Interesting news article re:imminent changes
- Thread starter touché
- Start date
Dejaavu said:I think CIC should be more transparent/open when it comes to skilled labor shortages and approve permanent resident visas based on actual labor market needs.
Even corporations have annual reports
You know what I think really stands in the way of this? The idea that Canada needs the 'cream of the crop' from foreign lands; so, you get an immigration process that favours foreign professors, doctors, whatnot. The rarefied skills these people have often don't translate very well, or very quickly, into Canadian institutions. A plumber, an electrician, a long distance trucker, might find themselves in immediate demand, even if they don't speak English very well; but the people who do these jobs in Asia, Africa, and Latin America don't often get an education that teaches them English, and they can't immigrate.
If Canada really assessed its labour markets, it might have to consider that it is not actually educated immigrants that are really needed.
Sorry, I just realized I'm hijacking this thread, which is more interesting than a debate about Canada's labour market . . .
r.e. the original article -- I don't totally see the point of the law change. I can totally understand the concern that 3 out of 4 years is not really giving people enough time to become Canadian, face it, it's less than you need to get a B.A. -- but who thinks 4 out of 6 will be better, particularly since it increases the proportion of time that they can spend out of the country?
Assuming of course that it is 4/6, that's speculation from a lawyer that may be knowledgeable, but isn't really demonstrated to be so.
r.e. the original article -- I don't totally see the point of the law change. I can totally understand the concern that 3 out of 4 years is not really giving people enough time to become Canadian, face it, it's less than you need to get a B.A. -- but who thinks 4 out of 6 will be better, particularly since it increases the proportion of time that they can spend out of the country?
Assuming of course that it is 4/6, that's speculation from a lawyer that may be knowledgeable, but isn't really demonstrated to be so.
on-hold said:
Sorry for digressing from the main topic, but it's not how the world works. Generally, a skilled person needs to get a job offer and an equivalent of work permit 1st and then (s)he can take a look at place and decide whether it's a good idea to remain there or not while being employed at the same time. This how it works in UK, Europe and the US. That's a honest system-- if you're good, then just go find a job and move to USA, Switzerland or whatever you wish.
Moreover, Canada is into direct marketing. The embassies held events over the countries that presented Canada as a land of possibilities and handed out colorful brochures and free cookies. A while it's easier now to get to the bottom of it with spread of internet, several year ago people had few sources of reliable information making a country research more difficult. Plus people in those countries think that the government of a developed nation knows what it's talking about and can be trusted. In reality, there are bogus "shortage occupation lists", unrecognized credentials, too picky employers and, most importantly, no jobs.
There's basically no follow up where it could been for the benefit of society as a whole, so logically it begs a question about true intentions of immigration program and why it still exists. I think CIC was being sued over this several times, but in any case, it's unethical. They know the system doesn't work as expected for the immigrants, but they don't care. They're fine with $10,000's people bring with them here. I can hardly think how that approach is supposed to establish relationships with mutual benefits for the country and the immigrants.
Corazon3, you don't deserve to be Canadian. First of all, nobody, absolutely nobody knows what the new citizenship act will look like, secondly, whatever the new act will look like, be ready to see as many immigrants as you are seeing today... Nobody wants to reduce immigration to Canada.
Your hate infused speech is a shame to every democracy on this planet.
We, the immigrants, are working hard so that Canada prospers and stays a strong country for generations to come, and we are doing this along with every self respecting Canadian who knows what Canada really stands for.
Your hate infused speech is a shame to every democracy on this planet.
We, the immigrants, are working hard so that Canada prospers and stays a strong country for generations to come, and we are doing this along with every self respecting Canadian who knows what Canada really stands for.
Corazon 3 , shame on you, who become canadian,,citizens like you, through many diffeculties ,
and later want enjoy,,,to see,,,,new applicants diffeculties, ,shamw on you, ,,,by the way, you came as a student in this country, i know your history, ,,,,,,
and later want enjoy,,,to see,,,,new applicants diffeculties, ,shamw on you, ,,,by the way, you came as a student in this country, i know your history, ,,,,,,
Smokescreen and mirrors for a badly run citizenship process coupled with election rhetoric is what this is all about.
Demographics drive the immigration agenda. There are not enough 'born and raised in Canada' tax payers to pay into the 'system' which is the source of pension payments for those who contributed for x years in a time where the tax payers/retiree ratio was high...its now heading towards a 1:1 ratio meaning you either cut pensions or raise taxes...that's a huge vote loss right there!! This same demographic problem is noticeable in every major western nation.
Easiest fix for this is to ramp up immigration to address the required population growth. The issue with this is the selection system as in Canada is outwith the labor market...under the previous FSW scheme droves of engineers qualified for PR but not only does Canada have enough say mechanical engineers but its a regulated profession and the immigrants couldn't work from day 1. You then end up with an engineer being a cab driver, security guard etc. In comparison a plumber would not get PR yet there was a shortage for such skills. Another issues is that the immigrant you get may have a different culture, language, religion etc that could be completely out of sync with those of the 'local' population leading to alienation, not fitting in etc.
Demographics drive the immigration agenda. There are not enough 'born and raised in Canada' tax payers to pay into the 'system' which is the source of pension payments for those who contributed for x years in a time where the tax payers/retiree ratio was high...its now heading towards a 1:1 ratio meaning you either cut pensions or raise taxes...that's a huge vote loss right there!! This same demographic problem is noticeable in every major western nation.
Easiest fix for this is to ramp up immigration to address the required population growth. The issue with this is the selection system as in Canada is outwith the labor market...under the previous FSW scheme droves of engineers qualified for PR but not only does Canada have enough say mechanical engineers but its a regulated profession and the immigrants couldn't work from day 1. You then end up with an engineer being a cab driver, security guard etc. In comparison a plumber would not get PR yet there was a shortage for such skills. Another issues is that the immigrant you get may have a different culture, language, religion etc that could be completely out of sync with those of the 'local' population leading to alienation, not fitting in etc.
Msafiri said:
I agree - and unlike the badly-run immigration process, they can't cancel a few hundred thousand citizenship applications to try and clear the desk. That's what would be behind the added-on year, a respite to work through the back load without many new ones coming in.
And one thing that I think is interesting about this is the comparison to the old Soviet bloc -- which failed because it was impossible to competently manage an economy. Canada is trying the same thing at one remove: managing the entry of people that the economy needs, with the needs centrally determined. I always understood that this was a fiction (I came in under 3141 College Instructor, and never saw a single job I could apply for in the entire time my FSW application was processed) -- but it sounds good for a country to believe that it desperately needs college instructors. It would be interesting to try and create a system that really reflected market demand. Perhaps:
1) anyone with a work permit can immigrate, and work permits are easy to issue -- but the foreign worker has to be paid 10% more than the industry standard. Rationale being, if there are no Canadians to do the job, the job market must be tight and a company that needs someone will pay to get them.
2) no language requirement at all, bring in blue-collar workers in valuable professions who can work from the get-go.
3) real government support for an IT industry, stick it in the Maritimes where land is cheap and life is pleasant. How this would be done, I haven't the foggiest idea.
As noted earlier in this posting, a big landmark legislation such as the one being proposed with all its add-ons and subsections (which will only increase the debate) will take time going through the legisylative process. Even regular bills take their time...something such as this where the pther parties also have a say and where there is bound to be a range of opinions (if not hue and cry too) will go thro a lot of debate / revisions etc.
Exatcly dejavuu !!! The conservative government and its allies want us here for our taxes, our skills and to fill the generational gap... But they also use us for their old age rhetoric about immigration and protectionism, someone should bring this to light because the bigger image is that these people are changing Canada in a way that no return will ever be possible.
I knew a guy from my country who came here when he was over 50 as a skilled worker. He didn't speak proper English. The guy came with his family and sold all his apartment back home and brought all his savings. Two years later he ran out of money and now he had to go back home and start over...
Why was he approved in the first place to the PR under the skilled worker program? I don't get it.
I am sure there are a lot of cases like these...
Why was he approved in the first place to the PR under the skilled worker program? I don't get it.
I am sure there are a lot of cases like these...
I have Canadian friends who worked with me in the US and now they are back in Canada and they had difficulty finding jobs here. They are educated in Canada, were born here and had work experience in Canada and they are still experiencing difficulties finding jobs. They have networks etc. Now I am not surprised why immigrants are experiencing difficulty finding a job let alone in their field or commensurate with their experience/qualifications/education. Government of Canada should be more honest and transparent about the real labor market situation in Canada. No wonder I met a lot of Canadians in Washington DC when I studied and worked there.
corazon3 said:
"Fleeces them off their savings"? How? By asking them to pay for their rent and food? By giving them free healthcare, education and benefits?
I for one and delighted to see a tightening of the residency obligations, and hope the rumors are true. Increasing the time required to reside in Canada before citizenship will serve to reduce the number of fraud cases and reduce the number of citizens of convenience. It will also ensure that citizenship is primarily granted to those who intend to make Canada their home.
Similar threads
