What I try to bring in this forum is fortunately accepted by media and other well known organizations too but still I am sure some of us would not accept this fact as they agree to disagree:


Apr. 14, 2004. 01:00 AM

CAROL GOAR

In the eyes of the world, Canada is an open, tolerant country that does a remarkably good job of accommodating newcomers.

In our own eyes — and those of recent immigrants — we are a nation coasting on an outdated reputation.

For the past decade, we've done a poor job of integrating foreign-trained workers into our job market. We've closed our eyes to rising poverty levels among new immigrants. We've jacked up the entry qualifications to get into Canada, but denied professionals from other lands the chance to use their skills.

The discrepancy between fact and fantasy was driven home to Christopher Worswick during a recent visit to Australia. The Carleton University economist, who taught at the University of Melbourne for five years, went back to his old campus to deliver a paper on the declining earnings of Canadian immigrants. "They were surprised at the difficulty we're having," he said.

Since his return, Worswick has written a study for the C.D. Howe Research Institute in which he tries to explain the disappointing economic performance of recent Canadian immigrants and offer some remedies.

The problem is not that Ottawa is letting in too many of the world's needy and dispossessed, he says. Today's immigrants are better educated and more highly skilled than any previous generation. Yet Canadian employers are reluctant to hire them. This suggests to him that there's something wrong with the government's selection criteria.

Worswick's first recommendation is that Ottawa freeze immigration levels until it can ensure new arrivals a reasonable chance of economic success in Canada. His second recommendation is that applicants with prearranged jobs be given preference over those with hard-to-assess paper qualifications.

Both proposals are controversial.

Capping immigration runs counter to government policy. The Liberals have set a target of increasing the nation's population by 1 per cent a year through immigration. That would mean letting in 310,000 immigrants.

Ottawa currently admits approximately 225,000 newcomers. Holding the number there while the government tries to fix what's wrong could mean no growth in the labour force for years.

Canada can't afford stasis. It is heading into a decade in which the baby boomers will start retiring. There aren't enough native-born workers to replace them. Without an increase in immigration, jobs will go unfilled and tax revenues will decline.

"You don't burn down the housing you're living in," said Ratna Omidvar, executive director of the Maytree Foundation, which has been helping immigrants establish a foothold for 17 years. "You don't cut off your nose to spite your face."

Worswick's second idea — downgrading foreign degrees and work experience that Canadian employers don't value — raises different problems, both practical and perceptual.

He acknowledges that ranking qualifications by country and university wouldn't be easy and could expose Ottawa to charges of discrimination. But it is unrealistic, Worswick counters, for the government to treat all types of education and work experience equally when the private sector clearly doesn't.

"To take an extreme example, compare an engineering degree from a regional university in China to one from a well-known university in the United States. Obviously, the American degree gets primacy," he said.

He suggests the government seek help from graduate admissions committees at Canadian universities and corporate recruiters to draw up a list of preferred institutions. Degrees or certificates from these academies would be given extra weight.

There is one major gap in Worswick's study. He pays little attention to the settlement assistance that immigrants receive once they get here.

To those working in the field, that is where the greatest room for improvement lies. Omidvar would like to see three specific reforms.

First, she says, Ottawa should take advantage of a waiting period (typically two years) between the time an immigration application is filed and approval is granted to help would-be newcomers understand the job market, upgrade their qualifications if necessary, and hit the ground running.

Next, the government should hand over responsibility for integrating new arrivals into the job market to the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. The Department of Human Resources Development is now doing it — badly, in her view.

Third, cities should be given an explicit role and adequate resources to get immigrants off to a solid start in their new home. She cites the newly formed Toronto Region Council for Immigrant Employment as an example of how public officials, employers, organized labour and the voluntary sector can work together at the local level to arrange mentoring, job placements and internship programs.

It is encouraging that economists and social activists are talking openly about the struggles new immigrants face.

It would be better if they talked together. Both bring valuable perspectives to a badly needed debate.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thanks and regards.
Biomed

-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Change before you have to" : Jack Welch

Isn't this an election year!
You will see and read such stories in coming months, but to no avail.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sunil Sharma, P.Eng.

Yeah you got it right
and that is the reason people are getting their citizenship within few weeks too

Thanks and regards.
Biomed

-----------------------------------------------------------------
"Change before you have to" : Jack Welch