H&C Humanitarian Ground with/or Without Failed refugee claim

[canuck78]

Yes, but i suggest you look into the situation of the people who are waiting for approval through these programs.
The wait times are extremely long because there is a lot of bureaucracy to deal with between the UNHCR and the host countries. Of course, the Canadian government accepts these obstacles, even though it has full sovereignty to create its own independent programs, separate from any organization or foreign state just like it is doing now by welcoming people from Hong Kong (lol...) while neglecting humanitarian applicants and even aylum seekers who are already in Canada.
As for the Skilled Refugee Program, it is basically another version of the rural communities program or the francophone communities program. It’s pure political symbolism. The acceptance rates are very low, and the criteria are quite strange

Your claim that there were no programs that allowed people to apply from other countries like Australia. That isn’t true. Didn’t say the system was great but the demand far exceeds the resettlement capacity I other countries. Canada depends on UNHCR to identify refugees that fit the profiles they have identified as priorities. In general there is no easy solution when the demand for resettlement in another country far exceeds what other countries are willing to accept by huge multiples.

 

[WellWell2021]

Ok, I corrected my claim to say that there is no program that works properly

 

[canuck78]

The rise in claims never meant poor visitor application scrutiny like it is made to look. It was the domino effect. The deck is stacked against the applicant anyway. Every transit airport has private security at the gate intimidating people with unprivileged passports. If the only issue is having a qualified IRB member researching to see if a claim is valid and time is the issue, I think that's anti-due process. They sldo never post about exit stats or abandoned claims. Just the hotel costs and freebie talk which is paritally true and political fodder. The bureaucrats know what they wanted back then and know what they want now. Just scapegoating people. Through new policy is how they get there. Every claimant works because locals are so sold on the anti-immigrant narrative. If the only criteria is for a claimant to come from an extreme war zone while others cases are questionable, there is prejudice there.

Passport is not that respected even in the G7.

Officers are all university grads, some even have masters. ICAC staff are also well educated- uni grads with foreign affairs backgrounds. Highschool diploma is the min requirement, it doesn't mean that's their qualification. Some do get it wrong but those are in the minority.

They knew what they wanted then, and what they want now. Just using inventory to their liking and disposing people. System is never abused. The inventory is.

C12 could all be a nothing burger. All the trying to absorb economic immigrants has never worked even h1b thing won't work. No one wants to come. Just a revolving door.

No or lax TRV vetting was a huge reason for the increase in asylum claims. People who would never have been granted TRVs were routinely granted TRVs in 2021-24. Visa free travel from Mexico also was a major impact. I see nobody involved in immigration questioning this and the data confirms this. Not all asylum seekers work yet again there is data backing up the amount of asylum claimants, protected people and refugees who receive welfare. There are certainly many who do. Talking about abandoned claims or exit stats for ex refugees, protected people or asylum claimants would only enrage the public even more because that would question the integrity of the program. Based on my interpretation the previous government wanted to be known & Canada known as humanitarians and did no actual longterm modeling. At a recent immigration committee meeting it became clear that the previous government had not consulted anyone in healthcare about the capacity to absorb newcomers. Assume it was the same with all other forms of infrastructure. I don’t think the previous government had a plan and the current government is just trying to deal with the mess they have been left. Also the system is full of abuse including H&C. There are industries that thrive off of the abuse in various immigration programs. There are of course genuine applicants

 

[canuck78]

Ok, I corrected my claim to say that there is no program that works properly

No country has a program that works properly because the demand far exceeds the number of stops available. Certain groups would benefit if UNHCR was not involved. If you live in a refugee camp with little resources (also may not know EN/FR or may not be even literate) you are much less likely to be able to identify and apply to refugee programs for specific countries. The countries would not be able to absorb the volume of applicants. It would also be easier to falsify that you were actually a refugee. A large percentage of refugees don’t have access to tech to apply or monitor their application.

 

[WellWell2021]

No country has a program that works properly because the demand far exceeds the number of stops available. Certain groups would benefit if UNHCR was not involved. If you live in a refugee camp with little resources (also may not know EN/FR or may not be even literate) you are much less likely to be able to identify and apply to refugee programs for specific countries. The countries would not be able to absorb the volume of applicants. It would also be easier to falsify that you were actually a refugee. A large percentage of refugees don’t have access to tech to apply or monitor their application.

You’re right. However, what I meant was that I’m referring to applicants coming from Latin America who risk their lives to end up here. They settle, and after a few months or usually even years they get refused and are told to leave…

Why not simply select them in advance instead of indirectly selling them a dream and then making things complicated afterwards for the applicants, for the IRCC officers, and for the justice system ?

 

[iSaidGoodDay]

But everything you just mentioned is not necessarily linked to a specific immigration status. Decadence, fraud, lack of civility, abuse, lack of ambition, ingratitude, poor integration and lack of attachment to Canada, opportunism, etc., are not exclusive to foreigners. Many permanent residents and Canadian citizens also engage in behaviours that harm the country, its economy, and its society.
Honestly, there are many issues to address, and in my opinion, cancelling immigration programs will not make things better. For example, instead of refusing work or study permit applicants out of fear that they will not leave Canada after their stay, it would be more reasonable to genuinely apply the concept of dual intent as provided by law. Canada should accept people who are clearly likely to become good future citizens, who will progress professionally and academically, contribute to the country, and integrate into society. This is better than accepting large numbers of applicants for a while and then refusing them massively afterward, which has unfortunately been happening for years.
A second issue, is the multicultural model, which creates divisions between individuals. Canada should adopt an intercultural approach, where people can maintain their cultural specificities while still remaining united and sharing common values. We must abandon the idea that Canadians are divided into separate communities, as this only fosters communalism, rejection of others, and reinforces stereotypes.
Regarding economic immigration programs, I believe it would be an excellent idea to introduce mandatory interviews for all candidates, since a computer program is not as capable as a human being of understanding people’s reality. Having 1,000 points does not necessarily mean that someone will be a good immigrant.
As for family sponsorship, in my view, no one deserves to be separated from their loved ones. However, sponsored family members must demonstrate that they genuinely wish to join their relative with the intention of building a life here, not simply coming to stay home in isolation or obtaining permanent residence by relying on that relative.
the asylum system also should to be more stable. I find it unfair to accept people who have walked thousands of kilometres only to reject them afterward. It would be more honest to state from the start that seeking asylum in this way is not allowed. It would be fairer to create specific visas for people who genuinely need protection as Australia does, and even Brazil, if I’m not mistaken so they can come directly and with dignity, while allowing Canada to identify in advance who truly needs support. However, if someone wants to come live in Canada, they should simply do so either as a permanent resident through an economic immigration program, which allows applicants to truly demonstrate their potential, or as a temporary resident, while accepting the reality that most of them intend to stay in Canada and build a life here.

>Decadence, fraud, lack of civility, abuse, lack of ambition, ingratitude, poor integration and lack of attachment to Canada, opportunism, etc., are not exclusive to foreigners.

I agree, but it reduces sensitivity towards immigrants. That won't happen towards a citizen. Thankfully, the biggest cohort of immigrants has the lowest criminal representation in Canada: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/ccrso-2021/index-en.aspx#sec-c15, BUT that fails to factor in non-criminal offenses from immigrant cohorts e.g. illegal basements, abusing parking, LMIAs, etc <- those day-to-day things that make us look worse than we are as immigrants.

>A second issue, is the multicultural model, which creates divisions between individuals

To be honest, it is more of an issue of who we bring here. We get maybe 3-7% of people who can be barely classified as skilled, rest are extremely unskilled. That leads to socio-economic models that reinforce ghettofication. I've lived and worked in Silicon valley for so long, they don't have a model, they don't even have a guide for immigrants - but we all gelled pretty well there. Canada is different because people move here just to earn, very few move here to live. The difference between them is subtle but makes all the difference.

>I believe it would be an excellent idea to introduce mandatory interviews for all candidates

Conducting 300k interviews per year would be something

 

[canuck78]

You’re right. However, what I meant was that I’m referring to applicants coming from Latin America who risk their lives to end up here. They settle, and after a few months or usually even years they get refused and are told to leave…

Why not simply select them in advance instead of indirectly selling them a dream and then making things complicated afterwards for the applicants, for the IRCC officers, and for the justice system ?

Canada is not selling people the dream of asylum/PR if they land in Brazil and get to Canada by land a smuggler is. Many of the people who decided to take the Darien gap route were not actual asylum seekers and were economic immigrants which is why people were likely denied. That route has essentially been shut down which is one of the good things I can say about Trump. People have other routes to get to Canada but in many ways it is easier to show up, there are no quotas for asylum seekers if you land in Canada and qualify to claim asylum, etc. If you’re referring to Latin & South Americans we did have a special PR pathway for them. Was likely put in place in exchange for closing Roxham road loophole but it still existed. If all it took to get PR in Canada is struggle to get here then why do we have any immigration policies & programs. This also would reward people talking risks with their lives while many were not aware of the requirements to be able to stay. Sadly smugglers sold this as a guaranteed stay if you made it to the US, Canada, etc.

 

[canuck78]

>Decadence, fraud, lack of civility, abuse, lack of ambition, ingratitude, poor integration and lack of attachment to Canada, opportunism, etc., are not exclusive to foreigners.

I agree, but it reduces sensitivity towards immigrants. That won't happen towards a citizen. Thankfully, the biggest cohort of immigrants has the lowest criminal representation in Canada: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/ccrso-2021/index-en.aspx#sec-c15, BUT that fails to factor in non-criminal offenses from immigrant cohorts e.g. illegal basements, abusing parking, LMIAs, etc <- those day-to-day things that make us look worse than we are as immigrants.

>A second issue, is the multicultural model, which creates divisions between individuals

To be honest, it is more of an issue of who we bring here. We get maybe 3-7% of people who can be barely classified as skilled, rest are extremely unskilled. That leads to socio-economic models that reinforce ghettofication. I've lived and worked in Silicon valley for so long, they don't have a model, they don't even have a guide for immigrants - but we all gelled pretty well there. Canada is different because people move here just to earn, very few move here to live. The difference between them is subtle but makes all the difference.

>I believe it would be an excellent idea to introduce mandatory interviews for all candidates

Conducting 300k interviews per year would be something

Think most people move to Canada to settle with the goal being PR or citizens while many move to Silicon Valley to earn but I don’t think most see their longterm future there due to affordability & lifestyle. Also to say that there isn’t some segregation based on ethnicity in Silicon Valley and in the surrounding areas is just untrue. Because many people in the region work in tech (or have ties to tech) then there is a commonality which is missing in other regions of the US and Canada. Silicon Valley is more like a company town where people are mostly linked by one industry (vs company) which creates a certain level of cohesion & shared interest which overrides some of the segregation that is present. Also the fact that we are often talking about higher income individuals means that there is less focus on these types of issues.

https://www.businessinsider.com/map...on-sf-later-asians-over-index-in-the-valley-3

 

[hopetheyhelp]

No or lax TRV vetting was a huge reason for the increase in asylum claims. People who would never have been granted TRVs were routinely granted TRVs in 2021-24. Visa free travel from Mexico also was a major impact. I see nobody involved in immigration questioning this and the data confirms this. Not all asylum seekers work yet again there is data backing up the amount of asylum claimants, protected people and refugees who receive welfare. There are certainly many who do. Talking about abandoned claims or exit stats for ex refugees, protected people or asylum claimants would only enrage the public even more because that would question the integrity of the program. Based on my interpretation the previous government wanted to be known & Canada known as humanitarians and did no actual longterm modeling. At a recent immigration committee meeting it became clear that the previous government had not consulted anyone in healthcare about the capacity to absorb newcomers. Assume it was the same with all other forms of infrastructure. I don’t think the previous government had a plan and the current government is just trying to deal with the mess they have been left. Also the system is full of abuse including H&C. There are industries that thrive off of the abuse in various immigration programs. There are of course genuine applicants

You talk about data and people without pointing it out. Not very far from the journalists who write about this for major news outlets. Some have a bias and think people are bad and the system is good. The only thing that would be possible was a failed AI project in 2022-2023 where they might have laxed out in issuing TRV. If it was a human being, they usually are very stringent. As for non-visa requirement, that's a different thing. It's calculated at the highest levels before becoming policy. Also they are mostly all the same people in the previous government that are in there now. The goals have changed. You write about welfare claimants etc.. No, again just political fodder.

 

[hopetheyhelp]

>Decadence, fraud, lack of civility, abuse, lack of ambition, ingratitude, poor integration and lack of attachment to Canada, opportunism, etc., are not exclusive to foreigners.

I agree, but it reduces sensitivity towards immigrants. That won't happen towards a citizen. Thankfully, the biggest cohort of immigrants has the lowest criminal representation in Canada: https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/rsrcs/pblctns/ccrso-2021/index-en.aspx#sec-c15, BUT that fails to factor in non-criminal offenses from immigrant cohorts e.g. illegal basements, abusing parking, LMIAs, etc <- those day-to-day things that make us look worse than we are as immigrants.

>A second issue, is the multicultural model, which creates divisions between individuals

To be honest, it is more of an issue of who we bring here. We get maybe 3-7% of people who can be barely classified as skilled, rest are extremely unskilled. That leads to socio-economic models that reinforce ghettofication. I've lived and worked in Silicon valley for so long, they don't have a model, they don't even have a guide for immigrants - but we all gelled pretty well there. Canada is different because people move here just to earn, very few move here to live. The difference between them is subtle but makes all the difference.

>I believe it would be an excellent idea to introduce mandatory interviews for all candidates

Conducting 300k interviews per year would be something

SV is big. If someone has to move out that means they were not really that skilled in the first place. Either the VC's absorb new founders or the firms keep them. Atherton, Palo Alto, Mountain view, Cupertino etc. this is where the cream lives. Average salaries + comp is $600k. Anyone moving to Canada from there is just not that skilled. Skilled for a average tech job at some Canadian bank or say a Shopify. $120-140k max. Apples and oranges.
Some do move out of SV but they go back to their own country and assume big roles there. Not just move to anywhere in the G7 and the like.

 

[iSaidGoodDay]

SV is big. If someone has to move out that means they were not really that skilled in the first place. Either the VC's absorb new founders or the firms keep them. Atherton, Palo Alto, Mountain view, Cupertino etc. this is where the cream lives. Average salaries + comp is $600k. Anyone moving to Canada from there is just not that skilled. Skilled for a average tech job at some Canadian bank or say a Shopify. $120-140k max. Apples and oranges.
Some do move out of SV but they go back to their own country and assume big roles there. Not just move to anywhere in the G7 and the like.

>Average salaries + comp is $600k. Anyone moving to Canada from there is just not that skilled.

Troll's new account. I moved to Canada to run my own tech business(proudly own three profitable businesses) and I moved to Canada as an exec. Keep your troll advice to yourself.

People don't move to a country because it is the best economically - that goes back to my comment on "why you are moving here". I didn't move here to earn, my earnings were higher in the US (less taxes) and India (lower cost of running a business). I opted to found three Canadian tech businesses and scaled them BECAUSE as my signature says "Home is where I want to be". I've felt at home here and that beats anything else.

>Anyone moving to Canada from there is just not that skilled. Skilled for a average tech job at some Canadian bank or say a Shopify. $120-140k max

Fwiw, I poached talent at my former F500 role in Canada and paid people $300k+, but you would know that those salaries exist in Canada if you KNEW what "skilled roles" really are.