What (some) birth Canadians think about immigrants

[on-hold]

Thanks to the new citizenship bill, I've had a couple of conversations with birth Canadians about the new requirements -- I'm absolutely flabbergasted that they actually believe immigrants should stay in Canada. Not at the level of "I think it would be a good thing if the Canadian government tried to select immigrants who will remain in Canada" (I agree with that), but feeling comfortable saying "They were brought here to work, they should stay here or give up their citizenship."

I guess the fact that I have no accent makes them comfortable saying 'they' to me . . . These discussions didn't get very in-depth, since most people I've talked to are profoundly ignorant about the minutiae of how immigration works, so we often get bogged down in discussing details and never actually brought up whether immigrant Canadians have the full set of Charter rights; but it's just mind-boggling that Canadians view immigrants as people brought in to serve the country, and have no problem criticizing them for doing something that they are planning on doing themselves (one woman I spoke with is retiring to Scotland this year, her husband is naturalized, and she's convinced no immigrant Canadian has the right to leave the country).

I've got to put this down as one big difference between the U.S. and Canada. I have never once heard an American spout off about naturalized Americans who live abroad, and I think it would be considered weird. Maybe that's because we get no services from our government , but this profoundly parochial idea Canadians have that immigrants are some sort of worker class who get to come here and be ersatz Canadians with most (but not all) of the rights is honestly stupid. It's also pretty widespread . . .

It reminds me of Robertson Davies' early books, most of which were about people trying to do something difficult, innovative, or beautiful in southern Ontario, while surrounded by louts.

 

[on-hold]

OK, I remembered the plot a bit inexactly . . .

In Fortune, My Foe (1949), Davies' first full-length play, the action centres
on the dilemma confronting the intellectual or the artist in Canada, who feels
that he must either emigrate to the United States or remain in Canada defeated
in his work by the naïve or hypocritical attitude of his countrymen. On this problem,
perhaps the most persistent to engage him, recurring as it does in his novels
as well as in his plays, Robertson Davies has many sharp and sad comments to
make.

Nicholas, a young university instructor contemplating departure for the United
States, denies the charge that he is a traitor to his country selling out his ideals
and responsibilities for the fleshpots of the south. He sees behind the stereotype
of America that Canadians, perhaps defensively, have established. Behind all the
commercialism and vulgarity, he argues, "there is a promise, and there is no
promise here, as yet, for men like me." He rejects the attempts of Rowlands, an
older professor, to dissuade him from leaving Canada. Rowlands, though himself
embittered long before by a similar frustration to the one that was presumably
impelling Nicholas to emigrate, queries his colleague's motives, sneering at the
incentive of money and shrewdly, almost cynically, suggesting that the real reason
was pressure from Vanessa, the self-willed young lady whom Nicholas wishes to
marry.

And I'm just putting this up here for fun, don't get the idea that I'm griping about Canada. I love Canada! But neither would I tell another Canadian that they were brought here to work, I wasn't, and I have a right that they lack.

 

[farrous13]

Re: What birth Canadians think about immigrants

Well. To be frank, immigrants work harder than Canadians by birth. That's why a high percentage of the millionaires here are immigrants (as per an article I read). But yet, Canadians by birth don't stop complaining and whining.

I am not in any way saying: Oh look at us. I just wanted to point out facts.

Thanks to the new citizenship bill, I've had a couple of conversations with birth Canadians about the new requirements -- I'm absolutely flabbergasted that they actually believe immigrants should stay in Canada. Not at the level of "I think it would be a good thing if the Canadian government tried to select immigrants who will remain in Canada" (I agree with that), but feeling comfortable saying "They were brought here to work, they should stay here or give up their citizenship."

I guess the fact that I have no accent makes them comfortable saying 'they' to me . . . These discussions didn't get very in-depth, since most people I've talked to are profoundly ignorant about the minutiae of how immigration works, so we often get bogged down in discussing details and never actually brought up whether immigrant Canadians have the full set of Charter rights; but it's just mind-boggling that Canadians view immigrants as people brought in to serve the country, and have no problem criticizing them for doing something that they are planning on doing themselves (one woman I spoke with is retiring to Scotland this year, her husband is naturalized, and she's convinced no immigrant Canadian has the right to leave the country).

I've got to put this down as one big difference between the U.S. and Canada. I have never once heard an American spout off about naturalized Americans who live abroad, and I think it would be considered weird. Maybe that's because we get no services from our government , but this profoundly parochial idea Canadians have that immigrants are some sort of worker class who get to come here and be ersatz Canadians with most (but not all) of the rights is honestly stupid. It's also pretty widespread . . .

It reminds me of Robertson Davies' early books, most of which were about people trying to do something difficult, innovative, or beautiful in southern Ontario, while surrounded by louts.

 

[on-hold]

It's possible that I'm just sensitive, but the 'intent to reside' clause really bugs me. I feel like it indicates two things: that the government sees immigrants as economic actors only, and that it doesn't trust them. I take it from this clause that the government would not consider any of the following scenarios a 'contribution' that I would be making to Canada:

1) taking a job teaching in a Thai university and discussing Thai politics with friends from a Canadian perspective. No tax money coming in! Being abroad and discussing political culture and human rights is for the birth Canadians.

2) spending several years in Thailand trying to start an NGO or an organization that uses charcoal fertilizer and agroforestry to increase carbon capture. Not for you! Your contributions to the world should be done within Canada, not globally! Global action is for birth Canadians.

3) Taking a temporary post in, say, Lithuania, and falling in love with a local, deciding to try and set up my life there. International love is not your role! Stay here and romance a Canadian lady.

4) Finding a cheap home in a cheap country and writing a book of poetry titled "Missing the Frostbite, Dreaming of Canada." WTF?!? Those tar sands aren't going to dig themselves, sonny. Poetry's for the locals, immigrants should be broad of back, small of mind, and quick with a pipe welder.

5) Working here for 4 years unable to find a job while developing a useful app in my spare time; unable to find venture capital, entering the U.S. on a TN visa and doing it there. Holy Moses, stop making the locals look bad.

 

[Canadian2007]

Noone answered this question I asked before.. I will ask again.. Why someone has to be forced to live(reside) in a country if the country has so much to offer? Does anyone else think that the focus is completely on a wrong spot by this administration? Shouldnt we be working on creating more jobs, more economic growth, encourage entrepreneurs to set up more businesses and job creation etc. so that people will NOT want to leave and try to find something better somewhere else? Anyone see the core issue here?

 

[on-hold]

Noone answered this question I asked before.. I will ask again.. Why someone has to forced to live(reside) in a country if the country has so much to offer? Does anyone else think that the focus is completely on a wrong spot by this administration? Shouldnt we be working on creating more jobs, more economic growth, encourage entrepreneurs to set up more businesses and job creation etc. so that people will NOT want to leave and try to find something better somewhere else? Anyone see the core issue here?

That's a good point -- the 'intent to reside' clause suggests that the Conservatives see Canada as a place people will try and leave; and that they see Canadian citizenship, one of the most powerful symbols of the country, as something that can be tweaked and altered and weakened to pursue limited policy goals. I guarantee you that the United States assumes new Americans want to live in America, and if they don't, well, then they'll be Americans abroad.

 

[Leon]

The intent clause just means that you need to stay in Canada during the citizenship processing because if you move during that time they may use it to deny your application. They will not revoke your citizenship for moving away later.

 

[on-hold]

I copied this from eileenf (in a different post):

Here's the quote from the Bill http://www.scribd.com/doc/205152354/Bill-C-24, page 11:

"(c. 1) Intends, if granted citizenship
i. To continue to reside in Canada."

To me, that doesn't sound like a promise to reside in Canada up to the point of citizenship being granted; and, given that 'fraud' is one reason for citizenship to be revoked, it at least cracks the door open for people to lose their citizenship for lying; and, this bill increases the ability of the Minister to do this without judicial oversight.

 

[Canadian2007]

It saddens me that, every time there is a news on media about immigration/citizenship related issues the comment section is full of negativity about immigrants. If there is so much negativity then why not stop the immigration? If the country has sufficient human resources/ capital to survive without foreign born immigrants then it only calls to STOP immigration all together.Why still bring in 250000 every year? This way the government doesn't have to deal with the issues like people getting citizenship and leaving.All I have been hearing lately is how immigrants are using up all sorts of services etc. All legal immigrants are also contributing with taxes as far as I am concerned. Also someone has to remember that Canada is not the only immigrant intake country in the developed world.. Skilled workers will always find places that will treat them humanly and respectfully. Immigrants not only leaves their home country behind but also leaves their families behind, so its never easy..

 

[Leon]

I copied this from eileenf (in a different post):

Here's the quote from the Bill http://www.scribd.com/doc/205152354/Bill-C-24, page 11:

"(c. 1) Intends, if granted citizenship
i. To continue to reside in Canada."

To me, that doesn't sound like a promise to reside in Canada up to the point of citizenship being granted; and, given that 'fraud' is one reason for citizenship to be revoked, it at least cracks the door open for people to lose their citizenship for lying; and, this bill increases the ability of the Minister to do this without judicial oversight.

True but this is kind of like the intent you sign for PNP nominations that you intend to settle in that province. Nobody has lost their PR so far for leaving their PNP province. Even if they do decide to go after people at some point, they would have to prove that you lied at the time. You could have intended to continue to reside in Canada at the time but as intentions change and real people have real lives and real events happen that can change the situation, just because you moved some time after getting citizenship doesn't necessarily mean that you did not intend to stay in Canada when you got it.

 

[links18]

True but this is kind of like the intent you sign for PNP nominations that you intend to settle in that province. Nobody has lost their PR so far for leaving their PNP province. Even if they do decide to go after people at some point, they would have to prove that you lied at the time. You could have intended to continue to reside in Canada at the time but as intentions change and real people have real lives and real events happen that can change the situation, just because you moved some time after getting citizenship doesn't necessarily mean that you did not intend to stay in Canada when you got it.

Then why bother with a stupid symbolic statement of total distrust like this? If they cut processing times to one year then there aren't really many reasons for anyone to leave while the application is in process. But at three years plus, like it is today, anything can happen in the interim period and if you have to move--you risk having your entire application called into question, losing PR status, etc. It really sucks.

 

[steaky]

Thanks to the new citizenship bill, I've had a couple of conversations with birth Canadians about the new requirements -- I'm absolutely flabbergasted that they actually believe immigrants should stay in Canada. Not at the level of "I think it would be a good thing if the Canadian government tried to select immigrants who will remain in Canada" (I agree with that), but feeling comfortable saying "They were brought here to work, they should stay here or give up their citizenship."

Why should they stay here or give up their citizenship? There are also birth Canadians living and working outside Canada and keep their Canadian citizenship.

 

[on-hold]

Why should they stay here or give up their citizenship? There are also birth Canadians living and working outside Canada and keep their Canadian citizenship.

I asked this . . . The answer is, birth Canadians didn't 'choose' to come here, they were born here. So they didn't make a commitment. Immigrant Canadians 'chose' to come here, they should stay. They were brought here to work, not dork around in the world.

And Leon, I agree with you -- it is a symbolic declaration. Its symbolism is poisonous for three reasons. One, it literally contradicts the Charter, which guarantees freedom of mobility; this also suggests that it is very important to the government, otherwise why do this lightly? Two, it strongly suggests that the government considers immigrants as labour and taxes, and nothing else. Worst, it gives aid and comfort to the lousiest sector of Canadian society (Conservative voters) who look down on immigrants and consider them to be largely cheats, coming here to eat social services and flee. Now, every Nimrod who thinks immigrant Canadians should stay and work and not exercise the rights every Canadian has, has this stoopid oath to fall back on: 'They swore they would stay.' 'See, the purpose of immigration is to bring in people to work, if they don't work they should lose their citizenship.' 'Immigration is for people who want to be here.' It'll be a mainstay of every comment thread on every newspaper article about immigration.

The guy above who pointed out that there is a strain in Canadian public thought that considers immigrants to be tax-paying sub-citizens is correct. Interestingly, that doesn't exist in the United States, where 'illegal' immigrants are reviled but you will never hear a peep about legal immigrants. Here in Canada the weeping about this group is quite deafening. This is the same as putting a clause in the process of applying for American citizenship requiring applicants to affirm "I promise I won't date any white women," and then disavowing any intent to actually pursue its enforcement; it's still a sop to racism.

 

[on-hold]

How many years must a PR abide
Before they call her a Canadian
How many 6 month periods out of a single year
Must a man reside on Dominion land
How many times must the RQ be sent out
Before it is taken and burned
The answer my friend, is 4/6 years
The answer is 4/6 years

How many years must a naturalized Canadian reside
Before they can go visit their home
And how many years must they work and pay tax
Before they can receive a pension without guilt
How many times must a true Canadian see them in the clinic
And pretend that he just doesn't see (the system under stress)
One answer, my friend, is 4/6 years
But the other is it's never enough

 

[Canadian2007]

You pointed out so correctly that in the US you will always hear about Illegal immigrants, and they are working towards making people legal/ documented. Not so much about giving LPRs hard time. I always wonder what woulda happened here if there were 12-14 million undocumented people living in Canada. Government is freaking out with PRs and making all kinds of laws to protect and strengthen citizenship. Just dont get it!