Comments for immigrantchildren.ca http://immigrantchildren.ca Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:48:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by zs http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4025 zs Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:48:23 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4025 Wow - thanks to all the comments from mta.ca. Wow – thanks to all the comments from mta.ca.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Philip Robert http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4020 Philip Robert Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:13:08 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4020 that highlight the ongoing issues, debates and discussions around the issue of multiculturalism including: is it time to move away from multiculturalism to interculturalism or even multiversalism. These discussions are a result of the move from cultural pluralism (“acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage” (Multiculturalism Act, 1988 Section 3.1.a)) to integration (“Canada recognizes the potential of all Canadians, encouraging them to integrate into their society and take an active part in its social, cultural, economic and political affairs” I feel the issue of Canada's perspective on multiculturalism is a touchy issue. Especially with regards to goals of integration. It is a hard issue to satisfy both sides of the argument between the nativism side and immigration side. This argument can cause tension and heated debates when brought up about those passionate about this subject. that highlight the ongoing issues, debates and discussions around the issue of multiculturalism including: is it time to move away from multiculturalism to interculturalism or even multiversalism. These discussions are a result of the move from cultural pluralism (“acknowledges the freedom of all members of Canadian society to preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage” (Multiculturalism Act, 1988 Section 3.1.a)) to integration (“Canada recognizes the potential of all Canadians, encouraging them to integrate into their society and take an active part in its social, cultural, economic and political affairs”

I feel the issue of Canada’s perspective on multiculturalism is a touchy issue. Especially with regards to goals of integration. It is a hard issue to satisfy both sides of the argument between the nativism side and immigration side. This argument can cause tension and heated debates when brought up about those passionate about this subject.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Jennifer Robinson http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4018 Jennifer Robinson Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:12:03 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4018 I agree with what May has said about migration and it is unbelievable how strict the system really is with all of the restrictions on limiting the amount and the type of people who are claimed to be suited or appropriate to best accommodate the needs of the Country (economics). When reading the part about Bill C-4 about those who will be punished for abusing the system, I began to think about how we can choose who is abusing the system and who in reality truly needs the help and a safe haven. Detaining people for up to a year without accurate knowledge of their situation is extremely unfair. I agree with what May has said about migration and it is unbelievable how strict the system really is with all of the restrictions on limiting the amount and the type of people who are claimed to be suited or appropriate to best accommodate the needs of the Country (economics). When reading the part about Bill C-4 about those who will be punished for abusing the system, I began to think about how we can choose who is abusing the system and who in reality truly needs the help and a safe haven. Detaining people for up to a year without accurate knowledge of their situation is extremely unfair.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Lauren http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4017 Lauren Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:08:33 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4017 I was particularly troubled by the section regarding "Islamisicm", and its assumed threat on Canada. I believe that as much as Canadians want to believe in multiculturalism, it is difficult for many to completely understand how to do this. I view it as a moral panic, which was largely inluenced by the events following 9/11. Due to the terrorism that occurred, Canadians created a moral panic surrounding how they viewed Islamic immigrants, and therefore created a negative identity for all immigrants assumed to be of Islamic descent as terrorists. They believed that allowing religious rights to immigrants would mean that it would allow immigrants to justify acts against Canadians. I think it is unfortunate, as the Shafia trial largely reinforced the ideas that religious freedom would ultimately lead to murder or terrorism. This feels to me like a double standard, as Caucasians commit acts of violence in their own country that are not necessarily seen as terrorism. I feel like as a solution, we can not generalize to a group of immigrants, but rather we should be accepting and welcoming of all groups, and we should not allow stereotypes to inform our opinions regarding religious rights of immigrants. I was particularly troubled by the section regarding “Islamisicm”, and its assumed threat on Canada. I believe that as much as Canadians want to believe in multiculturalism, it is difficult for many to completely understand how to do this. I view it as a moral panic, which was largely inluenced by the events following 9/11. Due to the terrorism that occurred, Canadians created a moral panic surrounding how they viewed Islamic immigrants, and therefore created a negative identity for all immigrants assumed to be of Islamic descent as terrorists. They believed that allowing religious rights to immigrants would mean that it would allow immigrants to justify acts against Canadians. I think it is unfortunate, as the Shafia trial largely reinforced the ideas that religious freedom would ultimately lead to murder or terrorism. This feels to me like a double standard, as Caucasians commit acts of violence in their own country that are not necessarily seen as terrorism. I feel like as a solution, we can not generalize to a group of immigrants, but rather we should be accepting and welcoming of all groups, and we should not allow stereotypes to inform our opinions regarding religious rights of immigrants.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Gill http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4007 Gill Wed, 07 Mar 2012 01:01:17 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4007 The blog states that “Many newcomers come to Canada because they have a skill, education and experience in a profession or trade. When they arrive, all too often, they are denied practice in their field due to a lack of "Canadian experience” this is something that is troubling to me. They come to Canada for i different future for themselves and their family's and have hope of finding a descent job in their field once getting here but are forced to return to school for more "canadain" training or work a job that they are way over skilled and underpaid. I see this as the system failing the individuals. As Lori sated there is favor put on the individuals that have already have specific training. but they need pay to do training again in order to get a gob in their field, specifically i am talking about Doctors. As a hole this just seems to be something that is not beneficial or supportive of the needs to the immigrants. The blog states that “Many newcomers come to Canada because they have a skill, education and experience in a profession or trade. When they arrive, all too often, they are denied practice in their field due to a lack of “Canadian experience” this is something that is troubling to me. They come to Canada for i different future for themselves and their family’s and have hope of finding a descent job in their field once getting here but are forced to return to school for more “canadain” training or work a job that they are way over skilled and underpaid. I see this as the system failing the individuals. As Lori sated there is favor put on the individuals that have already have specific training. but they need pay to do training again in order to get a gob in their field, specifically i am talking about Doctors. As a hole this just seems to be something that is not beneficial or supportive of the needs to the immigrants.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Michelle H http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4006 Michelle H Tue, 06 Mar 2012 23:40:19 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4006 I really liked the overview this blog provides regarding the allocation of funds for immigrants as primarily going towards the port of entry, while disregarding possible relocation patterns. I also agree that this aids in creating racialized communities with very low income. This racialization allows for stigmas and stereotyping of these communities to occur which in turn perpetuates the ideal that those migrating to Canada are of lesser value. Do you believe the re-allocation of funding will ultimately aid these communities or do you think that the work required in order to follow migration patterns will be too great and thus nothing will change? Personally, I think the funding is going to port cities simply because it it the easiest to track, but ultimately the relocation possibility of immigrants to Canada is too great for the government to recognize it as being a significant piece of information that could be used to to help immigrants adapt to a new life in Canada. I really liked the overview this blog provides regarding the allocation of funds for immigrants as primarily going towards the port of entry, while disregarding possible relocation patterns. I also agree that this aids in creating racialized communities with very low income. This racialization allows for stigmas and stereotyping of these communities to occur which in turn perpetuates the ideal that those migrating to Canada are of lesser value. Do you believe the re-allocation of funding will ultimately aid these communities or do you think that the work required in order to follow migration patterns will be too great and thus nothing will change? Personally, I think the funding is going to port cities simply because it it the easiest to track, but ultimately the relocation possibility of immigrants to Canada is too great for the government to recognize it as being a significant piece of information that could be used to to help immigrants adapt to a new life in Canada.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Rachel http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4004 Rachel Tue, 06 Mar 2012 21:37:37 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4004 Section 6 of this article really caught my eye. It seems that sometimes, secularity is simply a mask for racism, and after reading the "code of values" published by the city of Gatineau it seems truly tangible. However, if Canada is a secular state should it not be permitted to create a scheduled prayer time and room in a public institution such as a school? Section 6 of this article really caught my eye. It seems that sometimes, secularity is simply a mask for racism, and after reading the “code of values” published by the city of Gatineau it seems truly tangible. However, if Canada is a secular state should it not be permitted to create a scheduled prayer time and room in a public institution such as a school?

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by May http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4003 May Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:45:34 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4003 Thank you for such an enlightening blog post. I was not aware of the issues surrounding the topic of migration in Canada. It is unfortunate to see that they usually concern the government stating that they will aid foreigners who need help entering the country for different political reasons, but only later mentioning the 'fine print': there still seem to be many restrictions which stop people from entering the country even when they need asylum. The part that really upset me was the section about the Bill C-4. The Canadian government says it will try to help those considered as 'the world's vulnerable' while it will harshly punish 'those who abuse Canada's immigratio system'. The thing is, how do they determine who is merely abusing the system, and who really needs help? Oftentimes, they happen to be the same people. Will Canada then impose harsh treatment, year long imprisonsements and unjust laws on people who they are not sure of the identity? This is blatant discrimination and naivete on the part of the Canadian government. Though I do not know much to go into detail, I feel that the consequences that can come out of these kinds of Canadian policies will mirror the issues that surround immigration laws in the U.S.. Thank you again for the thought-provoking post; I will definitely keep this post in mind when reading future related news. Thank you for such an enlightening blog post.
I was not aware of the issues surrounding the topic of migration in Canada.
It is unfortunate to see that they usually concern the government stating that they will aid foreigners who need help entering the country for different political reasons, but only later mentioning the ‘fine print’: there still seem to be many restrictions which stop people from entering the country even when they need asylum.
The part that really upset me was the section about the Bill C-4. The Canadian government says it will try to help those considered as ‘the world’s vulnerable’ while it will harshly punish ‘those who abuse Canada’s immigratio system’. The thing is, how do they determine who is merely abusing the system, and who really needs help? Oftentimes, they happen to be the same people.
Will Canada then impose harsh treatment, year long imprisonsements and unjust laws on people who they are not sure of the identity?
This is blatant discrimination and naivete on the part of the Canadian government. Though I do not know much to go into detail, I feel that the consequences that can come out of these kinds of Canadian policies will mirror the issues that surround immigration laws in the U.S..
Thank you again for the thought-provoking post; I will definitely keep this post in mind when reading future related news.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Maddy http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4002 Maddy Tue, 06 Mar 2012 20:22:15 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4002 Although the rhetoric of Canadian Immigration Policy has no doubt shifted towards "economic and security consideration," it seems as if it overlooks the importance of familial bonds and kinship for immigrants in terms of their contribution to the Canadian labour force. Many immigrants coming to Canada are immigrating with the impression that high skill, high education, and the willingness to work automatically equates to immediate entrance in the labour force. However, with problems such as credential transference, among other things, this is not always the case. Because of this, immigrants are often forced in to jobs in which they are overqualified for, earning barely enough to support themselves. With many of these immigrants hoping to bring their family overseas when enough money is earned, this strain not only adds to the negative experience they have in Canada, but also reveals the clear disparity between rhetoric and reality in Canadian Immigration Policy. More specifically, by overlooking the importance of family reunification and concerns, as well as the role that kinship plays, the Canadian Immigration Policy makes it more difficult for immigrants to reach occupational goals (for example, the poor working conditions of Filipino nannies and the strain it creates on their familial bonds overseas). This in turn weakens and takes away from the economic contributions made by these immigrants, seemingly maintaining a negative cycle within the Canadian immigration experience. Although the rhetoric of Canadian Immigration Policy has no doubt shifted towards “economic and security consideration,” it seems as if it overlooks the importance of familial bonds and kinship for immigrants in terms of their contribution to the Canadian labour force. Many immigrants coming to Canada are immigrating with the impression that high skill, high education, and the willingness to work automatically equates to immediate entrance in the labour force. However, with problems such as credential transference, among other things, this is not always the case. Because of this, immigrants are often forced in to jobs in which they are overqualified for, earning barely enough to support themselves. With many of these immigrants hoping to bring their family overseas when enough money is earned, this strain not only adds to the negative experience they have in Canada, but also reveals the clear disparity between rhetoric and reality in Canadian Immigration Policy. More specifically, by overlooking the importance of family reunification and concerns, as well as the role that kinship plays, the Canadian Immigration Policy makes it more difficult for immigrants to reach occupational goals (for example, the poor working conditions of Filipino nannies and the strain it creates on their familial bonds overseas). This in turn weakens and takes away from the economic contributions made by these immigrants, seemingly maintaining a negative cycle within the Canadian immigration experience.

]]> Comment on 2011: The year in Canadian immigration, by Marco Campana, Gregory Johannson, & ZS Worotynec by Emily P http://immigrantchildren.ca/2012/01/11/2011-the-year-in-canadian-immigration-by-marco-campana-gregory-johannson-zs-worotynec/comment-page-1/#comment-4001 Emily P Tue, 06 Mar 2012 19:07:11 +0000 http://immigrantchildren.ca/?p=2502#comment-4001 The blog states in the immigration policy section: “however, there have been some concerns about the realities of medical insurance for inviting families, including costs and limited health care coverage”. Similar to Julia’s response, I believe that this shows where Canadians priorities lie. It is evident that we are more focused on economic considerations rather than family reunification. It is interesting to note that Canadians are more focused on health care costs rather than the idea of having strong family ties. I believe that the idea of the “super visa” has the potential to strengthen migrant workers family ties and ensure that they continue to be a part of their family culture and traditions. The blog states in the immigration policy section: “however, there have been some concerns about the realities of medical insurance for inviting families, including costs and limited health care coverage”. Similar to Julia’s response, I believe that this shows where Canadians priorities lie. It is evident that we are more focused on economic considerations rather than family reunification. It is interesting to note that Canadians are more focused on health care costs rather than the idea of having strong family ties. I believe that the idea of the “super visa” has the potential to strengthen migrant workers family ties and ensure that they continue to be a part of their family culture and traditions.

]]>