Archives for 2003

Q. I am wondering if my current work as a research assistant in a university in Canada can fetch me some points under the working experience factor as well as points for having worked for at least one year full-time in Canada since I have been on this job for up to 2 years part-time.

Answer: Part time experience in Canada which adds up to the full time equivalent of 1 year can be counted for both the Experience factor, as well as for points on the Adaptability factor. The exception may be in the case that such experience was gained at the same time as you full time education.

At present, a full time work week is considered to be 37.5 hours per week. Part time experience would be evaluated in its proportion to this figure.

Montreal, buoyed by a robust economy and aggressive recruitment strategies, vaulted past Vancouver last year among top Canadian destinations for immigrants.

It’s the first time since 1993 that Montreal has occupied second place behind perennial leader Toronto – a further sign of the economic turnaround on Quebec’s island metropolis.

The Montreal region received 33,004 immigrants in 2002, compared with 29,922 for Vancouver, according to numbers released in June by Immigration Canada.

Toronto continued to attract more new arrivals than any other Canadian city by far, with 111,580 in 2002, or 48.7 per cent of the national total.

Ontario seeking to improve security screening

The Ontario government is moving ahead with plans for the OPP to conduct extensive background security checks on all immigrants and refugees resettling in the province. Public Safety and Security Minister Bob Runciman wants the province to follow Quebec and begin selecting and conducting checks on immigrants before they’re allowed to resettle here. He hopes to dispatch a team of elite OPP officers to some embassies abroad to screen potential immigrants destined for Ontario.

OTTAWA — Immigration to Canada fell by about 8.5% between 2001 and 2002, says a new study, adding the downward trend was most significant in Toronto, which barely retained its position as the top North American destination for newcomers.

But the decline illuminates a wider problem than simply a drop in the number of immigrants to Canada’s largest city, one legal expert suggests.

The study, he believes, signals a growing inability in the federal immigration department to process visa applications from skilled workers quickly during the last two years.

“What he, really, is a breakdown in the delivery system in Canada in 2002,” David Cohen, a Montreal immigration lawyer, said yesterday. “It’s not that there’s less of a demand. There’s been less of an ability to deliver. What [the study] is saying is the system got gummed up.”

The study by the Association for Canadian Studies, a Montreal-based think-tank, looked at various aspects of immigration to Canada: comparing overall numbers in the last three years with those in the United States, and considering where immigrants to the two countries have come from.

It also reported a decline in the number of Canadians taking up residence in the United States, something the association suggested might be a result of poorer economic conditions south of the border.

Among its main findings, the study said 229,091 people immigrated to this country in 2002, according to figures provided by Citizenship and Immigration Canada. In 2001, there were 250,484 immigrants and 227,346 in 2000.

By comparison, the United States received 1,063,732 immigrants in 2002, according to the U.S. Department of Immigration and Naturalization Services, down slightly from 1,064,308 in 2001, but well above the 849,807 new arrivals in 2000.

For the fourth consecutive year, the study said, Toronto was the prime destination for immigrants to North America in 2002. Close to 111,500 new immigrants went to Toronto in 2002, down from 125,000 in 2001.

During the same period, the number of new, legal immigrants to Los Angeles — a city with a high number of illegal immigrants — rose to 108,600 in 2002 from 99,000 in 2001, threatening Toronto’s previously secure position as the preferred destination for immigrants to the continent.

“Toronto is unique in North America and that uniqueness is a little bit less now,” said Roderic Beaujot, a sociology professor at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ont., adding the study couldn’t prove by itself that Toronto was less popular.

“We think of American cities, partly because they’re so big, as receiving a lot of immigrants,” Mr. Beaujot said. “But Toronto is in that league, if not above it.”

Much of the overall decline in the number of immigrants to Canada between 2001 and 2002 was attributed to the fall in the number of people accepted from Asia and the Pacific region, the study said. Almost 119,000 people from Asia and the Pacific moved to Canada in 2002, 14,000 fewer than in the year before.

Those figures surprised Jack Jedwab, executive director of the think-tank, because they seemed to suggest that, after a decade of increasing immigration to this country, Canada had partially shut its door to newcomers.

Mr. Jedwab said such a phenomenon would run counter to other indicators that suggested the United States, rather than Canada, was looking less favourably on immigrants. “In the United States,” he said, “all the polls indicate a diminishing of openness.”

But Mr. Cohen wasn’t taken aback by the study and he connected it to problems in the immigration system.

Canada was faced with a growing backlog of skilled workers applying to come to this country in the last several years, he said.

The government could have taken a number of approaches to the problem, he added — eliminate the backlog by hiking its annual immigration targets, allow the delays to continue, or raise the standard newcomers would have to meet to qualify for visas and apply it retroactively.

In June, 2002, Ottawa took the third option, imposing new immigration rules and extending those rules back six months.

But the government landed in hot water when Immigration Minister Denis Coderre told Parliament there were only 30,000 people waiting to be processed when, in fact, there were actually 120,000.

After more than 1,000 families went to court demanding their cases be considered under the old immigration rules, a federal court judge last month issued an injunction that prevented Ottawa from using the new rules to reject people who had applied for visas before Jan. 1, 2002.

That decision is only the latest development in a chain of events that can be traced back to mid-2001, when the Immigration Department began to slow processing of applications from skilled workers as it anticipated the coming of the new immigration rules, Mr. Cohen said.

“The government has been unable to deliver visas in a timely fashion,” he added. “It’s kind of like a funnel. We’ve blocked the end of the funnel entrance now.”

But a spokeswoman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada dismissed Mr. Cohen’s claim, saying the high immigration totals in 2001 were a result of Ottawa exceeding its pre-set targets in an effort to reduce backlogs.

In 2002, the government targeted 210,000 to 235,000 immigrants and met those goals, Susan Scarlett said.

Q. I intend to apply to immigrate to Canada via the Quebec application process, which has a different selection system. Once landed, am I limited to residing in Quebec only?

Answer: In principle, if you choose the province of Quebec as a destination, you do have to have an intent to live and work in Quebec. This will be tested at the interview stage.

If it turns out that the intended destination you selected in Canada is not favourable to you upon your landing, then you are free to move to any other location in any province of Canada.

Once in Canada, you have freedom of movement that is guaranteed to you in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

More specifically, as described in Section 6, of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is stated:

Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right: (a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and (b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.

Q. Is it possible to obtain to work permit while a permanent resident application is pending ? is HRDC approval required for all jobs?

Answer: Yes, it is possible to apply for a temporary employment authorization while a permanent resident application is pending. Such an application would not have a negative bearing on the permanent resident case.

There are numerous situations in which it is not necessary to seek Confirmation of a job offer from Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC). These include certain occupations such as Software Development Workers; some situations in which candidates are being transferred within the same company to a Canadian subsidiary or affiliate; candidates subject to international agreements such as NAFTA or GATS; and more.

It is also the case that a candidate who obtains a work permit may also gain as many as 15 additional points in a permanent resident application.

Canada’s immigration department was dealt a serious blow late yesterday afternoon after a Federal Court judge slapped it with an injunction preventing it from rejecting the applications of skilled workers who applied before Jan. 1, 2002, to immigrate to Canada.

The move affects an estimated 100,000 people caught in a backlog when Canada decided to change the selection criteria for prospective immigrants.

“The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration is directed to refrain from finally rejecting applications for permanent residence submitted before the 1st of January 2002 by economic class applicants seeking immigrant visas and who have not been provided notice of a decision thereon before the date of this Order.”

Ontario Considers Separate Immigration System

The province of Ontario is developing plans to withdraw from key areas of federal-provincial co-operation, in part by establishing its own income-tax and immigration systems.

A memorandum from the Ontario Premier recommends that the province move to an immigration system identical to Quebec’s. That province, as a result of a 1991 federal-provincial agreement, is responsible for selecting, processing and integrating immigrants to the province, and advises Ottawa each year on how many immigrants it wants to receive.

A court ruling has offered new hope to thousands of would-be New Zealanders anxious to put down roots in their new homeland.

The High Court in Auckland today ruled against the retrospective application of immigration rules changes introduced on 19 November last year.

These changes restricted the issuing of temporary “Job Search” visas for General Skills applicants to those with qualifications in fields covered by the Occupational Shortage List and introduced tough new English language requirements for both General Skills and Business migrants.

The judgement confirmed that ‘the immigration policy effective from 20 November 2002 is invalid for breach of section 13C of the Immigration Act to the extent that it proposes assessment under specific new policies’. The Act requires that applications be assessed under the policy applying at date of lodgement.

“This is a great day for the thousands of future New Zealanders, whose plans for a new life were jeopardised when the immigration goal posts were suddenly changed last November,” says Bill Milnes, Chairman of the New Zealand Association for Migration and Investment (NZAMI), which took the matter to the High Court.

“The retrospective application of the rules changes introduced a great deal of unexpected anxiety and often hardship into the lives of people who had already commenced the long, complex and expensive process of applying to settle here. Today’s High Court decision will substantially reduce such anxiety and hardship.

“This will also be a great day for all Kiwis who take pride in the fair and just operation of our government and legal systems, who value our international reputation as a country which cares about people’s rights and who appreciate the huge contribution made to our economy by business and skills-based immigration,” he adds.

“It also confirms that government should not make retrospective changes in other areas such as health or education which would be detrimental to the lives of ordinary New Zealanders.”

The associated challenge to the Long-term Business Visa policy was not upheld and it is now confirmed that this category is to be considered as temporary policy and that changes may be made without affecting the integrity of the base policy.

Mr Milnes noted that it took three days of hearing and over a month for Justice Randerson to consider his report. He says, “This identifies the complex nature of immigration policy and the difficulty for government to balance the intent of policy with the rights of people. It would have been a very difficult decision at a time of considerable pressure on the Minister and the Service.”

The NZAMI represents nearly 200 members throughout New Zealand, including immigration and investment consultants, banks, business specialists and financial advisers. The Association seeks consistent, fair, reliable immigration policies of long-term benefit to New Zealand.

Mr Milnes says that the NZAMI is now looking forward to working more closely with the NZIS to help ensure a more balanced and consistent approach to immigration.

“We believe that this case has illustrated the importance of consultation in shaping rules which serve both New Zealand’s interests and the rights of our country’s future citizens,” he says.

Q. My husband is a US citizen, living and working in the USA. Due to our circumstances, neither of us are presently able to leave out home country to emigrate. However, my husband was recently refused admission to Canada as a visitor. Can anything be done?

Answer: This is an unfortunate issue of timing, and potentially overzealous application of new policy. At a recent department policy meeting, immigration officials revealed that they were tightening the provisions regarding admissibility of visitors married to Canadians. Essentially, they were no longer to be admitted strictly on the basis of this relationship, but rather on the merits of their case as a visitor alone.

One the basis of the information provided, it is apparent that the merits of your husband’s case is strong. It is possible, however, that this was not adequately presented in his application for admission. If any additional efforts to seek temporary admission are to be made, they should be done only in possession of sufficient documentation attesting to those ties that he has to the USA (i.e., home, work, volunteer, etc.). Documentation to this effect may help support the application, but the decision regarding admissibility is finally discretionary, and is hampered by a prior refusal.

The B.C. and Canadian governments are working on a new “made-in-B.C. strategy” for immigration that would increase the number of skilled out-of-province workers entering the workforce.

Federal Immigration Minister Denis Coderre met in Vancouver yesterday with George Abbott, B.C.’s minister responsible for immigration, and said afterward the deal involves greater recognition of foreign credentials.

And that, he said, would be tied to increased English as a second language training.

Demographics indicate that B.C. is an increasingly older society, and business leaders meeting with the two ministers yesterday told of the growing “skills gaps” in their industries, said Abbott.