Tuesday, June 14, 2011
Friday, June 10, 2011
Response to June 6th, 2011 LA TImes Immigration Article
In his LA Times article today Jacob Vigdor compares Canada's immigration policies favourably to those of the United States contending that Canada's focus on skills and education rather than country quotas and family ties makes the difference. He then goes on to mistakenly conclude that unlike the US, Canada recognizes dual citizenship.
Vigdor is correct in his assessment of the relative importance of family reunification in U.S. compared to Canadian immigration law. This was the subject of criticism of the government during the recent Canadian election when the Canadian party leaders and contenders for Prime Minister criticised current Prime Minister Steven Harper for failing to adequately deal with the long backlog of parents and grandparents of Canadian families who have applied to sponsor them to immigrate to Canada. The Prime Minister argued that for Canada as a whole, what came first, was the economy and filling jobs that were critical to the well being of Canadians. Family members would have to wait.
As Vigdor's article points out, the recession has had a heavy influence on immigration in both the US and Canada. The fact that there are 13 million people unemployed in the US has tightened the screws on all US immigration programs making it that much more difficult for foreign workers to find ways to come to work in the USA. The starting point for work permits for foreign workers, apart from outstanding individuals like the Wayne Gretzkys or Celine Dions of this world, is a job offer from an American employer. US policy is that effectively the foreign worker must have an American bachelor's degree or equivalent in a hard-skills or practical area of work, to gain approval for a work visa. Thus, professionals are able to enter without difficulty, but someone with a BA in fine arts might have a hard time. The US is weak, however, when it comes to enabling the blue collar skilled or semi-skilled workers to enter since the cost and timing of getting a work visa in this area is prohibitive.
Canada, on the other hand, is easier to work with for blue-collar skilled and semi-skilled foreign workers. They also need a job offer to start. But if they have an offer, Canadian immigration policy does provide options for them to come to Canada to work unlike those in the USA since the timing and cost are not as significant. Canada has a better approach to foreign students in enabling them to gain work experience and then settling in Canada though its Canadian Experience Class program than does the USA. Furthermore, Canada's federal skilled worker program provides certain foreign workers whose skills are in high demand in Canada, at least in 29 key areas, the opportunity to self-petition their way into the country without a sponsoring employer petitioner. Canada's caregiver program is far better than anything the USA has to offer in that field. Finally, unlike in the USA where immigration is a federal matter, Canada as provincial immigration programs that offer a plethora of options for workers and business immigrants facilitating their applications by fast-tracking them through the process.
Both the US and Canada have investor programs. However, the US EB5 program is better in that processing times are in the one-year range and the programs offer much more variety and a lower investment threshold ($ 500,000 compared to Canada's $ 800,000) to qualify. However, because the US program is run by private sector regional center projects that entail commercial risk and require investment of about four years, the Canadian federal and Quebec as well as other provincial programs are more secure since in these cases the funds are kept by the governments involved and repaid at the end of five years. The choice between the US and Canada boils down to how fast you want to get in - one year in the US as compared to probably many years in Canada, how much you are prepared to invest, and how sensitive you are to risk of loss.
To conclude, neither country's legal immigration programs are that bad - so far as they go. What is bad is that illegal immigrants, 13 million in the USA, and as many as 140,000 illegal immigrants in Canada, have entered because the legal programs were not working well enough. What is needed is for both countries immigration policies to reward people for undertaking the legal route and punishing those who attempt to immigrate illegally.
Vigdor is correct in his assessment of the relative importance of family reunification in U.S. compared to Canadian immigration law. This was the subject of criticism of the government during the recent Canadian election when the Canadian party leaders and contenders for Prime Minister criticised current Prime Minister Steven Harper for failing to adequately deal with the long backlog of parents and grandparents of Canadian families who have applied to sponsor them to immigrate to Canada. The Prime Minister argued that for Canada as a whole, what came first, was the economy and filling jobs that were critical to the well being of Canadians. Family members would have to wait.
As Vigdor's article points out, the recession has had a heavy influence on immigration in both the US and Canada. The fact that there are 13 million people unemployed in the US has tightened the screws on all US immigration programs making it that much more difficult for foreign workers to find ways to come to work in the USA. The starting point for work permits for foreign workers, apart from outstanding individuals like the Wayne Gretzkys or Celine Dions of this world, is a job offer from an American employer. US policy is that effectively the foreign worker must have an American bachelor's degree or equivalent in a hard-skills or practical area of work, to gain approval for a work visa. Thus, professionals are able to enter without difficulty, but someone with a BA in fine arts might have a hard time. The US is weak, however, when it comes to enabling the blue collar skilled or semi-skilled workers to enter since the cost and timing of getting a work visa in this area is prohibitive.
Canada, on the other hand, is easier to work with for blue-collar skilled and semi-skilled foreign workers. They also need a job offer to start. But if they have an offer, Canadian immigration policy does provide options for them to come to Canada to work unlike those in the USA since the timing and cost are not as significant. Canada has a better approach to foreign students in enabling them to gain work experience and then settling in Canada though its Canadian Experience Class program than does the USA. Furthermore, Canada's federal skilled worker program provides certain foreign workers whose skills are in high demand in Canada, at least in 29 key areas, the opportunity to self-petition their way into the country without a sponsoring employer petitioner. Canada's caregiver program is far better than anything the USA has to offer in that field. Finally, unlike in the USA where immigration is a federal matter, Canada as provincial immigration programs that offer a plethora of options for workers and business immigrants facilitating their applications by fast-tracking them through the process.
Both the US and Canada have investor programs. However, the US EB5 program is better in that processing times are in the one-year range and the programs offer much more variety and a lower investment threshold ($ 500,000 compared to Canada's $ 800,000) to qualify. However, because the US program is run by private sector regional center projects that entail commercial risk and require investment of about four years, the Canadian federal and Quebec as well as other provincial programs are more secure since in these cases the funds are kept by the governments involved and repaid at the end of five years. The choice between the US and Canada boils down to how fast you want to get in - one year in the US as compared to probably many years in Canada, how much you are prepared to invest, and how sensitive you are to risk of loss.
To conclude, neither country's legal immigration programs are that bad - so far as they go. What is bad is that illegal immigrants, 13 million in the USA, and as many as 140,000 illegal immigrants in Canada, have entered because the legal programs were not working well enough. What is needed is for both countries immigration policies to reward people for undertaking the legal route and punishing those who attempt to immigrate illegally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)