Comments on: The Canadian Immigration Question

By: Luke Savage

Luke Savage — Thu, 30 Jul 2009 03:16:56 +0000

First of all, it’s very different to qualify to live in Canada. Take this test, and see how well you do…I wouldn’t be allowed in.

http://www.workpermit.com/canada/points_calculator.htm

Based on this, I’d say the vast majority of immigrants are skilled, well-educated workers who are disadvantaged because of the laws that exist once they arrive here.

The last time I travelled abroad, I was driven by a Pakistani mechanical engineer. A Sudanese doctor serves me coffee every morning.

I think the problem is not the level of immigration, but the judicial prejudices that prevent them from effectively re-training or utilizing their valuable skills.

By: Patrick Baud

Patrick Baud — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:36:21 +0000

You are quite right to say that it is necessary to balance the interests of all Canadians when making public policy choices. That said, I think that there is as much opportunity as risk with returning to Trudeau-era immigration levels. If we recognized more foreign credentialed doctors and nurses, for example, we could help close the gap between the care we have and the care we need. Let’s take into account social costs, but let’s not forget the benefits of liberal immigration policies and official multiculturalism.

By: kiradorward

kiradorward — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:13:33 +0000

In the view of the Canadian government, “it is the governor general who summons Parliament, sets out the government’s program by reading the Speech from the Throne, and gives Royal Assent, which makes acts of Parliament into law…In the case of the death of a prime minister, it is the governor general’s responsibility to ensure the continuity of government”. It would appear that the duties of the Governor General are inherent to the running of the country, confirming her status as a politician.

Immigration is inarguably necessary in such areas as North America and Europe to bolster population growth where there is a low birth rate and increase in the average age of the population. However, this is not to say that large and sudden influxes of new population do not put more strain on existing social services in a country such as Canada, already facing these problems with the ageing baby-boomers.

A comparison of Canada with several other countries indicate that countries like Canada with a centralized healthcare system tend to adopt policies that make a special effort to afford immigrants with better access to health services. While I am certainly not arguing that providing immigrants with improved healthcare access is not a positive thing, some account has to be made for the additional resources that go into providing these services with the existing system already under strain from the ageing, nascent population. Simple barriers to efficient health care access among immigrant populations, like proficiency in English, result in deficiencies in treatment, extended hospital stays, unnecessary testing, and premature discharge/problematic follow-up. This is especially problematic with elderly immigrants, sponsored for citizenship by extended family members. With an example such as the Health Care system, elderly immigrants that become dependant on Canada’s social services are, unfortunately, not an addition to “this country’s economic prosperity”.

I am not suggesting that the views of the BNP are entirely synonymous with my own or other Canadians, or even Britons, for that matter. Perhaps I should have clarified, but what I am saying is that countries like the U.K. and Canada who have in recent decades adopted liberal immigration policies have overlooked some of the social costs incurred with a rapid growth of foreign population. As the social interests of immigrants should not be ignored by Canadian policy makers, neither should those of the nascent population.