Check It Out: Immigration is complicated
By Joan Janzen
joanjanzen@yahoo.com
It’s been said that the first rule of a passive aggressive club is: “You know what, never mind. It’s fine.” Which seems to also apply to the federal government’s new immigration rules.
The Toronto Sun obtained exclusive access to an email from the chief executive officer of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, which included instructions for immigration officers. The guidelines will definitely help the feds reach their increased annual goal of 400,000 refugees.
The internal draft document directed to immigration and refugee judges explained the process, whereby all grounds to exclude applicants are being removed. The missive laid out a long list of reasons immigrants can be allowed to enter and stay in Canada. Any and every applicant who has an “intersectional” claim is to be accepted.
You may be asking what “Intersectional” means? It’s defined as any two of the following: race, religion, indigeneity, political beliefs, socioeconomic status, age, sexual orientation, culture, disability, or immigration status, that “impact an individual’s lived experience of discrimination, marginalization or oppression”. Discrimination caused by any two of the above items listed will eliminate the need for immigrants to prove they are facing torture or death if forced to return to their home countries.
Officers also need to keep in mind that applicants could be unable to remember their stories correctly due to being traumatized or stressed. Therefore they are not to be excluded, since giving false information will qualify as a side effect of trauma, fear, helplessness, hopelessness or despair.
Compare this to the lengthy process of employers who choose to hire foreign workers. The steps involve registering for certification, meeting health and safety standards, proving financial stability, obtaining approval to hire a foreign worker and providing proper documentation that proves the applicant has the skills to meet the skilled labour required. There are waiting periods involved and expenses including the assistance of a licensed immigration consultant.
Another comparison could be derived from the situation in Afghanistan where the Taliban is going door to door looking for Christians to kill, and women to take captive. In mid-August an Afghan-Canadian, who had served in Afghanistan, called on the federal government to help Christians escape the chaos. Yet he was concerned that Christians wouldn’t fall under the government’s definition of “vulnerable”.
How much more vulnerable can one be than to be hunted down with the intent to be killed or captured? Are there different rules for people from Afghanistan, or foreign workers who are coming to Canada? Does the federal government expect Canadians to respond by saying, “You know what, never mind. It’s fine”?
You can contact me at joanjanzen@yahoo.com