Immigration Mailbox II
As I mentioned in my inaugural column a fortnight ago, immigration has been discussed a fair bit in the federal election campaign now coming to a conclusion. With election day less than a week away, I thought I would take a closer look at some of the positions taken by the three major federal political parties on this issue.
Each of the election platforms of the Liberal, Conservative and New Democratic Parties addresses the issue of immigration in specific terms and, sometimes, with fairly detailed policy proposals.
The Liberals have the most detailed plan to reform the system. However, given that they have been in power for the last 12 years, one has to wonder why all their ideas for improving the system are coming right at the end of their most recent mandate. Their plan to gradually abolish the Right of Landing Fee over the next two budgets seems especially suspicious in its timing. The Liberals introduced this fee in 1995 as part of then-Finance Minister Paul Martin’s measures to balance the federal budget. While the budget has been running surpluses for many years now, the Liberals have only in the last few weeks come to the conclusion “[t]he time has come to remove this barrier.”
Having said that, the Liberals deserve some credit for spelling out in detail their plans for other aspects of the immigration system. Their proposals for assisting new skilled immigrants in overcoming labour market barriers and obtaining recognition of their international credentials – an issue that the Conservatives and NDP also address in their platforms but in rather perfunctory fashion – reflect the experience they have gained in government struggling with this important and multifaceted problem.
The Liberals also pledge more money for settlement programs ($1.3 billion over the next five years), an additional $700 million to reduce backlogs in visa offices overseas, and the creation of an “In-Canada Landing Class” to help spread the benefits of immigration beyond Canada’s three major cities.
Each of these ideas has merit. However, once again, some skepticism is warranted given the fact each of these initiatives requires significant new funding and that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration during the last dozen years of Liberal rule has rarely been successful in securing more money for his/her department from Cabinet colleagues.
The Conservatives’ approach to the immigration issue is more heavily weighed on the enforcement side of things. For example, they focus on speeding up and increasing the number of deportations especially for those immigrants or illegals convicted of serious crimes. They also pledge to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to allow judges to order deportations as part of criminal sentences (currently deportation can only be accomplished by immigration officials and tribunals).
The Conservatives also want to give guns to the officers than man our border points and implement “face recognition and other biometric technology” at ports of entry.
On the facilitative side, a Conservative government would also cut the Right of Landing Fee and establish a “Canadian Agency for Assessment and Recognition of Credentials.” On the last point, it should be kept in mind that credential recognition and the regulation of professions such as engineering, medicine and the construction trades has traditionally been a provincial responsibility. A “made in Ottawa” or national solution may be challenging to implement.
The NDP takes a very “pro-immigrant” stance in its platform, pledging more money for the system, an increase in immigration levels, and the relaxation of certain rules for admission. They also promise to abolish the landing fee and assist in credentials recognition for skilled immigrants. Their most specific proposals involve allowing permanent residents and citizens to sponsor one additional relative, apparently regardless of relationship, over the course of a lifetime and allowing people without status in Canada to apply for landing based on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
The NDP platform on immigration otherwise lacks specifics and often relies on generalities. This may reflect the fact that they have little experience governing on this issue.
So, as election day approaches, these are the choices that are before us with respect to the issue of immigration. At the very least, one would hope that whomever is elected will follow through on the pledges they have made to improve a system that is currently far from perfection.
Immigration Mailbox I
Welcome to the inaugural Immigration Mailbox column. In this space, we hope to address issues and answer questions related to the issue of immigration. We welcome readers to submit their questions on the Canadian immigration system. In later columns, I will attempt to answer the questions that have been submitted.
First, a little bit about my background: I have been an immigration consultant for over a decade. Previously, I have served as the National Vice-President of the Association of Immigration Counsel of Canada (AICC) and I am a registered member of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC). Most recently, I worked with the BC government where I managed the BC Provincial Nominee Program and held the position of Director of Economic Immigration Programs.
With a federal election quickly approaching, immigration is once again an issue that is in the news. This past fall, the Federal Liberals re-committed to increasing the annual number of immigrants to 300,000 by gradually increasing the annual total (now at 245,000) over the next 5 years. The Federal Immigration Minister, Joe Volpe, also made news by committing to increasing the number of sponsored parents and grandparents approved this year and by stating that the immigration selection system should do a better job of addressing the skill shortages that exist in the Canadian labour market. All federal parties, and many of the provinces, have expressed ideas on how to better utilize the skills that economic immigrants bring to the country to ensure that the doctors, accountants, engineers and other skilled individuals that are selected to immigrate here are not prevented from making the most of their skills and experience after they arrive.
Canada is a country founded by immigrants and we now accept more immigrants per capita than any other country in the world. Although our system is not without its flaws, it is important to keep in mind the things our country does right in this area. Virtually all advanced industrialized countries are entering an era where they are competing globally for skills and knowledge. Alongside this trend toward globalization, Canada and many other Western countries are facing demographic pressures that require we look beyond our borders to address shortages of highly skilled workers. Among these countries, perhaps none is better placed to benefit from its vast experience in selecting and settling large numbers of immigrants than Canada.
However, it is also important to keep in mind that those benefits are unlikely to be realized unless our immigrant selection system and settlement services are not properly modernized and enhanced. As someone who has had recent experience working within the immigration division of a provincial government, I can attest to the important role that the provinces must play in selecting skilled and business immigrants if these classes are to bring continuing economic benefits to the province and the country. Canada is simply too large and diverse a country to have one national selection system that can meet the needs of all regions. The provinces are much better placed to select the types of skills and experience needed by their local economies. This means that the Provincial Nominee Programs (PNPs) that have developed across the country will need to grow and expand and that the federal government will in the future have to view the provinces as full partners in the realm of economic immigrant selection.
And once immigrants are here, it is the role of regulatory bodies, which are mostly provincial rather than federal, and Canadian employers to recognize the skills that these individuals bring and provide the opportunities that will allow their skills to be fully utilized. Currently, the Canadian labour market is far too closed to workers whose experience and skills have come from other countries. By contrast, the United States does a much better job of maximizing the economic potential of internationally-trained individuals.
These are some of the larger issues that the federal and provincial governments are currently struggling with and none of them have easy answers. However, I hope that some of your questions can be answered in this space in the near future. I look forward to receiving your inquiries and opinions.
Joe Kenney can be e-mailed at jkenney@www.jkenneyconsulting.com
