Will Greece be the 21st century equivalent of 19th century Ireland? :hmm:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/02/16/greek-exodus-workers-flee-to-canada-australia.html
QuoteGreek Exodus: Workers Flee to Canada and Australia
Feb 16, 2012 6:22 AM EST
Forget austerity. Thousands of Greeks, hung out to dry by the EU's bailout requirements, are fleeing in record numbers—as far away as Canada and Australia. Barbie Latza Nadeau reports.
Lambrousi Harikleia reached her breaking point on Wednesday when her boss at the Greek Housing Authority in Athens announced that, thanks to the Greek government's far-reaching austerity measures, both she and her husband would be losing their jobs. Harikleia and her husband, who have a disabled child, climbed out the window of their office building and threatened to jump to their deaths. "At least if we are dead someone will have to take care of our child," she can be heard saying from her dangerous perch. After over five hours on the ledge, police were able to coax her to safety, but she still won't be getting her job back.
Harikleia is one of thousands of increasingly desperate Greeks who cannot see a future under the current Greek austerity measures. The government has squandered its savings and is mired in a debt crisis that is no longer sustainable without help from the EU—which is clamoring for drastic cuts. But it is everyday Greek citizens who say they are paying the highest price for the government's mishandling of its assets. Youth unemployment has climbed to just under 50 percent, and the future looks bleak. Austerity measures, which have included stinging cuts in wages, pensions and public sector jobs, are being demanded by the EU as part of a massive bailout deal that will or won't happen in March. If the bailout fails, Greece will default on its loans and face expulsion from the euro, the EU's common monetary currency.
While frustrated members of the EU debate whether Greece's attempts to manage its debt are good enough to warrant the bailout funds, many Greeks are either taking to the streets to protest or hitting the road altogether.
In the last year, thousands of Greek workers have left the country. "There is no choice but to get out," says 24 year-old Kostas Papadakis, who was one of many Greek nationals waiting for the Canadian Embassy in Rome to open on Monday morning. He and his girlfriend traveled to Rome last week after what he says was the last straw. "There is no work, there are no services. What is there to stay for?"
In the last six months since the Greek economic debacle hit its pinnacle, the Rome embassies to Canada and Australia have seen applications for work permits and visas nearly double. Rome embassies process Greek and Balkan country applications for the Commonwealth countries, but instead of working through local consulates in Athens, many Greeks are using their EU travel rights to come directly to Rome to try to get the necessary paperwork to leave. Papadakis says the local consulates are so overwhelmed that they have stopped taking new applications for visas altogether. "I feel like we are the first wave of people who realize just how serious this is," says Papadakis, who has an engineering degree. "Even if we do find jobs, there is no way to earn a sustainable living any more."
John Yannitsos, head of the Calgary Hellenic Society, reports receiving hundreds of calls from Greeks with Canadian ties who want to move to Canda. The society can provide them with information, but they cannot offer any financial or placement assistance—meaning once they get there, there is no guarantee they will have a better life. "A while ago, it was in the dozens [of calls]," he told Calgary newspaper Metro. "Now we're approaching a hundred-plus inquiries, and that's just in Calgary."
Would-be Greek immigrants are also flocking to Australia in record numbers. Greeks make up the seventh-largest ethnic group in Australia, and many established family members are sending money to support their families in Greece or bringing family members to Australia to start over. The Australian Greek Welfare Society and the Greek Orthodox Communities of Melbourne and Victoria have formed a special task force to deal with the influx.
Bill Papastergiadis, head of the Greek Orthodox Community of Melbourne, is lobbying the government to waive visa requirements that prohibit young Greeks from working when they visit the country. "We have to give these young people an opportunity to break the cycle, earn a living and then go back to Greece to invest. Otherwise we risk an end to the Greek culture."
For people like Greek national Papadakis, returning to Greece is not on the horizon. "I have to get out and make it first," he says. "And then I'll have to wait and see if there is anything left to go home to."
Yuck. Hopefully they settle in Ontario. Let them trade one bankrupt land for another.
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2012, 11:03:24 PM
Yuck. Hopefully they settle in Ontario. Let them trade one bankrupt land for another.
Unfortunately for you they seem to be aiming closer to home! :menace:
QuoteJohn Yannitsos, head of the Calgary Hellenic Society, reports receiving hundreds of calls from Greeks with Canadian ties who want to move to Canda. The society can provide them with information, but they cannot offer any financial or placement assistance—meaning once they get there, there is no guarantee they will have a better life. "A while ago, it was in the dozens [of calls]," he told Calgary newspaper Metro. "Now we're approaching a hundred-plus inquiries, and that's just in Calgary."
I hate communists.
Stupid Greeks will never figure out the quadrant system in Calgary. They'll get lost looking for places to rob and starve to death.
I hope some of them come to HK and open some real Greek restaurants. I greatly enjoyed Greek food in Vancouver and I am very disappointed with the fake and toned-down version of Greek food being offered in HK.
I miss the Greek place in San Antonio with a buffet lunch and belly dancers. :(
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2012, 10:57:42 PM
Will Greece be the 21st century equivalent of 19th century Ireland? :hmm:
What do you mean the 19th century? Vancouver is full of recent Irish immigrants.
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2012, 11:11:20 PM
Stupid Greeks will never figure out the quadrant system in Calgary. They'll get lost looking for places to rob and starve to death.
Damn you're stupid Neil. How else can you explain the fact that Edmonton, due to expansion, has developeded into a quadrant system?
In Germany every little town has its Greek restaurant. Oddly, Vienna seems to have more Indian and Persian places than Greek. I miss good Bifteki.
Quote from: Jacob on February 16, 2012, 11:46:18 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on February 16, 2012, 10:57:42 PM
Will Greece be the 21st century equivalent of 19th century Ireland? :hmm:
What do you mean the 19th century? Vancouver is full of recent Irish immigrants.
Ireland didn't stop exporting her youth until the 90s. It was a real mark of success that people wanted to stay in Ireland.
One of the reasons the current crisis is so sad is that Ireland's gone back from the diaspora returning to the young leaving for greater opportunities elsewhere :(
Beware thoug: Greeks migrating means Greeks founding colonies. And after Greeks founding colonies come Romans conquering them... :p
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2012, 11:11:20 PM
Stupid Greeks will never figure out the quadrant system in Calgary. They'll get lost looking for places to rob and starve to death.
One good prairie winter, and they'll leave for Florida.
Quote from: Barrister on February 17, 2012, 01:18:37 AM
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2012, 11:11:20 PM
Stupid Greeks will never figure out the quadrant system in Calgary. They'll get lost looking for places to rob and starve to death.
Damn you're stupid Neil. How else can you explain the fact that Edmonton, due to expansion, has developeded into a quadrant system?
Edmonton has been in a quadrant for decades, but everything anybody might want to go to is in the NW, so we can just act like those other quadrants don't exist.
Quote from: Josephus on February 17, 2012, 08:24:48 AM
Quote from: Neil on February 16, 2012, 11:11:20 PM
Stupid Greeks will never figure out the quadrant system in Calgary. They'll get lost looking for places to rob and starve to death.
One good prairie winter, and they'll leave for Florida.
Or they'll start burning cars.
I'd be concerned.
Coincidence that the Government just introduced leglislation to make refugee cliams from safe European countries more difficult?
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 17, 2012, 02:05:25 PM
Coincidence that the Government just introduced leglislation to make refugee cliams from safe European countries more difficult?
Greece is the least of your worries. If Spain and Italy eventually implode and start losing as many people as Ireland does now, we're talking about millions looking for a new home.
Exactly. That is perhaps why the new refugee rules are being put into place - the Eurozone coutries are all considered "safe" in terms of human rights abuses. We dont want a flood of economic refugees posing as legitimate refugees.
I'd expect that the economic refugees originating from Europe would come in under the existing immigration laws - young people under working holiday visas and older people qualifying on education and experience in relevant fields.
The whole "safe" countries thing, I expect, is to prevent refugees from "forum shopping" as it were. It's been a big thing in Europe for a while. Basically, the idea is that if you're fleeing, say, human rights abuses in Syria and you want to claim asylum in Canada, you can't stop in Italy (or other designated "safe" countries) first. When ever you get out of the country you're fleeing from, to somewhere "safe", you have to apply there. You can't move on to Canada afterwards. The effect is that the safe countries closest to problem areas will be stuck with the majority of asylum seekers. This, of course, makes sense from a Conservative viewpoint in that Canada generally want well educated economically dynamic immigrants, not people who are scarred from civil strife and may need support.
On top of that, I'd think that the majority of Greek, Italian and/or Spanish immigrants coming to Canada to Canada for economic reasons are exactly the kind of immigrants that we, as a country, want and need. In general, I'd think if you think your economic future sucks and you get your shit together enough to make it to Canada as in immigrant, you have more than the average amount of drive to succeed. I'm sure that there are plumbers, architects, registered nurses, pharmacists, biologists and so on in Spain, Italy and Greece who'd make great contributions to Canada.
Though, on that note, I notice that the Conservative have recently put a maximum cap on the number of skilled workers Canada accepts. I'm not quite sure how I feel about that. That's probably a more likely vector for trying to control immigration from Europe than the "safe country" legislation (though I'm not convinced that the Conservative government is necessarily worried about such immigration).
I think that Jacob probably has the right of it (except vis-a-vis wanting filthy Greek immigrants), as he is an experienced immigrant who married into a race of folks who trick their way into the country.
Being interested in immigration issues is something that runs in my family, even back in the old country.
I thought they were doing this to keep gypsies out? When we made it harder for Romanians to get in here was a spike in Czech refuge claims. So the made it harder for
Czechs to come and there was a spike in Hungarian claimants. Sounds like
Canada said "fine, screw it, no Europeans can claim refuge status".
Quote from: Jacob on February 17, 2012, 08:53:33 PM
Being interested in immigration issues is something that runs in my family, even back in the old country.
OK Slargos.
Well, that sucks. Calgary is in my Top 3 Canadian cities to emigrate to, and now I have to cross it off the list because of all the filthy Greeks.
You are mixing apples and oranges there Jacob. Of course we can take people that have the skills we need. What we dont want are the people that are unemployable in their own country to come here under the guise of a refugee claim so that they can become unemployable in this country.
Real refugees yes. Fake refugees no.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:21:11 PM
You are mixing apples and oranges there Jacob. Of course we can take people that have the skills we need. What we dont want are the people that are unemployable in their own country to come here under the guise of a refugee claim so that they can become unemployable in this country.
Real refugees yes. Fake refugees no.
So this is basically aimed at gypsies, gay Polish lawyers and opponents of the Hungarian regime like HVC says? I guess that makes sense too.
Quote from: The Brain on February 18, 2012, 02:43:32 AM
Quote from: Jacob on February 17, 2012, 08:53:33 PM
Being interested in immigration issues is something that runs in my family, even back in the old country.
OK Slargos.
Pretty much for some of them, unfortunately.
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 01:35:04 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:21:11 PM
You are mixing apples and oranges there Jacob. Of course we can take people that have the skills we need. What we dont want are the people that are unemployable in their own country to come here under the guise of a refugee claim so that they can become unemployable in this country.
Real refugees yes. Fake refugees no.
So this is basically aimed at gypsies, gay Polish lawyers and opponents of the Hungarian regime like HVC says? I guess that makes sense too.
This is aimed at people who try to get in to Canada claiming they are a refugee when there is no valid refugee claim. Those people are normally referred to as economic refugees - people who try to game the refugee system because they realize they would not get in as a bona fide immigrant. Seems pretty clear.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 01:35:04 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:21:11 PM
You are mixing apples and oranges there Jacob. Of course we can take people that have the skills we need. What we dont want are the people that are unemployable in their own country to come here under the guise of a refugee claim so that they can become unemployable in this country.
Real refugees yes. Fake refugees no.
So this is basically aimed at gypsies, gay Polish lawyers and opponents of the Hungarian regime like HVC says? I guess that makes sense too.
This is aimed at people who try to get in to Canada claiming they are a refugee when there is no valid refugee claim. Those people are normally referred to as economic refugees - people who try to game the refugee system because they realize they would not get in as a bona fide immigrant. Seems pretty clear.
Thing is, I suspect that the economic refugees are more likely to have useful skills. Like doctors and scientist and engineers. Someone who has the drive to put himself through school to get a useful degree, is probably the first to become dissatisfied when economic prospects get poor and the first to have the resources to move across the ocean.
I imagine that Greece will be suffering from a "Brain drain" for the next few years.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
This is aimed at people who try to get in to Canada claiming they are a refugee when there is no valid refugee claim. Those people are normally referred to as economic refugees - people who try to game the refugee system because they realize they would not get in as a bona fide immigrant. Seems pretty clear.
Well duh! :lol:
Who are those people?
I mean, I can see the HVC analysis having something to it - Roma and people of other traveller communities - could (and may have) make the argument that they are being discriminated against or even persecuted in Europe and thus have a valid refugee claim. I suppose, too, that gay people from some of the more retrograde East European countries may be able to make such an argument. In that case this law that says "you can't be a refugee from Europe. Full stop" makes a lot of sense.
But to guard against your average Giorgos or Yannis from Greece claiming they're refugees? That doesn't really make sense to me. What grounds - even outlandishly spurious ones - could they have to claim that?
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2012, 01:50:31 PM
Thing is, I suspect that the economic refugees are more likely to have useful skills. Like doctors and scientist and engineers.
Interesting suspicion of yours. Do you have anything to base that on?
fyi, as Jacob has already mentioned there is a separate way for people with actual skills to enter the country - like doctors, scentists and engineers.
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 02:06:26 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 01:44:01 PM
This is aimed at people who try to get in to Canada claiming they are a refugee when there is no valid refugee claim. Those people are normally referred to as economic refugees - people who try to game the refugee system because they realize they would not get in as a bona fide immigrant. Seems pretty clear.
Well duh! :lol:
Exactly.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:08:54 PMExactly.
:lol:
What I was trying to get at is that when you said:
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 17, 2012, 02:05:25 PM
Coincidence that the Government just introduced legislation to make refugee claims from safe European countries more difficult?
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 17, 2012, 02:45:54 PM
Exactly. That is perhaps why the new refugee rules are being put into place - the Eurozone coutries are all considered "safe" in terms of human rights abuses. We dont want a flood of economic refugees posing as legitimate refugees.
That seemed to imply that you think that the new legislation to make refugee claims from safe European countries more difficult is in response to the economic crisis there, because it is likely that there'll be a significant increase in people wanting to immigrate for economic reasons posing as refugees.
Now, I think that it is unlikely to happen and thus I think that the Government has other reasons - most likely reasonable ones - for introducing the legislation. However, I'm not terribly informed on the legislation so I could very well be wrong. I was hoping to hear your reasoning if you do indeed believe what I thought you implied.
Jacob, there was a story on the CBC morning show this morning about local immagration agencies being overwelmed with calls from Greece. I think the main purpose of the legislation is to ensure that as things get worse in Europe that procedures for separating legitimate refugees from those claiming refugee status for economic purposes - ie non legitimate claims are put in place. This seems a good start.
As an aside, CC, I was mildly confused by your use of the term "economic refugee." I've always taken it to mean just another way to say "someone who immigrates for economic reasons" (whether it's an investor immigrant or someone who sneaks across the border to get fruit picker jobs) whereas you're using it to say "someone who claims to be a political refugee, but in reality is looking for refugee status because they want the economic benefits of immigration."
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 02:29:28 PM
As an aside, CC, I was mildly confused by your use of the term "economic refugee." I've always taken it to mean just another way to say "someone who immigrates for economic reasons" (whether it's an investor immigrant or someone who sneaks across the border to get fruit picker jobs) whereas you're using it to say "someone who claims to be a political refugee, but in reality is looking for refugee status because they want the economic benefits of immigration."
You are confusing the word refugee with immigrant. There is nothing wrong with economic immigrants. As you know we have a specific system for those people and as you may recall I have often argued that we need more such immigrants.
Refugees are a different matter completely. Refugees must be able to establish not that they are a political refugee but that their human rights are being violated to such an extent that they have a fear for their life. What I object to, and what I think the legislation aims to address, are people who have no such valid claim (ie they live in a country where their rights are not violated) and they are simply coming because they see greater economic opportunity. If that is the reason they want to come they should not pose as a refugee. They should apply as an immigrant like everyone else.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:28:38 PM
Jacob, there was a story on the CBC morning show this morning about local immagration agencies being overwelmed with calls from Greece. I think the main purpose of the legislation is to ensure that as things get worse in Europe that procedures for separating legitimate refugees from those claiming refugee status for economic purposes - ie non legitimate claims are put in place. This seems a good start.
I have no doubts that lots of Greeks would want to immigrate. This would explain the many calls to the local immigration agencies which, as far as I'm aware, deal with non-refugee immigration. I've seen no indication at all (but could've missed it), that Greeks have or are going to start claiming refugee status; I can't fathom what the claim would be based on such that you need extra legislation to say "because you're from Greece, you don't qualify." I think it's much more likely aimed at marginalized groups within Europe who might have more legitimate claims of being ill treated, but whom the Government considers undesirable or undeserving.
I was just wondering if you have something more to go on when you think this is a good start to prevent a future surge in spurious refugee claims originating in Europe - something in the legislation or some other developments that you're aware of. If not, I'll just disagree with your hunch and go with my own, that it is targeted at pre-existing groups that tend towards spurious refugee claims already (or who might have legitimate claims, but are seen as undesirable by the Government). In other words, when you ask if it's a coincidence, my immediate answer is "yes, probably." Not the end of the world, of course :bowler:
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:34:36 PMYou are confusing the word refugee with immigrant. There is nothing wrong with economic immigrants. As you know we have a specific system for those people and as you may recall I have often argued that we need more such immigrants.
Refugees are a different matter completely. Refugees must be able to establish not that they are a political refugee but that their human rights are being violated to such an extent that they have a fear for their life. What I object to, and what I think the legislation aims to address, are people who have no such valid claim (ie they live in a country where their rights are not violated) and they are simply coming because they see greater economic opportunity. If that is the reason they want to come they should not pose as a refugee. They should apply as an immigrant like everyone else.
No disagreement here, except on the usage of the term "economic refugee". I don't really like the term used the way you use it because it sort of impugns both "economic" (a perfectly legitimate reason to immigrate) and "refugee" (someone fleeing something bad) to make a compound that means something bad. Of course, if it's widely used I'll just have to suck it up, but your usage is the first time I've noticed that particular meaning. Is it a National Post thing?
Well, and I disagree with your hunch about the reason for this legislation, but all I have is a hunch of my own.
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 02:38:16 PM
I can't fathom what the claim would be based on such that you need extra legislation to say "because you're from Greece, you don't qualify."
Not sure what you base that on. Apparently upward of 95% of refugee claims from Europe are rejected as invalid. The problem under the old system after being rejected they still got to stay in the country pending an appeal which can take years to complete. Under the new system they are removed pending their appeal.
The old system allowed a gateway for people to enter the country and stay on a bogus claim. Surely you see the attaction of people trying to gain entry in this way when they would have no chance of gaining entry through the legitimate immigration process? Make a bogus claim - stay for years. Where is the down side in that system?
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 02:43:33 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:34:36 PMYou are confusing the word refugee with immigrant. There is nothing wrong with economic immigrants. As you know we have a specific system for those people and as you may recall I have often argued that we need more such immigrants.
Refugees are a different matter completely. Refugees must be able to establish not that they are a political refugee but that their human rights are being violated to such an extent that they have a fear for their life. What I object to, and what I think the legislation aims to address, are people who have no such valid claim (ie they live in a country where their rights are not violated) and they are simply coming because they see greater economic opportunity. If that is the reason they want to come they should not pose as a refugee. They should apply as an immigrant like everyone else.
No disagreement here, except on the usage of the term "economic refugee". I don't really like the term used the way you use it because it sort of impugns both "economic" (a perfectly legitimate reason to immigrate) and "refugee" (someone fleeing something bad) to make a compound that means something bad. Of course, if it's widely used I'll just have to suck it up, but your usage is the first time I've noticed that particular meaning. Is it a National Post thing?
Well, and I disagree with your hunch about the reason for this legislation, but all I have is a hunch of my own.
Like the phrase or not a person who claims they are a refugee but they are doing so only for economic reasons has to have some label. What would you call them? fyi, it has been a term used for years. I am surprised you have not heard it used before now.
edit: and a National Post thing? Really? More of your feared hidden agenda?
Here is as good a description as any for where economic refugee comes from
QuoteThe use of term "economic refugee" can be tracked as far back to the late 1990′s and replaces all other terms (such as "illegal immigrant", "undocumented immigrant", "illegal alien", etc.) when discussing immigration policy. It is not clear who originally coined the term "economic refugee" (see side bar for links to various publications across decades that have used the term), but it was perhaps best personafied in the 2001 film UPROOTED: Refugee of the Global Economy and in the 2006 "The Framing of Immigration" essay that was written by Professor of Linguistics George Lakoff and his colleague Sam Ferguson. The essay served as the inspiration behind the launch of Project Economic Refugee and was originally published on the now-defunct Rockridge Institute. In that essay, the American public was urged to recognize that the "issue of illegal immigration" is first and foremost a HUMANITARIAN matter that has many layers of complexity
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:46:41 PM
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 02:38:16 PM
I can't fathom what the claim would be based on such that you need extra legislation to say "because you're from Greece, you don't qualify."
Not sure what you base that on. Apparently upward of 95% of refugee claims from Europe are rejected as invalid. The problem under the old system after being rejected they still got to stay in the country pending an appeal which can take years to complete. Under the new system they are removed pending their appeal.
The old system allowed a gateway for people to enter the country and stay on a bogus claim. Surely you see the attaction of people trying to gain entry in this way when they would have no chance of gaining entry through the legitimate immigration process? Make a bogus claim - stay for years. Where is the down side in that system?
Ah, okay that makes sense then.
Kinda sucks for the 5% though. I wonder if there are any provisions for them
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:48:34 PM
Like the phrase or not a person who claims they are a refugee but they are doing so only for economic reasons has to have some label. What would you call them? fyi, it has been a term used for years. I am surprised you have not heard it used before now.
Here is as good a description as any for where economic refugee comes from
QuoteThe use of term "economic refugee" can be tracked as far back to the late 1990′s and replaces all other terms (such as "illegal immigrant", "undocumented immigrant", "illegal alien", etc.) when discussing immigration policy. It is not clear who originally coined the term "economic refugee" (see side bar for links to various publications across decades that have used the term), but it was perhaps best personafied in the 2001 film UPROOTED: Refugee of the Global Economy and in the 2006 "The Framing of Immigration" essay that was written by Professor of Linguistics George Lakoff and his colleague Sam Ferguson. The essay served as the inspiration behind the launch of Project Economic Refugee and was originally published on the now-defunct Rockridge Institute. In that essay, the American public was urged to recognize that the "issue of illegal immigration" is first and foremost a HUMANITARIAN matter that has many layers of complexity
Convincingly argued and supported. Point conceded.
Quoteedit: and a National Post thing? Really? More of your feared hidden agenda?
:lol:
Yes :blush:
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 03:05:09 PM
Kinda sucks for the 5% though. I wonder if there are any provisions for them
The new legislation does not prevent them from applying. The legislation changed the appeal process only. So presumably those 5% of valid claimants will be unaffected.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 03:36:01 PM
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 03:05:09 PM
Kinda sucks for the 5% though. I wonder if there are any provisions for them
The new legislation does not prevent them from applying. The legislation changed the appeal process only. So presumably those 5% of valid claimants will be unaffected.
Ah... so it's basically a stab at the whole "people abuse the appeals process and stay in the country for years and years collecting welfare when they don't have a claim" complaint. Sounds reasonable on the face of it.
Yeah, that is what I understand it to be.
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 04:12:17 PM
Yeah, that is what I understand it to be.
Well given the government's recent record on immigration, I'm willing to take it on faith that they're being sensible on this as well until shown otherwise.
:o Never thought you'd hear me say something like that about the Conservatives, did you?
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:34:36 PMWhat I object to, and what I think the legislation aims to address, are people who have no such valid claim (ie they live in a country where their rights are not violated)
Only problem is identifying "countries where their rights are not violated", and the Conservative record thus far is not encouraging as clearly, some rights (i.e., domestic violence) are not as important as others (ensuring good economic relations with Canada). Case in point, recently, Mexico.
Quote from: Oexmelin on February 20, 2012, 06:23:13 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:34:36 PMWhat I object to, and what I think the legislation aims to address, are people who have no such valid claim (ie they live in a country where their rights are not violated)
Only problem is identifying "countries where their rights are not violated", and the Conservative record thus far is not encouraging as clearly, some rights (i.e., domestic violence) are not as important as others (ensuring good economic relations with Canada). Case in point, recently, Mexico.
I'd imagine that it's purely based on considering domestic violence something that the judicial system in "safe countries" is perfectly capable of handling; that or, thinking that claiming domestic violence is to easy a thing to claim for economic refugees.
How does "good economic relations with Canada" enter into it?
I'm an economic refugee, let me in Canada!
Quote from: crazy canuck on February 20, 2012, 02:08:22 PM
Quote from: Razgovory on February 20, 2012, 01:50:31 PM
Thing is, I suspect that the economic refugees are more likely to have useful skills. Like doctors and scientist and engineers.
Interesting suspicion of yours. Do you have anything to base that on?
fyi, as Jacob has already mentioned there is a separate way for people with actual skills to enter the country - like doctors, scentists and engineers.
Yep, I elaborate on it after the first two sentences.
Quote from: Jacob on February 20, 2012, 06:28:39 PM
I'd imagine that it's purely based on considering domestic violence something that the judicial system in "safe countries" is perfectly capable of handling; that or, thinking that claiming domestic violence is to easy a thing to claim for economic refugees.
How does "good economic relations with Canada" enter into it?
As for "purely based", this is precisely a very, very grey zone. How does one deal with intentions? Is the letter of the law enough? How does one evaluate the actual actions? All of these require a) bureaucratic guidelines, which in turn depend on b) political judgment. Nothing from this government leads me to be terribly optimistic about either, considering their recurring desire to let Ministers do as they please and their complete lack of transparency. Hence, the recent bill removes the responsibility of establishing the list of "safe countries" from a panel of human rights experts to give it solely to the Minister himself, who in turn will base his judgement on the Hearing commission which has been conveniently packed with Conservative candidates who were defeated last elections.
The government has had little scrupules in tarring, say, all the Tamil refugees a year back as "potential threats" and keeping them in jail, but very little in denouncing or acting against countries where economic interests were greater. The case of Paola Ortiz is a good example: she asked for refugee status on the grounds that she feared for her life because her husband, a police officer, was violent, dangerous, and would never be prosecuted. A report from Immigration Canada from 2003 states: "Mexican society in general perceive domestic violence as a problem pertaining to the private sphere and as normal behaviour. This is why police rarely intervenes in such instances". But perhaps the situation has changed? A recent publication, dated 2010, mentions that only half the Mexican states consider domestic violence as a crime. In two thirds, non consensual relations between husband and wife are not a crime. In eight of those states, there are no shelter for women.
I'm not sure I follow you Oex, how does "good economic relations" enter into that?
Stop trying to steal our fruit pickers.
We definitely have been having a boom for Greek restaurants in Poland lately.