The Polarizing World of Irregular Migrants
By Author: Admin | August 2, 2018
The Immigration Department has promised to consult with appropriate government departments about the increase in refugee claims from the United States. The increase has necessitated short-term accommodation in university dorms, and, subsequently, in hotel rooms. Further, municipalities adjacent to Toronto (such as Markham) have been tasked with housing 5000 refugee claimants; this has resulted in heated protests, despite the fact that unused buildings would be utilized at no cost to the municipality of Markham. The protests, along with online, anonymous rants about the cost of processing refugees in Canada, do not recognize that some asylum seekers are women and children.
Rather, the perception of the type of people coming to Canada as refugees is much more specific. That type of specificity, along with disparaging, inappropriate labels, no doubt fuels the heated debate in a manner that has less regard to sober fact and analysis.
One more radical solution is to terminate the Immigration Refugee Board and delegate refugee adjudication to officers within the government bureaucracy. The presumption is that the taxpayer supported Immigration Refugee Board is at the mercy of “a powerful refugee lobby consisting of immigration lawyers, non-government organizations, church groups who sincerely believe that these people deserve help.” (I had no idea of my degree of power over Canadian government policy). There is a similar concern about the cost of operating the Immigration Refugee Board.
Canadian courts decided a long time ago that individuals claiming protection in Canada have a right to due process, that the process mst include a hearing where the person is not a terrorist or criminal. Even presuming such legislative changes pass constitutional muster, delegating refugee decision-making to government officers will likely save no money to Canadian tax payers. A presumed increase in unreasonable negative decision making would necessitate appeals by refugees to higher, more expensive Canadian tribunals like the Federal Court of Canada. Immigration lawyers would stand to benefit from the increase in appeals. I would add that the approach of terminating the Immigration Refugee Board would constitute a form of isolationism from international affairs that is at odds with Canadian historical activity. It may be, however, that events outside of Canada, if amplified by economic policy, could lead to public distaste for refugees, and immigration in general.
As an aside, the concerns relating to the long-term cost of asylum claimants is without merit.
Evidence abounds that the presence of refugees in Europe leads to an economic benefit, as well as in the United States, and Canada. The often-conjured images of asylum seekers living large on the public purse is a fantasy of far-right conspiracy.
Indeed, I have often found it amusing that such images seem to exist simultaneously with the fears that such people will steal the jobs of people already here. Evidently asylum seekers exist in a sort of quantum flux, labouring intensely for long hours while also being too lazy to work.
- The Polarizing World of Irregular Migrants
- Competing Priorities Under Canada’s Immigration Laws
- CIC News June 2018
- Citizenship Revocation recent update
- The Permanent Residence program for live-in Caregivers is coming to an End
- How to Apply for a Study permit for Canada – the logic of a study permit from outside of Canada
- I have a visitor Status in Canada can I apply for a work permit in Canada?
- Loss of Canadian Permanent Resident Status
- Immigration Consultants and Ghosts in Canada
- What are Removal Orders and What You Need to Know