Who is "fit" to immigrate to Canada?

[Acajack]

I don't think this has been discussed here.

On the radio this morning I heard that this file continues to move ahead on Parliament Hill.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/huss...lity-1.4414274

[kwoldtimer]

I'm a bit sceptical of the "principle" mentioned in the article, since I don't see any real connection between inclusion of the sick/disabled in Canadian society with our criteria for permitting the immigration of people with no connection to, or status in, Canada. One would also like to see more information on the potential costs of such a change - the estimate given in the article seems very low.

On the other hand, perhaps this can simply be seen as a cost of being a compassionate society, a bit like the costs we willingly incur to accept refugees into Canada.

The case of the professor with the Down Syndrome child always struck me as a case of the policy being too harsh. There would have been little to no cost to the taxpayer had the family been allowed to immigrate, as they could well afford to provide for the child.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

I'm a bit sceptical of the "principle" mentioned in the article, since I don't see any real connection between inclusion of the sick/disabled in Canadian society with our criteria for permitting the immigration of people with no connection to, or status in, Canada. One would also like to see more information on the potential costs of such a change - the estimate given in the article seems very low.

On the other hand, perhaps this can simply be seen as a cost of being a compassionate society, a bit like the costs we willingly incur to accept refugees into Canada.

The case of the professor with the Down Syndrome child always struck me as a case of the policy being too harsh. There would have been little to no cost to the taxpayer had the family been allowed to immigrate, as they could well afford to provide for the child.

That low estimate was also quoted in the Radio-Canada story this morning. It seems to me that it is based on the current policy which is fairly restrictive. If Canada were to amend its policy in order to make it more, um, "generous", it's not unlikely that the number of applicants of this nature would balloon given that there are very few options in the first world for this type of immigration.

Are there any others, in fact? If so, there can't be very many.

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by Acajack

That low estimate was also quoted in the Radio-Canada story this morning. It seems to me that it is based on the current policy which is fairly restrictive. If Canada were to amend its policy in order to make it more, um, "generous", it's not unlikely that the number of applicants of this nature would balloon given that there are very few options in the first world for this type of immigration.

Are there any others, in fact? If so, there can't be very many.

I couldn't swear to it, but I think the system in the USA is similar to, but less restrictive than, our current practice.

I think it would lead to an increase in the number of disabled applicants, but I suspect that they would be mostly in the family reunification category.

[ssiguy]

No one, except refugees, should be allowed to come to Canada without a good fluency of either English or French. Period. They should also have marketable skills and we don't need family reunification of everybody's parents and grandparents. I don't care if they have a disability or illness as long as they still can be gainfully employed.

As far as refugees, their claims should be settled within a month especially border crossers who are just que-jumpers. No endless appeals or trials in the courts just a simple yes or no and that's it. Canada says most of the current border crossers will be denied which maybe true but that could take up to a decade to figure out in our current system and by then they would have melted into the woodwork or be given yet another appeal this time on humanitarian grounds for, of all things, having been in the country so long. ANY children born by people who have not yet been determined to be refugees should also be considered refugees and not be given citizenship unless the family refugee claimants win their case.

In Richmond there is a wholesale industry of the Chinese visiting the country for a few months to have their kids hoping they get automatic citizenship and hence their parents will as well.

[kwoldtimer]

It's been a while since one of your "should" posts that ignore the reality of the Canada's laws and Constitution. A speedier refugee determination system would be possible, but it would cost (conservatively) hundreds of millions of dollars.

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

It's been a while since one of your "should" posts that ignore the reality of the Canada's laws and Constitution. A speedier refugee determination system would be possible, but it would cost (conservatively) hundreds of millions of dollars.

Quite the contrary it would save the government mega-bucks and bring a semblance of confidence back to the Immigration department by Canadians who have absolutely no faith in it now.

How much does it cost to gives these people welfare, housing, medical, and education supports over the years it takes for their claim to meander thru the system? How much does the government spend on employees having to deal with these same cases for years to say nothing of the endless court cases and immigration lawyers bleeding the system dry?

Anyone crossing the border from the US should immediately be put up in a nearby makeshift emergency hostel. Give them food and care for 2 days until their case is heard. Where are you from? Did you cross at a legal border crossing? Do you have a status in the US or a refugee claim there? If yes then escort them to the nearest border crossing and wish them luck. End of story.

Canada and Trudeau are so hypocritical. Bitching at Trump for cancelling it's Haiti post-earthquake status and yet Canada cancelled it's program a year ago.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Quite the contrary it would save the government mega-bucks and bring a semblance of confidence back to the Immigration department by Canadians who have absolutely no faith in it now.

How much does it cost to gives these people welfare, housing, medical, and education supports over the years it takes for their claim to meander thru the system? How much does the government spend on employees having to deal with these same cases for years to say nothing of the endless court cases and immigration lawyers bleeding the system dry?

Would you rather we set up refugee concentration camps the way the Australians have? I'm sorry, when given the choice between the way things are done in Canada and the way they're done in Australia, I know which one I'll pick, regardless of whether it costs more.

[kwoldtimer]

edit

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by Acajack

I don't think this has been discussed here.

On the radio this morning I heard that this file continues to move ahead on Parliament Hill.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/huss...lity-1.4414274

Rather hypocritical of the Federal Minister to dismiss the costs of burdening provincial health authorities with "just" $135 million over a five year average. he should put up and transfer an equivalent amount of federal money to the provinces.

[p_xavier]

In Quebec basically French speaking non-religious people.

[kel]

Knowledge of English or French, university or trade educated, under the age of 50 and not part of a death cult would be a good start.

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by kel

Knowledge of English or French, university or trade educated, under the age of 50 and not part of a death cult would be a good start.

Care to define "death cult" a bit more?

[ssiguy]

These would not be concentration camps so let's cool the hyperbole.

I am talking about thse people crossing the border from the US. Anyone coming from a safe 3rd country like the US should be given an automatic no and taken to the nearest border crossing and wish them luck. Canada should not, under any circumstance, allow anyone to claim refugee status from any safe 3rd country ie Western Europe, US, Aust/NZ, Japan etc. Anyone arriving by land or air from these countries should be held for 24 hours and sent on the next plane back. Anyone coming from a safe 3rd country is not, under any definition, a refugee.

Do I feel bad for these mostly Haitians and Hondurans crossing over from the US, of course I do. They are coming from poor and violent countries and I wouldn't want to go back to those countries either and I can't blame them for fleeing such horrid circumstances. That however does not make them refugeess according to the UN Charter of Refugees. Poverty and national instability are NOT grounds for refugee status.

[whatnext]

Apparently 11.2% of the residents of Richmond, BC can't communicate in English. What kind of immigration system allows that kind of drag on the economy?

[Acajack]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Apparently 11.2% of the residents of Richmond, BC can't communicate in English. What kind of immigration system allows that kind of drag on the economy?

How is that automatically a drag on the economy? I mean, I know in theory it could be in some cases, but not sure how we could be so categorical about it.

I am pretty sure there are unilingual people in Richmond and elsewhere in Canada who are richer than you and me and contribute more to the economy than we do.

[ssiguy]

I want future citizens to not only be such in the letter of the law but also in the spirit of it and these unilingual Chinese in Richmond don't qualify. Unfortunately they bought their passport and are now free to live in a Chinese-only world and launder their money. Anyone who cannot speak either of our official languages has absolutely no intention of belonging to the wider Canadian community. If they can afford to buy a passport and flip a house they are more than able to take a Berlitz course.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I want future citizens to not only be such in the letter of the law but also in the spirit of it and these unilingual Chinese in Richmond don't qualify. Unfortunately they bought their passport and are now free to live in a Chinese-only world and launder their money. Anyone who cannot speak either of our official languages has absolutely no intention of belonging to the wider Canadian community. If they can afford to buy a passport and flip a house they are more than able to take a Berlitz course.

Did the Chinese piss in your cereal or something? You are easily the most anti-Chinese person I've seen on these boards. It seems you're always complaining about something Chinese related (even something as minor as Chinese signage at Vancouver airport)

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by The Chemist

Did the Chinese piss in your cereal or something? You are easily the most anti-Chinese person I've seen on these boards. It seems you're always complaining about something Chinese related (even something as minor as Chinese signage at Vancouver airport)

What's wrong with China? Where do you want to start?

-The brutal repression of ethnic & religious minorities.
-The lack of rule of law for citizens who can be spirited away in the middle of the night, even from foreign countries.
-The race to steal manufacturing jobs at the cost of polluting not just china but the whole planet.
-Trying to control what its citizens think by blocking internet sites.
-A culture of corruption and cronyism that spreads to everywhere in the world their money touches.

I could go on and on, I'm surprised they even let you read SSP frankly.

[The Chemist]

Originally Posted by whatnext

What's wrong with China? Where do you want to start?

-The brutal repression of ethnic & religious minorities.
-The lack of rule of law for citizens who can be spirited away in the middle of the night, even from foreign countries.
-The race to steal manufacturing jobs at the cost of polluting not just china but the whole planet.
-Trying to control what its citizens think by blocking internet sites.
-A culture of corruption and cronyism that spreads to everywhere in the world their money touches.

I could go on and on, I'm surprised they even let you read SSP frankly.

Chinese government =/= Chinese people. Individuals should not be treated poorly just because they come from a country whose government has objectionable policies.

While you do have a point that the Chinese government has some major issues, I would like to address a couple of points:

1. While Tibetans and Uighurs are certainly treated badly by the Chinese government (not entirely surprising, given the separatist element in both of these ethnic groups) there are plenty of ethnic and religious minorities who are not oppressed by the government. Eg. The Hui, a Muslim minority who are very well integrated into Chinese society.

2. Why blame China for the loss of manufacturing jobs? Why not blame western companies who voluntarily moved their factories to China to take advantage of low labour costs and lax environmental regulations? The Chinese didn't force these companies to move there. As far as pollution goes, yes, it's bad, but there is a major effort to clean it up - China is already the world's largest investor in renewable energy, and China's coal use (a major source of its air pollution problem) has already started to decline as a result.

As for your final comment, there is a lot more unblocked content on the Chinese internet than you might think (some western media give the impression that every single foreign site is blocked, which is most certainly not the case) and for sites that are blocked anyone with a lick of technical sense can easily and cheaply set up their own private server to completely bypass the 'Great Firewall', as I have.