CANADA NEEDS IMMIGRANTS. BUT DO WE MEET THEIR NEEDS?

By SHAGORIKA EASWAR

Some days I feel like a parent standing with her hands on her hips, confronting a recalcitrant offspring.

“You asked me to make palak paneer. Now do you want it or not?”

Picture someone asking policymakers if they really want all the immigrants they are inviting – by the hundreds of thousands – and you’ll see where I am going with this.

Because the drumbeat is on. We need immigrants. To drive trucks, to look after our children and the elderly. To fill the gaps in every industry from healthcare to tourism.

But Canada doesn’t seem to know what to do with immigrants once they get here.

Or even whom to invite or how to word the invitation.

While the immigrations levels plans – 500,000 a year by 2025 – have set off alarm bells in some quarters, those working with newcomers and in settlement services are asking if we have the resources that all these people are going to need.

Are newcomers, in these numbers, a good idea? Or a short-term solution with long-term repercussions we haven’t given enough thought to?

With the worker-to-retiree ratio set to fall from 7:1 to 2 :1 by 2035, we may need the numbers. But is bringing in people by the planeloads the solution?

Perhaps an immigration lawyer could help figure this out?

Enter Ravi Jain. The barrister and solicitor (Ontario) and attorney-at-law (Massachusetts) has a distinguished career in immigration law.

Certified as a specialist in citizenship and immigration law by the Law Society of Ontario, he has been recognized as Lawyer of the Year, Immigration Law, 2022; was past chair, Canadian Bar Association – National Immigration Law Section; and initiator and co-founder, Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association.

Jain Immigration Law is a full-service immigration law firm, and with decades of experience between them, the team assists with temporary and permanent residence applications of all types including federal and provincial programs as well as business programs.

Recently returned from a visit to Dubai where he partners with lawyers and immigration professionals who hold seminars, Jain says there’s a lot of interest in business immigration, though his roster of clients runs the gamut from business immigration through highly skilled professions to international students.

Critics used to focus on unemployment rates in the country and claim that newcomers would just add to those numbers, Jain points out. “But with our current unemployment rate low, they have shifted their focus to lack of housing and healthcare.”

And nixes both.

“Just the announcement of the immigration targets set off a hysterical response but look at the numbers as a percentage of the total population. It is just over one per cent. Not five, not ten, but one per cent.”

And he quotes Sean Fraser, the minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada: “Without the increased numbers, our questions will not be about labour shortages generations from now, but about whether we can afford schools and hospitals.”

Which paints a dire picture.

But a look at the categories we are relying on to bump up the numbers casts doubt on that claim.

WHEN WILL FOREIGN-TRAINED PHYSICIANS GET TO PRACTISE?

How does bringing in more healthcare professionals solve the healthcare crisis if they can’t practise in their fields for years? When foreign-trained physicians, nurses and other healthcare professionals already here are languishing in other fields because their credentials were not recognized?

Jain himself testified before the Senate Standing Committee on Human Rights that it is the provinces that regulate the professions and so pressure must be applied there. This was back in 2008.

So if our justification for bringing them in is that we need them to fix our healthcare system, don’t we need to fix the system first?

There are structural issues with respect to healthcare, says Jain. “But there are problems in these areas even without the increased numbers. I really do believe that the increased numbers target sharpens the need to fix things. We’re seeing more pressure lately on relaxing criteria for international physicians, on removing artificial barriers.”

In Backlash on ramped up immigration numbers unwarranted, an opinion piece he recently wrote in The Lawyer’s Daily, Jain says that “Perhaps in an attempt to alleviate future concerns... the government noted that over 60 per cent of admissions would be in the Economic Class by 2025 and that new “features” (powers) would allow the minister to pick and choose by occupation within our Express Entry points system to address labour shortages...”

ENROLLED FOR CHEAP LABOUR

Juxtapose IRCC press releases with research coming out of Conference Board of Canada and you see two completely different faces of immigration.

And sadly, an uncaring face of Canada.

International students and other temporary migrants are being welcomed as part of a two-step immigration process.  On the face of it, it’s a brilliant idea. These young people enrolled in Canadian institutions not only earn a Canadian degree, they learn Canadian ways, gain valuable Canadian experience and are ready to hit the ground running when they gain full immigrant status. 

IRCC touts the value international students and temporary migrants bring to Canada.

A selection of excerpts from press releases, below:

• Sean Fraser, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, announced the temporary lifting of the 20-hour-per-week cap on the number of hours that eligible post-secondary students are allowed to work off-campus while class is in session.

• The announcement is part of a series of initiatives that aim to benefit international students and graduates, while supporting Canada’s broader efforts to improve client service and application processing times.

• Other measures to benefit international students and recent graduates include an opportunity for those with expired or expiring post-graduation work permits to get an additional 18-month open work permit.

But while being upfront about the country’s need, the press releases then resort to “selling” the measures as being good for international students.

“This measure will provide many international students with a greater opportunity to gain valuable work experience in Canada and will increase the availability of workers to sustain Canada’s post-pandemic growth. With more than 500,000 international students already in Canada available to potentially work additional hours, this temporary change reflects the important role international students can play in addressing our labour shortage, while continuing to pursue their studies.”

They also put in the caveat that “study permit holders are still expected to balance their study and work commitments, as those who stop studying or reduce course loads to only study part-time are not eligible to work off-campus.”

Which is like saying, “We need you, you need the work, but it’s on you to manage a brutal combination of long hours of underpaid work and a full course load. Govern yourself accordingly.”

Isn’t that a bit of a cop-out? Can one really wash one’s hands of the responsibility? We encouraged these young people to come study in Canada with the promise of an easier path to permanent residency. But how are we facilitating it? International students are expected to show funds to cover the first year of tuition when they enrol. Many families sell land or valuable possessions to come up with the funds in the hopes that their children will be able to work to support themselves from the second year on.

But countless hours at minimum wage are required just to cover tuition fees, rent and food.

International students and temporary foreign workers are often considered “ideal immigrants” as they have professional and personal experiences in Canada – branded as “Canadian experience” – that government and employers presume would facilitate their economic integration. But the evidence for Canadian experience paints a more complex and nuanced picture, according to an impact paper for the Conference Board of Canada by Yilmaz Ergun Dinç.

The paper questions whether these education and training programs deliver the expected Canadian experience benefits. “International students, for instance, are often paying for programs with limited employment prospects, with significant uncertainty on transitioning to permanent residency.”

And, “Most Canadian education programs to which international students and newcomers turn to gain Canadian experience aren’t explicitly designed for economic integration. As a result, these programs don’t always lead to successful economic inclusion... Temporary residents may gain Canadian experience that helps with their economic integration upon admission, but they often do so while facing visa status vulnerabilities, having limited access to IRCC-funded settlement services, working in precarious and difficult working conditions, and lacking the rights of a permanent resident.”

“I’m truly against that,” says Jain categorically. “The pressure came from universities and colleges and has created an awful, truly disgraceful situation. Now employers can say they know students are allowed to work unlimited hours and that they will replace anyone not wanting to do so or unable to do so with others who will.”

A segment of CBC’s Fifth Estate shed light on the exploitation of international students. Questioned about the impact on the lives of thousands of young people, Fraser said this was unacceptable. And then passed the buck to provincial governments. It was up to them to regulate educational institutions that failed to deliver.

Fair enough. Education is a provincial responsibility. But immigration is federal. When hundreds – sometimes thousands – of students, many of whom can barely communicate in English, gain admission at questionable educational institutions, don’t the immigration officers see that there’s no bright future ahead for these people? Isn’t it their responsibility to gently point them in another direction, to question what they hope to gain from degrees or diplomas in areas that will not result in jobs?

When they give their stamp of approval, are they not, in effect, endorsing the same institutes Fraser says should be better regulated?

“Which government gives the designation of an educational institution?” asks Jain. “The federal government. Which department? Fraser’s. He’ll say we rely on the provinces to tell us about the institutions’ functioning.”

Jain, who has successfully represented students in class action suits, has suggested not issuing student visas to international students planning to enrol in private institutions as a way to address the issue.

Fraser is quoted in an IRCC press release as saying, “With the economy growing at a faster rate than employers can hire new workers, Canada needs to look at every option so that we have the skills and workforce needed to fuel our growth. Immigration will be crucial to addressing our labour shortage. By allowing international students to work more while they study, we can help ease pressing needs in many sectors across the country, while providing more opportunities for international students to gain valuable Canadian work experience and continue contributing to our short-term recovery and long-term prosperity.”

Once the course is over (and the fees collected), these students are hoping to find employment. But many of the courses they sign up for might get them past the door, but not into jobs.

The sad truth is that their “Canadian experience” is often not the most positive and also gained in ways that does not help “Canadianize” them, as per the desired goal.

Think about it, a student straight from a village or a small town in India is unlikely to find employment at a mainstream business, specially if they are challenged in spoken English. So they find employment in their comfort zones, in small restaurants or family-owned businesses, where their interactions are limited. We have all met young people serving at restaurants whose smiles are accompanied by monosyllabic responses – until one addresses them in a familiar tongue. This Canadian experience is not going to get them into their dream jobs.

EXPRESS ROUTE TO LOW-SKILLED JOBS

Nurse aides, long-term care aides, hospital attendants, elementary and secondary school teacher assistants, and transport truck drivers are examples of some of the 16 occupations now included in the Express Entry category.

These are not the highest paying jobs – and one might make the case that that’s why Canadians aren’t falling over themselves to fill these vacancies. Are the newcomers in this category being set up for long-term financial stability?

In an episode of Hub Dialogue, Mikal Skuterud, a labour economist at the University of Waterloo and director of the Canadian Labour Economics Forum, discussed immigration’s diminishing economic returns with host Sean Speer.

They covered how we ought to think about the effects of Canadian immigration policy on the labour market, as well as outcomes for immigrants themselves.

“There are some very significant shifts happening now, in particular toward prioritizing lower-skilled immigrants,” said Skuterud. “I had some pushback about a year ago when I suggested that that was happening. The changes to what’s called the Express Entry system that are coming down the pipeline, make it very clear...Only if you want a lower-skilled economy with low wages, if that’s where you want to allow businesses to expand and be successful is by providing them with this low-skilled labour, then certainly you should target lower-skilled workers in your immigration program. As Canada has done for many years, if you hope to have high productivity, high-wage economy, then the emphasis should be high-skilled workers.”

Jain sees it differently, By bringing in people for jobs Canadians aren’t interested in, the government is addressing the labour shortages in some sectors.

“Take the healthcare sector – one nurse sees so many patients. One person can solve a 400-person problem.”

THE THING ABOUT FAMILY REUNIFICATION

According to an IRCC press release, “Family reunification plays a significant role in attracting, retaining and integrating immigrants who contribute to our success as a country. Canada has an extremely generous family sponsorship program, which allows Canadian citizens and permanent residents the option to bring their parents and grandparents to Canada as permanent residents... Recognizing that many potential sponsors may have experienced financial difficulties in recent years because of the pandemic, IRCC will once again use a lower income requirement for the sponsorship of parents and grandparents. For the 2020 and 2021 tax years, the income requirement for sponsors will be the minimum necessary income, instead of the minimum necessary income plus 30 per cent, and regular Employment Insurance benefits and temporary COVID-19 benefits (such as the Canada Emergency Response Benefit) will be allowed to be included toward the sponsor’s income. These measures will ensure that sponsors and applicants are not unfairly penalized for a temporary loss of a sponsor’s income during the pandemic.”

Read between the lines and you have to ask: By not penalizing applicants for a temporary loss of income during the pandemic by including the benefits they may have received, are we not setting them up for greater hardship down the road? Because the benefits have dried up. And not everyone is back at the jobs they were let go from or at pre-pandemic income levels.

Which, in turn, begs the question about the logic behind the original plan. Someone must have come up with the minimum necessary income plus 30 per cent requirement based on the cost of living and supporting dependants. Everyone else in the corridors of power must have agreed. Now suddenly, and at a time when prices for everything are going up and food banks are reporting unprecedented demand, we are lowering the income requirement?

How will applicants who may qualify under these new parameters to bring a parent or grandparent support them when they get here? Those whose families are financially challenged face an uncertain and bleak future. We see groups of senior citizens in parks around the city in spring and summer. In winter, they haunt the corridors of malls like lost souls.

Family reunification is one of the most humane immigration policies.

If done right.

In conversations on the subject in living rooms, several ideas have been shared. Here’s one:

Maybe aim at fewer people in this category if sponsors are unable to support them financially but make it easier for those that are selected by providing some income supplements.

Because the country pays, one way or another, anyway. Either through increased expenditure on healthcare, or by funding community agencies that in turn support these very same seniors. May as well use the money to support families to allow these seniors dignity and comfort.

Jain brings a different perspective. The rationale behind the reduced income requirements, he says, is that post-COVID, the income would be normalized again.

“The larger issue is the people who have been trying for years to sponsor parents or grandparents.”

He has suggested a weighted lottery, one in which people who have already tried a few times would have a better chance than someone who applied yesterday.

Discussing the thorny issue of unscrupulous agents in other countries who snare people wishing to come to Canada, Jain says the immigration department is beginning to pay attention to who the representative is.

“But it’s very much buyer-beware,” he adds. “In terms of the latest info I am seeing, the focus is on hire someone competent. I believe we should enforce that only immigration lawyers should be allowed to practise in this area as is the case in the US. This is not such a problem there as it in the Commonwealth countries.”

In his article for The Lawyer’s Daily, Jain quotes columnist Andrew Coyne who has written that  Canada is a much more interesting, dynamic place than it was in his childhood.

“That is exactly right, and it’s partly what drew me to the field of immigration law over 20 years ago: an instinct I had that immigration would help decrease nativism, xenophobia and racism.”

 But if one were to play the Devil’s advocate, isn’t that exactly what a child of immigrants, born and raised in Canada and an immigration lawyer to boot, would say?

Jain responds with a laugh.

“Well, when I was growing up, skinheads rode the subway in Toronto, that’s not so now. That’s not to say there’s no racism now, but it’s certainly less overt. One thing I noticed is that the more diverse the place became, the fewer issues there were. Some problems persist, but when you have an intermingling of people, there’s less fear of ‘the other’.”

And echoing Doug Saunders’ words in Maximum Canada, Ravi Jain says he firmly believes the world could use more Canada.

Which most of us are agreed upon.

But in a Bloomberg article, Randy Thanthong-Knight quotes people who “are accusing the Canadian government of using them as a cheap source of labour and discarding them once they’re no longer needed”.

“I’m basically sitting at home and living off of my savings and not knowing how long I’d have to do that,” Daniel D’Souza, an accountant and former student at Seneca College near Toronto, said in an interview. “I regret choosing Canada as a country to immigrate to, to study and to live in. Canada should appreciate foreign students more, not just use them as a form of cheap labour.”

There are parties that everyone wants to be invited to, the ones they can causally drop references to in conversation for weeks to come. And there are those that people steer clear of.

Canada was once the country everyone was delighted to be welcomed to. Is it in danger of becoming one people are warning each other about? 

The journalist from India who completed two separate year-long journalism courses in Canada and who is now struggling to meet the requirements for PR – while working for a news organization – what is he going to tell his peers who are looking at Canada as the land of opportunity?