[lg policy] Canada: The Conservatives=?windows-1252?Q?=92_?=Anti-Asian Immigration Policies A Step Backwards!

[Harold Schiffman]

The Conservatives’ Anti-Asian Immigration Policies A Step Backwards!

Whether it’s to raise the language requirement, to cancel 300,000
applications (most of which were from China and India), or to raise
the requirement of sponsoring parent immigration ($40,000 per head
plus life-time sponsorship), all the new measures have an adverse
effect on Asian immigrants.

By Gabriel Yiu

Once the Conservatives formed a majority government with all the power
to wield, they have been bringing in a lot of changes. Immigration
Minister Jason Kenney has been making so many changes and
announcements that even the most attentive critics have difficulty in
following them. The Conservatives are using this tactic of rapid
changes because they don’t want the public to see what they’re up to.

Whether it’s to raise the language requirement, to cancel 300,000
applications (most of which were from China and India), or to raise
the requirement of sponsoring parent immigration ($40,000 per head
plus life-time sponsorship), all the new measures have an adverse
effect on Asian immigrants. The Conservatives not only want to hinder
future immigration from Asia, they even block the immigration of those
who applied years ago.

But what has upset me most is their level 4 language requirement for
citizenship. The new measure requires immigrants who have been
accepted, who fulfilled their immigration obligations, who have
settled down and lived in Canada, and who have been contributing to
the country, to achieve a minimum standard of CLB 4 (Canada Language
Benchmark level 4) in an English or French test (which includes
listening, speaking, reading and writing)  before being accepted as
citizen.

Canada is indeed an English and French speaking country.  Immigrants’
command of one or both of the official languages would help them in
their lives and in achieving prosperity. At the same time, Canada is a
democratic country where voting is a most sacred fundamental right of
being a citizen.  Looking into Canada’s history, we learn that Asian
immigrants had painful experiences of being discriminated against.  It
takes them generations of struggling and fighting to gain equality.

A century ago, Chinese were discriminated against by the government
and by society.  They were exploited in work, their children’s
education and development were retarded, and they did not have the
right to vote, not to mention to run for public office.  History has
proven that governmental discrimination based on reasons like race and
language is a mistake. It is unjust and it’s against Canadian values.
Yet, today’s Conservative government is reviving that spirit in their
new immigration policies.

The Conservatives’ new requirement will strip away the voting right of
a great many immigrants who having been living in Canada for years,
paying taxes and contributing to their new homeland. I agree that
immigrants should learn English, but the government should employ
encouragement rather than measures that oppress immigrants who have
been an asset to the country. Our history in the past century has
shown that, even with a language barrier, Asian immigrants and their
offspring have contributed immensely to Canada.

In today’s world, when Asia is a dominant player in the global
economy, Asian immigrants with their language capacity, cultures and
relations should be recognized as Canada’s assets instead of being
viewed as a burden. In the past decades, Canada’s generosity and
forgiving attitude have won the world’s respect and the heart of
immigrants.  Canada’s immigration policy has been set according to our
needs and interests. We have welcomed and embraced people from
different parts of the world.  We have taken immigrants according to
criteria like skill, investment and family connection.

In the investor and family immigration classes, even when applicants
have a language barrier, the government would still accept their
application if they’re able to fulfill their obligations to invest or
reunite with their family here in Canada.

But now, the Conservative government wants the investor and family
classes of  immigrants to pass a language exam at level 4 before
they’re allowed to become  citizens.  I have to say that this measure
is outdated, unjust and would turn immigrants with a language barrier
into “second class” citizens.

In the US, the so-called “big melting pot” country, they don’t have
this kind of language requirement for their new citizens.  In Hong
Kong, the place I was born and brought up in, the government doesn’t
require their Caucasian or East Indian residents to speak and read
Chinese before they can cast their vote.

Of course, Chinese are not the only immigrant group with a language
barrier. Asian immigrants from India, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, and
immigrants from some central American, Latin American or eastern
European countries could face the same hurdle.

Canada’s history has clearly illustrated that in the last century, a
language barrier did not hinder immigrants and their offspring from
contributing to society.  So why, in the age of global village, should
Canada take the old path, applying discriminatory policies to restrict
immigrants from becoming citizens and exercising their democratic
right?

To those who are brought up in an English-speaking society, they might
think that learning English or French is not that difficult. But we
should understand that different people have different language
learning capacities.  There’re people who can command several
languages and there’re those who can’t command or write well even in
their own language, let alone a second one.

I have been listening to Japanese songs and watching Japanese films
and TV series since high school; but after more than thirty years, I
don’t think I’ve reached the minimum level of Japanese language
proficiency.

Several years ago, I traveled to Japan. What shocked me was that even
in Tokyo’s top international hotels, their lobby receptionist couldn’t
speak English well.  What I’m saying is, we can’t see others only from
our angle.  Learning English or French may not be a problem for you,
but it can be a problem for other people.

Vancouver is praised for having the best Chinese food in the world,
but have you thought about the real contributors to this fame, those
who worked hard in the  kitchen? How many could pass a language exam
at level 4 in all four skills?  I can tell you that most, if not all,
will not be able to pass and I believe this phenomenon is not unique
to Chinese restaurants. If the chefs were denied their citizenship,
that would be a heavy blow to the Canadian culinary industry.

In the South Asian community, I’ve seen many young women who married
here and who can’t speak English.  I was told many hard-working farm
workers have a language barrier too.

The above are just a few examples.  If the new citizenship language
requirement is implemented, these hard-working immigrants who have
been contributing to their family and to our society would become
“second class” citizens.  The fact is,  new immigrants usually work
longer than those who’re locally born, they have to look after their
children and family, and they have to adapt to the new culture and
environment.  They can function effectively within their community and
to a certain extent outside it. Stripping them of their citizenship
and voting right because of their weakness in English is not going to
improve their language capacity.

Gabriel Yiu is a Chinese-Canadian community activist and NDP candidate
for Vancover-Fraserview rid

http://thelinkpaper.ca/?p=16778

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of the list as to the veracity of a message's contents.
Members who disagree with a message are encouraged to post a rebuttal,
and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
 A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
Moderator)

For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
listinfo/lgpolicy-list
*******************************************

_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list