Wise immigration policy more than numbers game

The immigration levels for 2018 announced this week by Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen come as no surprise. The Liberals have been vying to go beyond their predecessors since they took office. Their plan would welcome one million new entrants by 2020.

For a relatively under-populated country like Canada, this otherwise routine policy is contentious.

On one hand, Canada is vying to be seen as a global leader in everything Canadian, particularly goodwill. On the other, it has to manage the economic demands and social expectations of rising immigration.

Even before the announcement, some online comments spewed vitriol, implicating immigrants in acts from terrorism to inciting racial hatred, to bleeding the country dry.

But paranoia aside, increasing immigration levels do raise many legitimate questions.

For instance, there is the question of declining skills and resources in countries of origin that need their youth to stay rooted at home, but are unable to keep them. The loss of their skills leads to a dangerous economic and social vacuum that ultimately spills across borders.

Similarly, why are immigration levels geared toward combatting an aging population and declining birth rate, when Canada actually has one of the fastest growing youth cohorts: Indigenous people? The current census shows a 42 per cent increase in their population over the last decade.

The rationale behind increasing immigration levels ignores this fact, even as Canada tries to better its relationship with its Indigenous communities.

As the world becomes more transient and employment opportunities shift globally, how long will Canadians, including naturalized Canadians, remain in Canada and contribute to its growth?

There is the question of the environmental impact of immigration on urban areas, if there is no sustainable mechanism to attract immigrants to lesserpopulated parts of the country and keeping them there, as Hussen has also stated.

None of these questions should be framed as xenophobic, racist or bigoted, the way many Canadians at one extreme express themselves. Nor should they elicit unconditional support from many Canadians at the other extreme.

Instead, they must be addressed logically and intelligently.

When I moved to Canada, there was no one to guide me on how to live, work and socialize. I was virtually left out in the cold. I survived because of my past familiarity with Canada. The system in place to support newcomers is poorly articulated because the focus is on numbers, not strategy.

Numbers are easy. Managing them is not. The lack of clarity as to how these 300,000-plus annual arrivals will negotiate and secure housing, employment and social services, is what is fuelling anxiety, as much as is the unfounded fear of terrorist threat.

Likewise, Canada needs to communicate to potential immigrants a realistic perception of what to expect without compromising its positive edge. This does not need to be derogatory to other people’s cultures, but instead should take into account that there may be inconsistencies between those cultures and the way of life here.

Canada prides itself on its diversity, and it should. But targets cannot be developed in a vacuum. There must be a clear accompanying economic and social strategy — and not after the fact — if Canada wants to gain positively from these numbers.

And let’s be clear: Immigration is ultimately about economics, not necessarily human kindness. The parameters of managing that are very different from just being welcoming.