The Canadian undocumented?


ShareThis
January is the month of the refugee. The UN High Commission for Refugees estimates that in 2010 more than 30 million people sought asylum in other countries--264,000 in the United States and 165,000 in Canada--because of war or persecution. But that, doesn’t mean that they were welcomed to stay. After processing, some are denied and asked to leave.
Canada once had a reputation for being most accommodating. Not so anymore. The Conservative government has tightened its process of granting asylum and has reduced the number it accepts. This seems already to have created a new set of “illegals” or unauthorized immigrants according to the Los Angeles Times.
The phenomenon became more publically known couple of weeks ago, when the Los Angeles area experienced a series of arsons--mostly of parked autos. Harry Burkhardt, the suspect, was soon apprehended. He and his mother, Dorothee, were here on visitors’ visas and holding German passports. But they also entered the U.S. from Vancouver, after having been denied asylum.
Canada has revised its asylum process--ostensibly to quicken the pace of acceptance, but really to save money and to cut the number of asylums granted during hard economic times. Now asylum-seekers are to get a hearing in 90 days and, if rejected, are to be ushered back to their home country within 120 days. This is not enough time, immigrant advocates say, to gather the documentation to make the petitioner's claim of persecution-- before or after the hearing. Canada has 42,000 pending cases and 124,000 ready for deportation. The fear is that those rejected will travel as visitors on still valid passports, like the Burkardts. While the U.S. and Canada have an agreement to prevent asylum-jumping, as in case of the Burkhardts, once they're legally in the country, they have the right to present themselves to an asylum officer. If rejected, they won’t necessarily go home, but might just melt into the shadows among the other undocumented.
Many of those seeking asylum in Canada last year came from surprising places. The largest number is from Hungary. Now a member of the European Union, which insists on strong human rights policies, the former Communist country seems to be slipping back into one-party rule. The EU has charged Prime Minster Viktor Orban of extending his party’s control over the central bank, the judiciary, and the media. Critics speak oftransforming the county into a “Putin democracy” or a “Viktorarcy.”
It’s a shame that the plight of refugees should complicate the U.S.’s immigration problems further, or that Canada should temper its generous welcome to refugee. The number of refugees continues to be high. The UN High Commission estimates that every minute eight people flee their homes because of conflict or persecution. So there are millions more refugees than those that come to seek asylum. (Note that the Gospel of Matthew has the Holy Family seeking asylum in Egypt.)

Immigration trends — by the numbers

By SALIM MANSUR, QMI AGENCY



The headline on my column last week read, “Immigration isn’t just about numbers.”
But numbers indeed tell the story of how the trend line for immigrants arriving in Canada over the past 25 years slopes upward. In 2010, some 280,681 immigrants — or new arrivals as permanent residents, in the language of the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration Canada — entered the country. The figure for 1986 was 99,354.
The total number of immigrants arriving in this period (1986-2010) was more than 5.5 million, or an average of some 220,000 annually. During these years the total population grew from about 26 million in 1986 to 34 million in 2010.
To put the above numbers in perspective — all figures provided here come from government sources — Canada accepted some 4.4 million immigrants in the three decades between 1951 and 1981 at an average of about 146,000 annually. In 1951, Canada’s population was slightly above 14 million, and in 1981 the figure was close to 25 million.
The number for immigrants in 2010 was the highest for a single year during the past 60 years.
We might note in the period of 1986-2010 the spike in numbers occurred under the previous Conservative government of prime minister Brian Mulroney. In order to assure new Canadians or ethnic minorities that the Conservatives favoured increased immigration, the Mulroney government spiked the numbers upward, from less than 100,000 in 1986 to a record high of 256,641 in 1993.
 This jump in immigration levels, while disregarding an economic downturn during the same period, was a transparent effort by the Mulroney Conservatives to woo ethnic votes. The irony is the effort failed as the Conservatives crashed to their worst electoral defeat in the 1993 election.
Immigration has contributed to population growth since Confederation. But during the past half-century, a dramatic shift took place in terms of the source-area composition of immigrants to Canada.
Until 1961 the origin of more than 90% of immigrants was from Europe, and non-European immigrants, primarily from Asia, barely registered at 3%. In the decades following the centennial year, these figures were significantly altered.
In the period of 1991-2001, immigrants of European origin entering Canada fell below 20%, and Asian immigrants soared to nearly 60% of the new arrivals. During the same period, immigrants from Africa accounted for nearly 8% of the total, while around 11% were those arriving from the Caribbean basin, Central and South America.
It is in this shift of source-area composition of immigrants that the demographic profile of Canada’s population as predominantly of European-origin has begun to change.
In 2010, for instance, the top three source countries for immigrants — their respective numbers are given in brackets — were Philippines (36,578), India (30,252) and China (30,197). Together these three countries provided nearly 35% of new arrivals in Canada.
The other noteworthy figure for 2010 is the total number of immigrants originating from Muslim majority countries, which amounted to 65,684 or approaching 25% of the new arrivals.
The cumulative effect of these numbers over time will be significant, and this is why immigration is the big issue politicians of all stripes want to avoid publicly discussing.

Leave us a message

Check our online courses now

Check our online courses now
Click Here now!!!!

Subscribe to our newsletter

Vcita