone out of their way to include a diverse slate of candidates as well as make campaign appearances in diverse ridings, he says.

More importantly, both parties have strongly spoken out against Tory policies, including family reunification; citizenship, the niqab and refugees, he adds. Liberal leader Justin Trudeau and NDP leader Tom Mulcair are trying to win over newcomers and minority communities by arguing that Tory policies are not in the best interest of the country, he says. “It took courage, I think, to stand for minority rights; to stand for inclusion based on diversity and pluralism, tolerance and the rule of law.”

However, Thierry Giasson, professor of political science at Laval University, believes the Tories have been very effective — perhaps just as effective — this time around. They know what they’re doing when it comes to wooing specific ethnic and newcomer communities, he says.

…Ratna Omidvar, founder of the Global Diversity Exchange, a think tank at Ryerson University, believes the Conservatives have made substantial inroads in certain ethnic communities by appealing to “mainstream values within (certain) immigrant communities that are in favour of law and order … I do think the Conservatives have the lead on this.”

Source: Can Tories repeat past success in wooing the ethnic vote? | Toronto Star

Flight and Freedom: Refugee Stories

Flight and Freedom, the book of refugee stories by Ratna Omidvar and Dana Wagner, is now out.

I read a proof copy and find their book to be a timely and well-needed counterpart to much of the rhetoric around refugees through its highlighting the remarkable personal stories of thirty refugees who have, and continue, to contribute to Canada. These stories make a compelling case for a more generous approach, reminding us of the potential cost of more restrictive approaches, particularly germane in the context of today’s Syrian refugee crisis:

What does escape look like up close? Why do people choose Canada? And once they land in a safe country, what happens next?

In Flight and Freedom, Ratna Omidvar and Dana Wagner draw on 30 astonishing interviews with refugees to Canada to document their extraordinary journeys of flight, and to transform a misunderstood group into familiar, human stories.

Each of the 30 stories documents an escape that is sometimes harrowing and always remarkable. The narrative then turns to contemporary lives and careers, and the impact of refugees-turned-Canadians in the communities they call home, from Halifax to Vancouver.

Stories focus on Canadians who arrived as refugees from notable conflicts around the world, from the War of 1812 to the ongoing War in Afghanistan. Beyond conflict zones, other stories profile people from persecuted groups like gay men and women. At the time of escape, some refugees were children, others were parents, and others got out alone. Notwithstanding the diverse events of a story, the single overriding imperative for all characters can be summed up in one sentence: “We have to run.”

Closing the book is a question: Would they get in to Canada today? Peter Showler, lawyer and former chairperson of the federal Immigration and Refugee Board, answers the hypothetical question by analyzing how the cases would be handled under Canada’s new refugee system.

Source: About the Book – Flight and Freedom

More commentary on Syrian Refugee crisis: Impact of previous policy changes and recommendations what should Canada do?

Syrian_Refugees_MacleansStarting with the use of refugee or migrant:

For most of the Syrians we are hearing about, I would argue, the right term is “refugee.” The origins of that word also belong to the 17th century, when it referred to Protestants who fled religious oppression in a triumphantly Roman Catholic France. Over time the word’s meaning extended to include all those who were escaping war, persecution, or intolerable conditions at home. Kurdi’s family were determined to get away from a civil war that has all but destroyed Syria. They were not making a rational economic decision or a calm political choice. Just like the Vietnamese boat people in the late 1970s, they were fighting for their lives.

Are they refugees or migrants? Why what we call the people fleeing Syria matters

On the implications of the policy changes made to reduce fraud for family sponsorships with respect to Syrian refugees and the Kurdi case:

In earlier humanitarian crises, Canada went directly to the migrants and accepted large numbers quickly. That stands in stark contrast to Thursday’s response from the federal immigration department to the death of a boy found on a beach in Turkey. A group of Canadians had applied to bring in his uncle’s family and hoped to sponsor the boy’s family next. But the family had not been certified as refugees by the UN refugee agency, UNHCR, or a foreign state.

…Canada has required such certification since October, 2012 – when the Syrian crisis was developing – for “group of five” sponsorships, a reference to the minimum number of adult Canadians needed to bring over a refugee family.

…Among the other bureaucratic hurdles is the fact that the waits at visa offices for Canadian officials to review applications – a review that happens after that of the UNHCR – range from 11 months in Beirut to 19 months in Amman to 45 months in Ankara, according to Canadian government figures.

And the immigration department’s central processing office in Winnipeg – which handled the application for the boy’s extended family – takes two or three months to look at applications.

Decades before the current crisis, Canada airlifted 5,000 people from Kosovo in the late 1990s, 5,000 from Uganda in 1972, and 60,000 Vietnamese in 1979-80. From January, 2014, to late last month, Canada resettled 2,374 Syrian refugees.

Canada’s response to refugee crises today a stark contrast to past efforts

Amira Elghawaby and Bernie Farber criticize the Government for providing preference to Christian refugees:

The Canadian government’s departure from established refugee norms began in 2012 with the passage of new laws which created a two-tier system based on country of origin. Canada began to categorize refugee claimants based on group characteristics rather than using a case-by-case approach.

“Group labelling tends to exclude, not welcome. Placing individuals above categoric exclusions is the best way to ensure Canada continues granting asylum to people who need it most,” migration expert Dana Wagner wrote in a 2013 article for the Canadian International Council. It isn’t to deny the role of group identity in understanding why individuals and their families may fear persecution, or violence, in their countries of origin. It is simply to include it as one of many factors that must be examined in an individual’s claim.

While I understand the rationale for their critique, I equally appreciate the Government rationale for its focus on those communities which appear to be most at risk such as Christians and Muslim minorities such as the Yazidis.

 Forget labels when we witness such dire human need 

Ratna Omidvar’s suggests some practical actions:

First: Triple the number of visa officers processing Syrians.

Second: Relax visa requirements out of the European Union.

Third: Canada should grant prima facie refugee status to all Syrians outside their country. Full stop.

Fourth: Allow Syrians in Canada to quickly reunite with their families through a temporary resident permit.

A final requirement is political will. Without it, Canada will neither exceed nor meet its initial pledge.

Practical solutions for refugees flow from political will 

Peter Showler, former head of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB):

There are solutions. In addition to the 1979-80 boatlift when Canadians welcomed over 60,000 refugees, Canada has used emergency immigration programs and special teams of immigration officers to bring thousands of refugees quickly from Uganda and Kosovo. Refugees are processed efficiently and quickly and are granted temporary status in Canada. Private sponsorship groups can be enlisted to help them establish in Canada, providing financial support and helping families to integrate into their communities. Later, the refugees can apply for permanent residence from within Canada, if they so choose.

We have done it before. Canada has the expertise and capacity to do it again. Bringing 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada does not end the war but it saves individual lives and sets an example for other nations to also open their doors. The government often invokes the historical generosity of the Canadian people but has done little to truly encourage it. In 1986, the Canadian people were awarded the Nansen Medal by the United Nations for their extraordinary generosity in welcoming the boat people. It is the only time the medal was given to an entire people.

Canada and its government once again have an opportunity to lead the world to relieve an excruciating humanitarian crisis.

Peter Showler: Canada can do more

Lawrence Hill reminds Canadians of the values at play:

We could do much, much more. We should, and we must. We should live up to the promises we have made – so far undelivered – to accept thousands of Syrian refugees. And then we should increase our quotas and meet them too. We have room for more people. We should send officials in large numbers into refugee camps to process people more expeditiously, cut through red tape, and bring them more quickly to Canada. It’s possible. We’ve done it before. We should demand greater action on the part of our politicians, not just to respond to the crises of famine, war and natural disasters but also to invest more in international development. By helping people develop stronger social and economic infrastructures in their own countries, we help them develop peaceful, organized means to cope with their own crises.

The refugee crisis that rocks the world today belongs to the world. And it belongs to Canada. For one thing, many active, engaged Canadians come from the countries most affected. For another, we have fought in wars – in Afghanistan, for example, and we are now participating in air strikes in Syria – that add to the mayhem forcing people to flee. And we have signed onto refugee conventions committing us to humanitarian principles and action with regard to accepting and assisting refugees. Most important, we owe it to ourselves to respond. To remember what it means to be human. To remember what it means to be Canadian.

 A moment to revisit our Canadian values 

Lastly, some fairly severe criticism of the the role that Gulf countries are (not) playing:

Gulf countries have funded humanitarian aid. Saudi Arabia has donated $18.4-million to the United Nations Syria response fund so far this year, while Kuwait has given more than $304-million, making it the world’s third-largest donor. The United States has given the most, $1.1-billion, and has agreed to resettle about 1,500 Syrians.

….This week, Kuwaiti commentator Fahad Alshelaimi said in a TV interview that his country was too expensive for refugees, but appropriate for laborers.

“You can’t welcome people from another environment and another place who have psychological or nervous system problems or trauma and enter them into societies,” he said.

Cartoonists have lampooned such ideas. One drew a man in traditional Gulf dress behind a door surrounded by barbed wire and pointing a refugee to another door bearing the flag of the European Union.

“Open the door to them now!” the man yells.

Another cartoon shows a Gulf sheikh shaking his finger at a boat full of refugees while flashing a thumbs-up to a rebel fighter in a burning Syria.

…Michael Stephens, the head of the Royal United Services Institute in Qatar, said the decision by the United States not to directly intervene against Assad had left many in the Gulf unsure of how to respond.

“The Gulf Arabs are used to a paradigm in which the West is continuously stepping in to solve the problem, and this time it hasn’t,” Stephens said. “This has left many people looking at the shattered vase on the floor and pointing fingers.”

 Gulf monarchies bristle at criticism over response to Syrian refugee crisis 

Asra Nomani takes a similar tack with a harder edge:

It is not politically correct to utter, but it has to be acknowledged that the arrival of millions of refugees from, yes, mostly Muslim regions raises serious long-term demographic and policing concerns for countries in the West, which will likely see the character and values of their communities completely transformed by refugees who may have values and attitudes about secularism very different from the countries they would be calling home. Already, countries like the United Kingdom struggle with issues of Islamic extremism among legal immigrants that have transformed British culture to the point that London is nicknamed “Londonistan.”

There are serious issues of ideology and identity at risk here.

Reasonable, rational, tolerant folks are saying that the refugee crisis isn’t Europe’s problem to fix, and it is, in fact, a form of reverse racism to let Muslim countries off the hook, as if they are just too backward, intolerant and incapable of finding homes for these refugees. The family of young Aylan, after all, was fleeing Turkey, a Muslim country, for the West, because the father said that the refugees weren’t treated respectfully in Turkey. That is a policy problem in Turkey that needs to be fixed, not displaced to other countries.

Last December, Amnesty International released statistics highlighting that the five Gulf countries—Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain—“have offered zero resettlement places to Syrian refugees.”

Mideast Needs To Save Its Own Refugees

Canada takes a step back on immigration policy | Bauder and Omidvar

Harald Bauder and Ratna Omidvar overview on citizenship and immigration policy changes and their implications:

Ottawa has failed in our eyes to provide a convincing justification for these changes. Many dependants and elderly family members seem to be excluded not because they would be eligible for social benefits but simply because they are from low-income families.

Canada has a story of exceptionalism to tell and it is widely regarded by others as model in how it manages immigration and succeeds in integrating immigrants. However, the evidence now tells another story, one that is somewhat more tarnished than we know.

The new data signals a shift and encourages us to reflect on the most alarming trends and redirect where necessary. But there is good mixed in with the bad. Canada still leads in labour market integration, anti-discrimination and creating a sense of belonging for newcomers. The one-point drop is smoke and not fire.

Canada takes a step back on immigration policy | Toronto Star.