Powell J. Encyclopedia Of North American Immigration

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

and sisters. Now they bring this home with them, and this has

a great effect on the Asians here in the United States. . . .

MODERATOR. I’d like to pose some questions to the panel.

Anyone can answer them. I would like to know, were those

black men who were considered troublemakers forced to the

front before other men more qualified.

ROMO. If I can say one word before you go on, just one word

about the Chicano, the Puerto Rican, the brown. If it’s all right,

thank you. The brown people, the Puerto Rican, the Chicano,

suffer from a problem in America, not only of racism, but of a

language and a cultural difference. The ghettoizing that goes on

in his early life, his economic background of relegation to farm

work, etc., puts him in position that when he goes in the service,

the only thing the service feels he’s qualified for is the front line

and infantry duty. As a consequence, when he gets to the field, he

cannot relate to his officers or NCOs. He can’t understand the

language and he can’t understand the culture behind it. As I said

before, the Chicano, the brown, the Puerto Rican, suffers statis-

tically more casualties than any other minority and the white. I

think this has to be brought out and it has to be stopped.

HANEY. My name is Evan Haney, and I would like to point

out that if you took the Vietnamese war, of the American war,

as it is, and compared it to the Indian wars a hundred years ago,

it would be the same thing. All the massacres were the same.

Nowadays they use chemical warfare; back then they put small-

pox in the blankets and gave them to the Indians. . . .

ROSE. I guess most of it’s been said. All the brothers said real

beautiful, all the Asian brothers, and my Indian brother here. I

have been in the Marine Corps for ten years, ten long years in

the Marine Corps. Went to Vietnam twice. When I looked

around me in those ten years I found out who was really fight-

ing this war, and all I’ve seen was Third World people and poor

whites fighting this war. Most of the poor whites in the war were

in the positions of power, more or less the sergeants and officers.

People say, how can Third World people go in the service

and fight? All through the years we’ve been miseducated, all

through high school, elementary school, and then we have one

more choice left, and that’s the military. To make this great big

American splash, like in Hitler youth, we got to make our name

in the sky. So we go into the service. My brother was there in

1965; he felt like it was his patriotic duty. I did the same thing

in ’65. “I’m going to wipe them all out, really do it, get my

medals, really make it on the scene.” Then you go out and they

keep using words like Cong and slopehead and slanteyes. I said,

“Hey, those are the same words they use in the States against

me, against Third World people.” They dehumanize these peo-

ple so much that it’s easy to go out and kill them or blow them

away, because they are dehumanized, and it becomes in your

mind, they become more dehuman to you. But as you go on,

you’ve got to realize that this is foolish, you’re killing our own

brothers. So that out of ten years this is what I got out of it

and it makes me very bitter. A lot I’d like to say, and I’m not

going to say, because the rest is going to be practice. I have no

more time to talk. . . .

LLOYD. I had a few experiences, you know. I met quite a few

Vietnamese, old women and children and to me they looked up

to the black man—those that had been oriented properly—

looked up to the black man something like for help more or less.

Most of the time we’d go in the village, we’d go in there with food

or candy or clothes if we had it and the little kids were always

around us and then some of them would come up and look for

a tail and different things. When they run it down to you, they

try to make you understand that you are part of them by being

black in your blood line. We have the same blood that they have,

something like, you know, it’s just like about that. We related to

them and why should we be fighting them and we’re the same

color? This is what it boils down to. . . .

Source: Congressional Record, “Extensions and Remarks,” 92nd

Congress, 1st Session, April 7, 1971, 2,825–2,900, 2,903–2,936; cited

in Winter Soldier Investigation, available online, URL: http://lists.

village.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Resources/Primary/

Winter_Soldier/ws_32_3d_W orld.html.

STATEMENT BY JOHN KERRY, VIETNAM

VETERANS AGAINST THE WAR,

TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON

FOREIGN RELATIONS

April 23, 1971

I would like to talk on behalf of all those veterans and say that

several months ago in Detroit we had an investigation at which

over 150 honorably discharged, and many very highly deco-

rated, veterans testified to war crimes committed in Southeast

Asia. These were not isolated incidents but crimes committed

on a day-to-day basis with the full awareness of officers at all

levels of command. It is impossible to describe to you exactly

what did happen in Detroit—the emotions in the room and

the feelings of the men who were reliving their experiences in

Vietnam. They relived the absolute horror of what this country,

in a sense, made them do.

They told stories that at times they had personally raped,

cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones

to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs,

blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages in

fashion reminiscent of Ghengis Khan, shot cattle and dogs for

fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the country-

side of South Vietnam in addition to the normal ravage of war

and the normal and very particular ravaging which is done by

the applied bombing power of this country. . . .

We learned the meaning of free fire zones, shooting any-

thing that moves, and we watched while America placed a

cheapness on the lives of orientals.

We watched the United States falsification of body counts,

in fact the glorification of body counts. We listened while

month after month we were told the back of the enemy was

about to break. We fought using weapons against “oriental

human beings.” We fought using weapons against those peo-

ple which I do not believe this country would dream of using

were we fighting in the European theater. . . .

354 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN IMMIGRATION

We are here in Washington to say that the problem of this

war is not just a question of war and diplomacy. It is part and

parcel of everything that we are trying as human beings to com-

municate to people in this country—the question of racism

which is rampant in the military, and so many other questions

such as the use of weapons; the hypocrisy in our taking umbrage

at the Geneva Conventions and using that as justification for a

continuation of this war when we are more guilty than any other

body of violations of those Geneva Conventions; in the use of

free fire zones, harassment interdiction fire, search and destroy

missions, the bombings, the torture of prisoners, all accepted

policy by many units in South Vietnam. That is what we are try-

ing to say. It is part and parcel of everything. . . .

We wish that a merciful God could wipe away our own

memories of that service as easily as this administration has

wiped away their memories of us. But all that they have done

and all that they can do by this denial is to make more clear than

ever our own determination to undertake one last mission—to

search out and destroy the last vestige of this barbaric war, to

pacify our own hearts, to conquer the hate and fear that have

driven this country these last ten years and more. And more.

And so when thirty years from now our brothers go down the

street without a leg, without an arm, or a face, and small boys

ask why, we will be able to say “Vietnam” and not mean a desert,

not a filthy obscene memory, but mean instead where America

finally turned and where soldiers like us helped it in the turning.

Source: Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hearings on Legislative

Proposals Relating to the War in Southeast Asia, April 20–May 27, 1971,

pp. 180–210.

Objectives of the Canadian

Immigration Act, 1976

In 1973, the Department of Manpower and Immigration began

a review of Canadian immigration policy that eventually led to

nationwide public hearings under a Special Joint Committee of

the Senate and the House of Commons during 1975. The Immi-

gration Act of 1976 marked a significant shift in Canadian

immigration policy in limiting the wide discretionary powers of

the minister of manpower and immigration. Although it coor-

dinated the policies established in the 1952 Immigration Act

and the various regulations subsequently passed, for the first time

it expressly stated the goals of Canadian immigration policy,

including family reunion, humanitarian concern for refugees,

and targeted economic development. The act took effect on April

10, 1978. It was amended more than 30 times, including major

revisions in 1985 and 1992, before being replaced in 2002 with

the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

OBJECTIVES

3. It is hereby declared that Canadian immigration pol-

icy and the rules and regulations made under this Act shall

be designed and administered in such a manner as to promote

the domestic and international interests of Canada recogniz-

ing the need

(a) to support the attainment of such demographic goals

as may be established by the Government of Canada

from time to time in respect of the size, rate of growth,

structure, and geographic distribution of the Canadian

population;

(b) to enrich and strengthen the cultural and social fabric

of Canada, taking into account the federal and bilin-

gual character of Canada;

zens and permanent residents with their close relatives

from abroad;

(d) to encourage and facilitate the adaptation of persons

who have been granted admission as permanent resi-

dents to Canadian society by promoting cooperation

between the Government of Canada and other levels

of government and non-governmental agencies in

Canada with respect thereto;

(e) to facilitate the entry of visitors into Canada for the

purpose of fostering trade and commerce, tourism,

cultural and scientific activities, and international

understanding;

(f) to ensure that any person who seeks admission to

Canada on either a permanent or temporary basis is

subject to standards of admission that do not discrim-

inate on grounds of race, national or ethnic origin,

colour, religion or sex;

(g) to fulfil Canada’s international legal obligations with

respect to refugees and to uphold its humanitarian

tradition with respect to the displaced and the per-

secuted;

(h) to foster the development of a strong and viable econ-

omy and the prosperity of all regions in Canada;

(i) to maintain and protect the health, safety, and good

order of Canadian society; and

(j) to promote international order and justice by denying

the use of Canadian territory to persons who are likely

to engage in criminal activity.

Source: Freda Hawkins, Canada and Immigration: Public Policy and

Public Concern, 2d ed. (Kingston and Montreal: Institute of Public

Administration of Canada and M

cGill–Queen’s University Press,

1988), p. 426.

An Account of Somalis in Canada, 1990s

Muslim families were slow to come to North America, in part

because immigration would separate them from the religious

society that was so important in maintaining their cultures. A

Somali immigrant, Faduma Abdi speaks of the challenges of

living in Canada.

We are Muslims, we believe in the Islamic religion, and we prac-

tised it in our country. People from all over the world, every con-

tinent, every country maybe, come to Canada, so all the

APPENDIX A 355

religions are here. We go to mosque on Fridays instead of Sun-

day like the Christians. On Saturday and Sunday, there are cer-

tain religious classes, but sometimes it is difficult to get

transportation. The nearest mosque is on Dundas [Street, in

Toronto], It’s too far away, so sometimes it is difficult to get there.

I’m Muslim, but I’m not a very religious person. We have our

own clothes and our own culture. We like and are very proud to

wear our traditional dresses in the summertime. Whether you are

very religious or not, winter is your master because you have to

wear what the other people wear. But in the summertime, we

are very comfortable wearing our dresses, our style. If you are

married, you have to cover your hair. That’s for religious pur-

poses. We have different sheekh (religious leaders). Those are in

the top ranks of the religion. I

n some circles, if you are a woman,

whether you are married or not, you have to cover your body

except for maybe your eyes, your face. Our tradition is the

Somali tradition. We cover our hair and our body. We are all

Muslim, but some wear short dresses the way that they like. They

pray five times a day, but they wear whatever they like, and oth-

ers have some restrictions, but it depends, just like Catholicism.

We pray five times a day. Sometimes we pray as a family,

but it is not compulsory to do it together. Amina prays on her

own and the others do so as well, but on the weekend, if we

are all together, we pray together in the morning (Subah), at

noon (Duhur), evening (Asar), (Macrib) and the final prayers

sha). That’s five prayers. We pray before sunrise, after two

o’clock, at six, at nine, and at ten we pray the last one before

we go to bed. If it is not possible for them to pray during the

day, when they come home, they have a late prayer.

My children socialize with the people at school and maybe

they make conversation, but we are different from Canadian

girls who want boyfriends. This is prohibited in our culture and

our religion. When a girl is ready to be married, then maybe she

will talk or make some conversation in order to know the boy

before she gets married. But they don’t have boyfriends. So my

two eldest daughters go to school together, they come home

together, they are friends and they walk together. When they

come back from school, one of them may go to the kitchen and

do her chores and one does her homework and so on, but they

don’t go out on dates. My son is more active than my daugh-

ters. He has some friends, but not girlfriends. I don’t know

whether he’s hiding them from me. He goes with his Canadian

friends to the school, then he comes back and usually I don’t

allow him to go out at night.

Source: Elizabeth McLuhan, ed., Safe Haven: The Refugee Experience

of Five Families (Toronto, Multicultural History Society of Ontario,

1995), pp. 192–194.

Excerpts from the

USA PATRIOT Act, 2001

In the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks in New York

City and Washington, D.C., on September 11, 2001, the

administration of President George W. Bush proposed a series

of measures designed to combat terrorism, which included

greater border controls. The Uniting and Strengthening Amer-

ica by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and

Obstruct Terrorism Act (USA PATRIOT Act) was signed into

law on October 26, 2001. The act provided for greater surveil-

lance of aliens and increasing the power of the attorney general

to identify, arrest, and deport suspected terrorists.

TITLE I—ENHANCING DOMESTIC SECURITY

AGAINST TERRORISM

Sec. 102. Sense of Congress condemning discrimination against

Arab and Muslim Americans.

(a) FINDINGS—Congress makes the following findings:

(1) Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, and Americans

from South Asia play a vital role in our Nation and are entitled

to nothing less than the full rights of every American.

(2) The acts of violence that have been taken against Arab

and Muslim Americans since the September 11, 2001, attacks

against the United States should be and are condemned by all

Americans who value freedom.

(3) The concept of individual responsibility for wrongdo-

ing is sacrosanct in American society, and applies equally to all

religious, racial, and ethnic groups.

(4) When American citizens commit acts of violence against

those who are, or are perceived to be, of Arab or Muslim descent,

they should be punished to the full extent of the law.

(5) Muslim Americans have become so fearful of harass-

ment that many Muslim women are changing the way they

dress to avoid becoming targets.

(6) Many Arab Americans and Muslim Americans have

acted heroically during the attacks on the United States, includ-

ing Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a 23-year-old New Yorker

of Pakistani descent, who is believed to have gone to the World

Trade Center to offer rescue assistance and is now missing.

(b) SENSE OF CONGRESS—It is the sense of Congress

that—

(1) the civil rights and civil liberties of all Americans,

including Arab Americans, Muslim Americans, and Americans

from South Asia, must be protected, and that every effort must

be taken to preserve their safety;

(2) any acts of violence or discrimination against any

Americans be condemned; and

(3) the Nation is called upon to recognize the patriotism of

fellow citizens from all ethnic, racial, and religious back-

grounds.

TITLE IV—PROTECTING THE BORDER

Sec. 402. Northern border personnel.

There are authorized to be appropriated—

(1) such sums as may be necessary to triple the number

of Border Patrol personnel (from the number authorized

under current law), and the necessary personnel and facilities

356 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN IMMIGRATION

to support such personnel, in each State along the Northern

Border;

(2) such sums as may be necessary to triple the number of

Customs Service personnel (from the number authorized under

current law), and the necessary personnel and facilities to sup-

port such personnel, at ports of entry in each State along the

Northern Border;

(3) such sums as may be necessary to triple the number of

INS [Immigration and Naturalization Services] inspectors

(from the number authorized on the date of the enactment of

this Act), and the necessary personnel and facilities to support

such personnel, at ports of entry in each State along the North-

ern Border; and

(4) an additional $50,000,000 each to the Immigration

and Naturalization Service and the United States Customs Ser-

vice for purposes of making improvements in technology for

monitoring the Northern Border and acquiring additional

equipment at the Northern Border.

Sec. 403. Access by the Department of State and the INS to certain

identifying information in the criminal history records of visa

applicants and applicants for admission to the United States.

(b)(1) The Attorney General and the Director of the Fed-

eral Bureau of Investigation shall provide the Department of

State and the Service access to the criminal history record infor-

mation contained in the National Crime Information Center’s

Interstate Identification Index (NCIC-III), Wanted Persons

File, and to any other files maintained by the National Crime

Information Center that may be mutually agreed upon by the

Attorney General and the agency receiving the access, for the

purpose of determining whether or not a visa applicant or

applicant for admission has a criminal history record indexed in

any such file.

(2) Such access shall be provided by means of extracts of

the records for placement in the automated visa lookout or

other appropriate database, and shall be provided without any

fee or charge.

(3) The Federal Bureau of Investigation shall provide peri-

odic updates of the extracts at intervals mutually agreed upon

with the agency receiving the access. Upon receipt of such

updated extracts, the receiving agency shall make correspond-

ing updates to its database and destroy previously provided

extracts.

Sec. 405. Report on the integrated automated fingerprint identi-

fication system for ports of entry and overseas consular posts.

(a) IN GENERAL—The Attorney General, in consulta-

tion with the appropriate heads of other Federal agencies,

including the Secretary of State, Secretary of the Treasury, and

the Secretary of Transportation, shall report to Congress on

the feasibility of enhancing the Integrated Automated Finger-

print Identification System (IAFIS) of the Federal Bureau of

Investigation and other identification systems in order to bet-

ter identify a person who holds a foreign passport or a visa

and may be wanted in connection with a criminal investiga-

tion in the United States or abroad, before the issuance of a

visa to that person or the entry or exit from the United States

by that person.

MENTS—

(1) IN GENERAL—Except as otherwise provided in this

subsection, the amendments made by this section shall take effect

on the date of the enactment of this Act and shall apply to—

(A) actions taken by an alien before, on, or after such

date; and

(B) all aliens, without regard to the date of entry or

attempted entry into the United States—

(i) in removal proceedings on or after such date (except

for proceedings in which there has been a final administrative

decision before such date); or

(ii) seeking admission to the United States on or after such

date.

Sec. 414. Visa integrity and security.

(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS REGARDING THE

NEED TO EXPEDITE IMPLEMENTATION OF INTE-

GRATED ENTRY AND EXIT DATA SYSTEM—

(1) SENSE OF CONGRESS—In light of the terrorist

attacks perpetrated against the United States on September 11,

2001, it is the sense of the Congress that—

(A) the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secre-

tary of State, should fully implement the integrated entry and

exit data system for airports, seaports, and land border ports of

entry, as specified in section 110 of the Illegal Immigration

Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C.

1365a), with all deliberate speed and as expeditiously as practi-

cable; and

(B) the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secre-

tary of State, the Secretary of Commerce, the Secretary of the

Treasury, and the Office of Homeland Security, should imme-

diately begin establishing the Integrated Entry and Exit Data

System Task Force, as described in section 3 of the Immigration

and Naturalization Service Data Management Improvement

Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-215).

(2) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS—

There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be

necessary to fully implement the system described in paragraph

(1)(A).

(b) DEVELOPMENT OF THE SYSTEM—In the devel-

opment of the integrated entry and exit data system under sec-

tion 110 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant

Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1365a), the Attorney

General and the Secretary of State shall particularly focus on—

(1) the utilization of biometric technology; and

(2) the development of tamper-resistant documents read-

able at ports of entry.

DATABASES—The entry and exit data system described in

this section shall be able to interface with law enforcement

databases for use by Federal law enforcement to identify and

APPENDIX A 357

detain individuals who pose a threat to the national security of

the United States.

(d) REPORT ON SCREENING INFORMATION—

Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this

Act, the Office of Homeland Security shall submit a report to

Congress on the information that is needed from any United

States agency to effectively screen visa applicants and applicants

for admission to the United States to identify those affiliated

with terrorist organizations or those that pose any threat to the

safety or security of the United States, including the type of

information currently received by United States agencies and

the regularity with which such information is transmitted to

the Secretary of State and the Attorney General.

Sec. 416. Foreign student monitoring program.

(a) FULL IMPLEMENTATION AND EXPANSION

OF FOREIGN STUDENT VISA MONITORING PRO-

GRAM REQUIRED—The Attorney General, in consultation

with the Secretary of State, shall fully implement and expand

the program established by section 641(a) of the Illegal Immi-

gration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8

U.S.C. 1372(a)).

(b) INTEGRATION WITH PORT OF ENTRY

INFORMATION—For each alien with respect to whom

information is collected under section 641 of the Illegal Immi-

gration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8

U.S.C. 1372), the Attorney General, in consultation with the

Secretary of State, shall include information on the date of

entry and port of entry.

APPROVED EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS—

(3) OTHER APPROVED EDUCATIONAL INSTITU-

TION—The term “other approved educational institution”

includes any air flight school, language training school, or voca-

tional school, approved by the Attorney General, in consulta-

tion with the Secretary of Education and the Secretary of State,

under subparagraph (F), (J), or (M) of section 101(a)(15) of

the Immigration and Nationality Act.

(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS—

There is authorized to be appropriated to the Department of

Justice $36,800,000 for the period beginning on the date of

enactment of this Act and ending on January 1, 2003, to fully

implement and expand prior to January 1, 2003, the program

established by section 641(a) of the Illegal Immigration Reform

and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 (8 U.S.C. 1372(a)).

(1) WAIVER OF FISCAL YEAR LIMITATION—

Notwithstanding section 203(e)(2) of the Immigration and

Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(e)(2)), an immigrant visa num-

ber issued to an alien under section 203(c) of such Act for fis-

cal year 2001 may be used by the alien during the period

beginning on October 1, 2001, and ending on April 1, 2002, if

the alien establishes that the alien was prevented from using it

during fiscal year 2001 as a direct result of a specified terrorist

activity.

(2) WORLDWIDE LEVEL—In the case of an alien enter-

ing the United States as a lawful permanent resident, or adjust-

ing to that status, under paragraph (1) or (3), the alien shall be

counted as a diversity immigrant for fiscal year 2001 for pur-

poses of section 201(e) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

(8 U.S.C. 1151(e)), unless the worldwide level under such sec-

tion for such year has been exceeded, in which case the alien

shall be counted as a diversity immigrant for fiscal year 2002.

(3) TREATMENT OF FAMILY MEMBERS OF CER-

TAIN ALIENS—In the case of a principal alien issued an

immigrant visa number under section 203(c) of the Immigra-

tion and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(c)) for fiscal year

2001, if such principal alien died as a direct result of a speci-

fied terrorist activity, the aliens who were, on September 10,

2001, the spouse and children of such principal alien shall,

until June 30, 2002, if not otherwise entitled to an immigrant

status and the immediate issuance of a visa under subsection

(a), (b), or (c) of section 203 of such Act, be entitled to the

same status, and the same order of consideration, that would

have been provided to such alien spouse or child under section

203(d) of such Act as if the principal alien were not deceased

and as if the spouse or child’s visa application had been adjudi-

cated by September 30, 2001.

(d) EXTENSION OF EXPIRATION OF IMMIGRANT

VISAS—

(1) IN GENERAL—Notwithstanding the limitations

under section 221(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act

(8 U.S.C. 1201(c)), in the case of any immigrant visa issued to

an alien that expires or expired before December 31, 2001, if the

alien was unable to effect entry into the United States as a direct

result of a specified terrorist activity, then the period of validity

of the visa is extended until December 31, 2001, unless a longer

period of validity is otherwise provided under this subtitle.

Source: Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate

Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act

of 2001. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 2001.

Canada’s Immigration Plan for 2002

The Canadian immigration plan for 2002 called for admission

of 210,000–235,000 immigrants, with at least 10 percent

refugees. Determined to bring skilled workers into Canada to

aid in development, there was nevertheless a clear nod to the

terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, with greater emphasis

on guarding the borders and preventing the use of fraudulent

documents. The document below is the Canadian government’s

explanation of its goals.

THE IMMIGRATION PLAN FOR 2002

I. Commitment to Immigration

The government remains committed to investing in

Canada’s economic and social development through immigra-

358 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN IMMIGRATION

tion. A planning range of 210,000 to 235,000 is confirmed for

2002. Refugees will account for more than 10 percent of new-

comers to Canada in that year. Skilled workers, business people

and provincial or territorial nominees, together with their fam-

ilies, will again make up about 60 percent of the movement in

2002, and family members of Canadian citizens and perma-

nent residents, slightly more than one-quarter (see appendices

C and D).

This is consistent with the planning range announced ear-

lier for 2002 and reaffirms the long-term objective of moving

gradually to immigration levels of approximately one percent of

Canada’s population, while bearing in mind Canada’s absorp-

tive capacity. The skilled workers, business immigrants, family

members and refugees who enter Canada through our immi-

gration program are increasingly important to maintaining a

strong and skilled labour force. These same people also

strengthen Canada’s social fabric and cultural diversity.

The government remains committed to investing in

Canada’s economic and social development through immigra-

tion. Temporary residents are also a key element of Canada’s

growth. The immigration program provides for the temporary

entry of skilled foreign workers and business people essential

to economic development, foreign students drawn by the rep-

utation of Canada’s universities and colleges for excellence in

education, research and training, and tourists eager to experi-

ence the many attractions of this country.

The commitment to immigration is inseparable from

Canada’s determination to deny access to those who pose

criminal or security threats to Canada and other countries,

and who might abuse immigrant, refugee or temporary entry

programs for illicit and fraudulent ends. Investigation and

interdiction abroad, screening at border and airport entry

points, and removal activities in Canada are necessary

adjuncts to an open immigration policy and the levels plan-

ning process.

Pursuant to immigration legislation, the Social Union

Framework Agreement and federal/provincial/territorial immi-

gration agreements, consultation is essential to immigration

planning, and various federal/provincial/territorial forums exist

to that end. In addition, as part of the Multi-year Planning Pro-

cess, Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) and the

provinces and territories are working to establish a joint plan-

ning table to address common concerns and challenges related

to immigration planning. Consultations with other parties who

are increasingly interested in participating in immigration plan-

ning will continue.

The scope of the policies and procedures required to

enhance public safety and security, and concomitant pressures

on the fiscal framework, will have an important effect on future

planning, as will the nature of migration flows in the coming

years, and other program pressures. Given the current level of

uncertainty, it would be premature to announce a planning

range for 2003 at this time without further consideration and

consultation to ensure that supports are in place to move to

higher immigration levels.

II. International and Domestic Contexts

A. International

The international environment has changed significantly

in the wake of the terrorist attacks in the United States. There

is a heightened awareness of the sophistication and geographic

reach of terrorist activities, and the need to ensure that Canada’s

immigration and refugee protection programs are not seen as

gateways to these activities in North America.

It is difficult to predict how the current campaign against

terrorism will affect the global movement of people. Other

factors that influence Canada’s ability to attract and process

immigrants and non-immigrants in an efficient and timely

manner include the following:

1. a significant increase in immigrant and non-immigrant

applicants to Canada, including refugee claimants;

2. a shift in source countries; the number of people on the

move worldwide; and

3. international competition to attract skilled workers.

About 150 million people are on the move at any given

time.

Between 1997 and 2000, the number of immigrant appli-

cations increased by 46 percent. Currently, 50 percent more

applications have been received than are needed to meet pro-

gram targets. The growth in non-immigrant applications dur-

ing those years was unprecedented: applications for visitor visas

rose by 27 percent; applications for employment authorizations

(temporary work permits) rose by 43 percent; and applications

for student authorizations (issued for the most part to post-

secondary students) rose by 63 percent. Since 1998, there has

also been a significant increase in refugee claims made in

Canada, from just under 25,500 in 1998 to more than 35,000

in 2000.

Canada draws its immigrant population from a great num-

ber of countries, but over time, we have seen significant shifts

in primary source countries. In 1990, the top two source coun-

tries were Hong Kong and Poland, which together accounted

for some 20 percent of the movement in that year. In 2000,

China and India were the two primary source countries, mak-

ing up close to 30 percent of the movement.

Behind the interest in Canada as a migrant destination is

the increasing worldwide mobility of people. It has been esti-

mated that about 150 million people are on the move at any

given time. Some flee persecution, civil strife, or severe political

or economic upheaval; others are forced to leave as a result of

natural disasters or environmental degradation; still others

move primarily to seek a better way of life for themselves and

their families. In short, migration as an aspect of globalization

is accelerating. If it wishes to maximize the benefits of this

movement, Canada cannot afford to stand still. We must

proactively plan for the future.

The key to sustaining a robust immigration program hinges

on striking the right balance between maximizing the benefits of

immigration, such as economic growth and social development,

and sustaining public confidence in the system by ensuring,

APPENDIX A 359

through effective enforcement, that its generosity is not abused.

Canada is not alone in facing increased pressures from irregular

migration, including human trafficking and smuggling.

Currently, Canada, the United States, Australia and New

Zealand are the only countries that encourage and plan for

immigration. However, greater international economic integra-

tion and competition, ageing work forces and declining birth

rates are leading countries of the European Union and Japan

to reconsider their approach to the planned admission of for-

eign workers. It is anticipated that in the future, Canada will

face serious competition in recruiting the highly skilled as most

developed countries struggle with skill shortages and the effects

of an ageing population.

B. Domestic

The following factors will continue to influence the com-

position of the immigrant movement and federal, provincial

and territorial integration initiatives, as well as overall immi-

gration targets:

1. The increasing importance of immigration to labour

force and population growth.

2. The strategic advantage of immigration in a competi-

tive global economy.

3. The continued and growing preference of immigrants

for living in Canada’s largest urban centres.

Like other industrialized countries, Canada faces demographic

challenges. Birth rates are at a historic low, and Canada’s largest

age cohort—the baby boomers—is ageing. While immigration

cannot significantly change the resulting age structure of the

population, it is an important tool to mitigate its effects. Immi-

gration will likely account for all net labour force growth by

2011, and projections indicate it will account for total popula-

tion growth by 2031. For these reasons, ensuring that immi-

grants and refugees have the skills to succeed in the labour

market is key to Canada’s future prosperity. Equally, policies

designed to attract significant numbers of highly skilled work-

ers will give Canada economic and sociocultural advantages in

the new global economy.

Programs have been in place since the mid-1990s to

increase the number of economic immigrants and their fam-

ilies within the overall immigrant movement and to put

more emphasis on education, skills and language ability in

the economic selection process. Education levels are rising.

In 1995, 41 percent of working-age immigrants and refugees

had a post-secondary degree on landing, while 57 percent

had one in 1999. By comparison, 42 percent of the total

working-age Canadian population had a post-secondary

degree in 1999. Nonetheless, available data point to gaps in

labour market performance between immigrants, refugees

and the Canadian-born. Given the growing importance of

immigration to the labour force, it is especially important to

help immigrants and refugees manage the transition into the

labour market so that they can realize their potential as

quickly as possible.

Canada benefits from the different perspectives, networks,

skills and traditions that immigrants bring, as well as from their

economic contributions. In addition, newcomers and Canadi-

ans share common values. As reported in the World Values Sur-

vey, most Canadian and foreign-born residents agree that

children should understand other cultures, learn to respect oth-

ers and take responsibility for their actions. Both groups also

show strong support for the merit principle in business.

It is generally recognized that while immigration is critical

to building our economy and society, it is not without chal-

lenges, specifically with regard to ensuring that adequate sup-

ports are in place to facilitate social and economic integration.

Challenges include the recognition of foreign credentials, com-

bating discrimination and finding ways to more evenly dis-

tribute the benefits of immigration across the country. In 2000,

90 percent of immigrants chose to live in Ontario, British

Columbia and Quebec; nearly 75 percent settled in Toronto,

Vancouver and Montréal, an increase of five percentage points

in the past decade. To date, efforts to encourage immigrants to

settle in smaller urban centres have met with limited success. It

will be important to further explore how to attract immigrants

to smaller centres and persuade them to stay there in order to

reduce the pressures on Canada’s largest cities.

Canada’s immigration program provides a significant level

of support for settlement and integration services. Its citizen-

ship program offers newcomers the opportunity to obtain

Canadian citizenship following a three-year residency period.

Settlement programs and services assist immigrants in

becoming participating and contributing members of Cana-

dian society and promote an acceptance of immigrants by

Canadians. While helping newcomers adapt and learn about

their rights, freedoms and responsibilities and the laws that pro-

tect them from racial discrimination, settlement programs also

sensitize Canadians to different cultures and how diversity

strengthens the economy and community life.

III. Other Management and Planning Considerations

The government is committed to higher levels of immi-

gration given the importance of immigration to Canada’s econ-

omy and to Canadian society as a whole. However, the

appropriate infrastructure and other supports must be in place

to meet the challenges that lie ahead.

The proposed Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

(Bill C-11) will give CIC the tools it needs to further enhance

public safety and security by introducing new inadmissibility

grounds, strengthening authority to arrest criminals and people

who pose security threats, and restricting access to the refugee

determination system for certain categories of people, such as

people who have been determined to be inadmissible on secu-

rity or other serious grounds.

We must maintain appropriate balance between achieving

immigration levels targets, responding to non-immigrant

demands, providing timely service to all and ensuring program

integrity. At the same time, to support our long-term commit-

ment to immigration and to facilitate the entry of legitimate

360 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN IMMIGRATION

immigrants and refugees, Bill C-11 and its regulations will also

support the following measures:

A. The shift in selection emphasis from the worker’s cur-

rent occupation to an assessment of skills and experi-

ence.

B. The strengthening of family reunification and refugee

protection.

C. The redesign of the Temporary Foreign Worker Pro-

gram to introduce a simple, efficient process for skilled

workers, and to allow spouses to work.

D. Facilitation of the transition from temporary to per-

manent resident status by allowing qualified foreign

temporary workers to be processed for landing in

Canada.

In addition to this legislative initiative, a number of other

initiatives are under way to improve program management and

delivery. Pilot projects have been undertaken and options are

being considered to allow CIC to continue to maintain an appro-

priate balance between achieving immigration levels targets,

responding to non-immigrant demand, providing timely service

to all, and ensuring program integrity. Pilot projects are testing

the feasibility of centralizing some aspects of immigrant-related

decision making in Canada, evaluating measures to reliably iden-

tify and process uncomplicated applications, and examining the

benefits of using available standardized language tests.

Looking ahead, a number of significant challenges remain.

We must continue our responsible management of the immi-

gration program and work to ensure that appropriate supports

are in place to fully realize all the potential social and economic

benefits. To that end, consultations with the provinces and ter-

ritories and other interested stakeholders will be essential as we

move to develop our immigration plan for 2003 and beyond.

Source: Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Minister of Public

Works and Government Services Canada, 2001, available online,

URL: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/anrep02.html#, accessed

November 12, 2004.

Highlights of the Immigration

and Refugee Protection Act

and Its Regulations, 2002

In an attempt to streamline immigration procedures, and, in

the later stages, in response to the attacks of September 11,

2001, Canada implemented its Immigration and Refugee Pro-

tection Act (IRPA) to replace the Immigration Act of 1976. The

measure was introduced to the Canadian parliament as Bill

C-11 on February 21, 2001, and came into law on June 28,

2002. It focused on selecting skilled workers with the particular

needs of Canada’s postindustrial economy in mind. The IRPA

introduced new tools for securing Canadian borders, including

front-end security screening of all refugee claimants; procedures

to facilitate the removal of immigrants committing serious

crimes and to suspend refugee claims for people charged until

legal judgments were made; and introduction of a high-tech

Permanent Resident Card, to make it easier to identify illegal

immigrants.

I. MANAGING THE VOLUME

OF IMMIGRATION

The Act provides the government with the flexibility to link

immigration to Canada’s labour market needs. The govern-

ment’s long-term objective is to move gradually to immigra-

tion levels of approximately one percent of Canada’s

population, while bearing in mind Canada’s absorptive

capacity.

For a variety of reasons—primarily Canada’s popularity as

a place to live—the number of people who want to come to

Canada is much greater than the number of foreign nationals

Canada plans to admit in a given year. This has had an impact

on the management of the immigration program, especially

on how long it takes to process an application.

Section 94 of the Act requires an annual report on the

number of foreign nationals projected to become permanent

residents in the following year. This number is determined after

consultation with the provinces and with appropriate organiza-

tions and institutions. Section 94 also requires the federal gov-

ernment to table an annual report to Parliament on activities

under the Act, including:

A. activities and initiatives, such as cooperation with the

provinces;

B. the number of new permanent residents during the

year;

C. the number of permanent residents in each class in

provinces which have responsibility for selection under

a federal-provincial agreement;

D. the linguistic profile of new permanent residents;

E. the number of temporary resident permits issued and

the grounds of inadmissibility;

F. the number of people granted permanent residence on

humanitarian grounds; and

G. a gender-based analysis of the immigration program.

II. CONSULTATIONS AND AGREEMENTS WITH

THE PROVINCES AND TERRITORIES

Immigration accounts for a significant part of Canada’s popu-

lation, rate of growth and demographic structure. It can there-

fore have a strong impact on regional and provincial planning.

Under the Constitution, immigration is a shared respon-

sibility between the federal government and the provinces, with

federal legislation prevailing. Section 8(1) of the Act provides

for federal-provincial agreements on immigration. The Minis-

ter must publish an annual list of the federal-provincial agree-

ments that are in force. Section 10(2) of the Act provides a legal

basis for the federal government to consult the provinces

APPENDIX A 361

regarding the number, distribution and settlement of perma-

nent residents. This provision ensures that the federal govern-

ment considers regional requirements when developing or

amending immigration and settlement policies.

Immigration agreements have been concluded with a

number of provinces and territories. The most comprehensive

of these is an agreement with the Province of Quebec. The

Canada-Quebec Accord gives Quebec certain selection powers

and sole responsibility for integration services. Canada main-

tains responsibility for defining immigration categories, deter-

mining inadmissible persons, planning levels of immigration

and enforcement.

Regulations under the Act specifically describe classes of

applicants destined for Quebec, such as the Quebec Skilled

Worker Class. Students and temporary foreign workers intend-

ing to settle in Quebec require the province’s consent. Quebec

also has exclusive selection authority for all foreign nationals

who are neither members of the Family Class nor persons

whom the Immigration and Refugee Board has determined to

be Convention refugees.

The federal government currently has agreements in place

with eight provinces and one territory, covering a range of

issues including settlement and integration services, language

training, labour market access and the Provincial Nominee Pro-

gram, which allows provinces to nominate skilled workers who

settle in their jurisdiction.

III. THE IMMIGRATION

AND REFUGEE BOARD

The Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) is an independent,

quasi-judicial administrative tribunal. The Board reports to

Parliament through the Minister of Citizenship and Immigra-

tion. The Board’s mandate is “to make well-reasoned decisions

on immigration and refugee matters efficiently, fairly and in

accordance with the law.” The IRB consists of four divisions:

A. The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) is responsible for

determining whether a person in Canada is a Convention

refugee or a person in need of pr

otection.

B. The Immigration Division (ID) conducts admissibility

hearings for permanent residents and for

eign nationals who

are seeking admission to Canada or are already in Canada and

are considered inadmissible.

C. The Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) is an indepen-

dent tribunal with the powers of a court. It hears appeals on a

variety of matters under the Immigration and Refugee Protec-

tion Act.

D. The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) is currently not in

force. When the relevant sections of the Immigration and

Refugee Protection Act are proclaimed, the RAD will provide

failed refugee claimants and the Minister with the right to a

paper appeal of a decision from the IRB. Unsuccessful refugee

claimants and the Minister currently have the right to apply for

judicial review to the Federal Court.

All decisions made under the Act, including decisions by

the divisions of the IRB, can be judicially reviewed by the

Federal Court of Canada, but only after all rights of appeal

under the Act have been exhausted. However, applicants must

first obtain leave from a Federal Court judge to initiate such

a review.

IV. IMMIGRATING TO CANADA

Since 1967, Canada’s immigration program has been based

on non-discriminatory principles, both in law and in prac-

tice. Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) assesses

foreign nationals on standards that do not discriminate on

the basis of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion

or sex. The immigration program is universal—CIC assesses

applicants from around the world against universal criteria

that assess their ability to adapt to Canadian life and to set-

tle successfully.

The Act establishes three basic categories that correspond

to major program objectives: reuniting families, contributing

to economic development and protecting refugees. Applicants

can be admitted to Canada as permanent residents under three

corresponding classes: Family Class, Economic Class or

Refugee Class.

A. Family Class. Helping families reunite in Canada is a key

objective of Canada’s immigration policy. Members of the Fam-

ily Class are people sponsored to come to Canada by a relative,

a spouse, a common-law partner or a conjugal partner who is a

Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada.

The Family Class applicant must be the sponsor’s:

1. spouse, common-law or conjugal partner;

2. dependent child, including a child adopted abroad;

3. child under 18 to be adopted in Canada;

4. parents or grandparents; or

5. an orphaned child under 18 who is a brother, sister,

niece, nephew or grandchild and is not a spouse or

common-law partner.

Dependent children of a sponsored foreign national may

be included in that person’s application. A dependent child is

either a biological child or an adopted child. Children can be

dependent if they meet one of the following conditions:

1. they are under age 22 and unmarried or not in a com-

mon-law relationship;

2. they have been full-time students since before age 22,

attend a post-secondary educational institution and

have been substantially dependent on the financial sup-

port of a parent since before age 22 and, if married or

a common-law partner, since becoming a spouse or a

common-law partner; or

3. they are aged 22 or over and have been substantially

dependent on the financial support of a parent since

before age 22 because of a physical or mental condition.

In addition, spouses or common-law partners who are 16

years of age or older, and have legal temporary status in

362 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF NORTH AMERICAN IMMIGRATION

Canada as visitors, students, temporary workers or tempo-

rary resident permit holders may apply under the In-Canada

Class.

Applicants and their family members are subject to medi-

cal, criminal and background checks.

Successful applicants become permanent residents of

Canada, giving the applicant and his or her family members the

right to live, study and work in Canada for as long as they

remain permanent residents.

Sponsors must support their sponsored family members or

relatives after they become permanent residents of Canada.

Spouses, common-law and conjugal partners must be sup-

ported for three years.

A sponsor’s dependent children under age 22 must be sup-

ported for 10 years or until they reach the age of 25, whichever

comes earliest.

A sponsor’s dependent children aged 22 or over must be

supported for three years.

Other family members, including their own dependent

children, must be supported for 10 years.

The duration of these federal undertakings applies only to

sponsorship agreements outside Quebec. Sponsors who live in

Quebec are governed by Quebec’s laws. While a sponsorship

undertaking is in effect, if the sponsored persons receive social

assistance, the sponsor is in default and is required to repay the

social assistance payments.

B. Economic Class. Permanent residents admitted to Canada

under the Economic Class are selected for their skills and abil-

ity to contribute to Canada’s economy. The Economic Class is

comprised of two streams: skilled workers and business immi-

grants.

1. Skilled workers

Canada values skilled immigrants who can effectively com-

pete and succeed in the country’s knowledge-based economy.

Foreign nationals who are skilled workers are chosen for their

ability to become successfully established in Canada. The reg-

ulations under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act stress

education, language ability and skilled work experience rather

than experience in a specific occupation.

Skilled workers are assessed according to a selection grid

(point system). In order to be admitted to Canada, skilled

workers must:

a. have at least one year of work experience within the past

10 years in a management occupation or in an occupation nor-

mally requiring university, college or technical training as

described in the National Occupational Classification (NOC)

developed by Human Resources Development Canada

(HRDC);

b. have enough money to support themselves and their

family members in Canada.

The Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations establish a

new selection grid for skilled workers. Applicants are assessed

on a variety of selection criteria which evaluate their ability to

adapt to the Canadian economy.

Selection Criteria Maximum Points

Education 25

Official languages (English and/or French) 24

Employment experience 21

Age 10

Arranged employment in Canada 10

Adaptability 10

TOTAL 100

To be considered under the Federal Skilled Worker cate-

gory, applicants must score a minimum of 75 out of the possi-

ble 100 points. The pass mark may be amended by the Minister

to reflect changes in the Canadian labour market, economy and

society as well as the changing demands of prospective new-

comers to Canada.

The Provincial Nominee Program

Under the Provincial Nominee Program, most provincial

and territorial governments may nominate a person for a per-

manent resident visa on the grounds that the individual’s labour

market skills are in particular demand in the province or terri-

tory. Provincial nominees are expected to live in the province

that nominated them in order to contribute their particular

employment skills.

Skilled workers intending to live in Quebec

The Canada-Quebec Accord gives the Province of Que-

bec sole responsibility for selecting skilled worker applicants

and sole responsibility for integration services for newcomers

who settle in Quebec. Skilled workers who intend to live in

the Province of Quebec must satisfy the Quebec selection cri-

teria and obtain a Certificat de sélection du Québec (Quebec

certificate of selection) issued by the Government of Quebec.

2. Business immigrants

Business immigrants are selected to support the develop-

ment of a strong and prosperous Canadian economy, either

through their direct investment, their entrepreneurial activity or

self-employment. Business immigration is made up of the

Investor, Entrepreneur and Self-employed Person classes. To be

eligible for immigration as a business immigrant, applicants who

are investors and entrepreneurs require a specified net worth and

business experience as set out in the Canadian immigration reg-

ulations. Self-employed applicants require specific experience.

a. Investors. Investor applicants must have legally obtained a net

rth of at least $800,000. They must also have either con-

trolled a portion of the equity of a qualifying business, or been

responsible for the management of the equivalent of at least five

full-time jobs per year in a business.

They are also required to make an investment of $400,000

through the Receiver General for Canada before a visa is issued.

The investment is subsequently allocated to participating

provinces and territories in Canada, which use the funds for job

creation and economic development.

APPENDIX A 363