Impacts of Bill C-31

       In the week after Bill C-31 was passed in Parliament, there has been a radical drop in the number of refugees requesting asylum in Canada. Based on data from the first 7 weeks of 2013, “on average, 164 foreigners are claiming asylum weekly in 2013, down nearly 70 per cent from the average weekly claim for the past five years, which was 537” (Chase 2013). Immigration Minister Jason Kenney championed this bill as a way to protect Canada from so-called “bogus refugees,” yet what he has ended up doing is scaring refugees off entirely (ibid). As well, the Conservative government wanted to save money in social, education and health benefits, as well as lessening the financial burdens on tax payers who fund the benefits for refugees while their cases are heard. It is now expected that the total savings for provinces and territories could grow exponentially as a result of mass declines in asylum claims. The government also justified this bill by saying that it would allow them to get through the accumulation of refugee applications, which “exceeds 29,000 today” (ibid). However, all that this bill appears to do is grant the government the power to kick people out of the country and to impose stricter criteria on refugees. It appears that the government is really the only beneficiary to this bill, as it allows them to save money and make good on their shortcomings and ineffectiveness. On the other hand, Bill C-31 makes it even tougher for those fleeing from persecution and danger to find asylum, with more stringent criteria and less individual consideration.

Discriminatory Policies Faced By Refugees

http://nimg.sulekha.com/others/original700/sri-lanka-war-refugees-2009-12-9-11-11-4.jpg

A refugee is someone who has fled their country of origin and resettled in another area in order to escape dangerous or threatening situations. The Canadian immigration system is designed so that those who claim refugee status are subjected to different parameters in order to be granted asylum in Canada. Refugees must meet certain criteria, most notably proof that they face a high probability of persecution or risk of harm in their home country. To do so, refugees present their case orally through provision of testimony and evidence to the Immigration and Refugee Board, who assess the evidence and make the final decision on whether an applicant should be granted formal asylum (Rousseau et al. 2002).           

This system has been criticized as restrictive in terms of the cases passed and the requirements set out for applicants, highlighting a discriminatory undertone in the existing refugee policies. The Conservative Party, who took over as leaders of the federal government in 2006, have been criticized for implementing policies that led to a decline in acceptance rates for refugees coming to Canada. As Debra Black observed, in 2006 the acceptance rate was 47%, while the current rate is around 28% - a drop of 19% over a six-year period (2012). The Conservatives seem to have a bias against illegitimate refugees, which has led to strict reforms in policies in order to protect Canada and it’s citizens against these ‘bogus’ refugees as Immigration Minister Jason Kenney calls them (Black 2012).

In late 2012, the federal government passed Bill C-31. This bill classifies countries into two categories – those that are ‘safe’ to live in and those that are ‘unsafe’ based on criteria of “democratic governance, human rights records, respect for freedoms and rule of law” (Keung 2012).  Ultimately, however, the minister “has the final say as to which country is safe” (Keung 2012). Those who seek asylum from so-called ‘safe’ countries face much stricter restrictions and time limits in making their case. Instead of having 1,000 days, claimants are only given 15 days to find a lawyer and prepare their statements, with their cases being accepted or denied in a maximum of 45 days. This two-tiered system fails to take into account the individual circumstances of each refugee, focusing instead on a broad, black-and-white classification of countries as safe or unsafe. It also does not acknowledge that there is often unrest, threats and violence in ‘safe’ countries, especially for members of minority groups (Keung 2012). As Benjamin Oliphant argues, the denial of claimants based on their country of origin can be seen as discriminatory under Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarantees people equal protection and benefit despite their ethnic or national origin (2013). By imposing stricter criteria upon some, simply because of where they originate from, the Canadian government is violating individual rights and freedoms. Thus, Bill C-31 essentially codifies and entrenches discrimination within Canadian legislation.

The government pushed this bill largely out of fear for individuals who seek to abuse the system, especially those whom Immigration Minister Kenney claims were coached in how to take advantage of the existing system (Chase 2013).

Personally, I feel that Canada’s refugee policies are coupled with discriminatory and biased attitudes, held especially by the federal Conservative leaders. There can be no denying that reforms in refugee policies have led claimants to face partiality based on the home nation, subjecting some individuals to much higher standards of proof in order to be accepted. In the fair, democratic and equal society that Canada claims to be, this prejudice cannot and should not be tolerated. Changes need to be made to the refugee process, for if they are not, the federal government will continue to risk the safety and security of those who seek asylum in Canada.

The Canadian Economic Action Plan

                     

              The ever so popular Canadian Economic Action Plan pursues easing the immigration process, most specifically by creating work for individuals. The plan seeks to emphasize educational background in the immigration process, to ensure that those who do immigrate are ‘needed’ within the Canadian economy. This idea, analyzing those who wish to immigrate for their strengths in the labour-force creates a dominance of Canada over the immigrant (Government of Canada). This message portrays that it is a privilege, and not a necessity, to be accepted into Canada – and in fact, so many current citizens do view it as this. Language skills have also been emphasized, something, which would prove to be important in the transition from a home country to Canada’s English-dominant borders.

               However, as seemingly good as the plan may be, the Economic Action Plan is put forth for a limited 5-year test run, accepting 2,750 individuals at maximum per year. Although the plan may strengthen the process of immigration, it puts forth an exclusive approach towards immigration to Canada. This number seems shocking as an average 0f 250,000 people immigrate to Canada annually (Government of Canada). This approach also utilizes a point system, which succumbs immigrants to merely objects rather than people, awaiting their ‘rank’ or ‘score’ and hoping for the best. Not only will prospective immigrants be affected, but also employers in various provinces Canada-wide.

               There is no doubt that the Canadian Economic Action Plan holds good intentions. It’s surface offerings appear fair and just. However, when analyzing its proposition, in comparison to the amount of people who immigrate to Canada annually, and their trend towards lower wage occupations, this plan does have its faults. My personal bias is directed towards the fact that the plan views prospective immigrants as nothing more than a waiting list. Though some prospects deem to be more qualified than others, a point system based on various educational, language, and skill factors takes away from any form of acceptance for which Canada is globally known. In terms of development, I view this initiative as a setback, as it discourages new settlement based on a series of factors that may be unachievable for the majority of those living in the global-south.

               If Canada really is a ‘new beginning’ for so many people, how can we justify ranking them on their pasts?

The Brain Drain in Canada: Taking a Stance

          What can be done about the brain drain to Canada and the issues with immigrant employment once they arrive? Galarneau and Morisette report that provincial and federal governments are trying to fix this problem with adjusting the examination requirements for many regulated sectors (2008:14). I know from helping with a recent immigrant to get a job at a bank, that many banks offer a 12 week course to assess the skills of immigrants to determine whether they can work their successfully. However, this woman has failed out of two programs, each at a different bank. What could be done for her? Having more language classes tailored to certain occupations would be a good place to start. If language is the only barrier a person has, it’s a fixable barrier. Another option to actively solving this problem is encouraging MNCs to hire people that don’t have English or French as their first language. These are people that can easily communicate in their native language in order to help the MNC, but still speak proficient English to communicate with the MNC. Tax breaks are always popular among MNCs, so the government could set up a program that gives tax breaks for hiring immigrants with English or French as a secondary or tertiary language. On the opposite end of the spectrum, the Canadian government could limit immigration to Canada only to those that can pass a language test. This would limit the number of immigrants to Canada, but also have them assimilated into the Canadian labour market faster. This is a discriminatory practice, and would likely not be popular among potential immigrants. A more grassroots solution to this problem is getting involved in your community as an ESL tutor. Campbell River, BC has a program to tutor adults in ESL in hopes of them finding a job. This is a volunteer position, and sessions are approximately 12 weeks. This allows tailoring to each individual’s job hopes and prospects, as many classes offered by companies and the government are group classes. There is no easy solution to this problem, as the labour market is over supplied with and not demanding skilled workers.

Canada and Cultural Assimilation in the Immigration Process

        

http://www.jobboom.com/carriere/wp-content/uploads/2008/06/discrimination.jpg

         In Canada, cultural assimilation is occurring in the immigration process. For many, this is not wanted, nor needed, but because of how the media portrays immigrants and what certain governmental policies do, immigrants are being assimilated into the Canadian society without their consent (Tsabari 2013). For others, this assimilation is proving beneficial and provides the new Canadians the means in order to take advantage of what Canada has to offer (Kay 2012).

As Ayelet Tsabari tells of her story of immigrating to Canada in the article What Kind of Jew Are You Anyway?, one can easily recognize that she is on the negative side of the immigration process. Her article reveals that because of how the media portrays Jews, there is little of her own Jewish culture in Canada. She finds herself lost in a world of Canadian culture in which there is a speck of Jewish culture that she has never experienced before and the reason for this is how the media plays a significant role in Canadian’s views on culture, race, ethnicity, gender, etc. She continues to talk about this, using the example of how in her own country (Jerusalem), in the place where her ‘Arabic Jewish’ ancestors migrated to, little was taught in her schools of that subject, but she learned a great deal about European Jews and their historical migration (Tsabari 2013). This example just helps to explain how much influence the dominant order and media affects every part of the world (Tsabari 2013), and how the education system is crucial for understanding cultures in life. From the immigrant perspective in any case (not just this one example) this would create the process of ‘fitting in’ and feeling at home that much harder, and it is the reason after generations, the once immigrants have lost their culture and have been assimilated into the dominant order, and have become ‘Canadian.’

On the other side, the assimilation of these immigrants into Canadian society is proving to be beneficial, and Jonathan Kay in Assimilating Immigrants: One Tale From the Front Line proves exactly that. In the article he talks about how he went into the ‘front lines’ and experienced what the organizations helping students were like in the education system. What he found was that the people truly utilizing these play groups, day cares, and parenting classes were new Canadians from all over the world. It was these educational groups that brought all of the immigrants together and it helped them (and still does) to not only ‘fit into’ the Canadian culture but to be able to function as well (Kay 2012). He talks about how for many women with controlling, abusive, strict husbands, these groups give them the freedom in order to learn, talk and socialize when in previous circumstances the women would never have been allowed to do so. More importantly these groups make an easier transition into the Canadian culture by learning the language, interacting with ‘Canadians,’ and to be given the opportunities to be successful in the Canadian society (Kay 2012). In one perspective of the immigrant, it is the assimilation into the Canadian culture that brings more rewards and opportunities for the person which will always be seen as positive or negative depending on where you stand in society.

I found these articles interesting because they showed the two different perspectives of immigrants on the assimilation into Canadian culture. I did not disagree with either of the articles because I understood both point of views equally, but I do believe in Canada’s society today, trying to stick to your roots and culture makes life harder as a Canadian immigrant. I think this is wrong, but with the way our government is running our country and how the media portrays people right now, ‘becoming Canadian’ would make life that much easier. I think the organizations and groups Kay mentioned in his article are awesome for smoothing the transition from the immigrant’s home country into the Canadian one, but at the same time they are allowing the immigrants to lose their culture. I disliked the thought that in Tsabari’s article I could relate to the man who was confused with Tsabari’s ‘Arabic Jew’ (Tsabari 2013) background and it is because of how media and society portrays people that a white, Canadian male like myself perceives and feels this way.