Canada’s current political climate in my opinion is best described as post-truth. This means that politicians try to appeal to their electorate’s emotions instead of to logic. Politicians don’t rely solely on data during their campaigns but instead use half-truths to spread share their agenda. There is also a lot more information accessible to leaders today than previously, which allows them to create believable campaigns by “cherry-picking” information that supports their arguments. This has been demonstrated by multiple news publications that have been accused of bias either to a liberal or conservative stance. A prime example of this is regarding immigration policy is a recent publication in the Vancouver Sun titled “Syrian family living a good life in Surrey” (Ryan, 2018) depicting a happy and successfully integrated Syrian family living in the greater Vancouver area off government supports.
It appears that due to this post-truth political trend, the opposing political parties do not get the same information that the individual who is in the middle receives. This has allowed for many politicians to sway the opinion of the electorate to their side depending on their alignment. A challenge therefore exists in creating a policy that is practical because it could be hard to gain approval from either side. It has been demonstrated in other countries that people are willing to vote for opinions not supported by international press. There has been a tendency for press coverage to focus on the criticism of conservative ideas and the support of liberal ideas which gives many viewers a false understanding of the support of issues. (Salzman 2018).
In Canada, immigration is necessary to provide labour for most industries. Due to a low birth replacement rate and a large aging baby boomer population, the economic immigrants (coming here to work) are the ones that Canada needs the most. According to Statistics Canada, Canada’s fertility rate stands at 1.61 births per woman which is below the replacement level of 2.1 needed to maintain our economy and social benefits without a drastic change to entitlement policies (StatsCan 2018). Without immigrants, Canada would find itself short of labour (Dion, 2015). The government of Canada’s current immigration policy is accepting 310,000 immigrants in 2018, up from accepting 300,000 in 2017. Each year this number is expected to rise (Government of Canada, 2018).
127 our experts are availableright now
The problem of integration of immigrants and reconciliation with the culture of the citizens still exists. Governments have experienced problems from failing to consider the problems that the indigenous population is experiencing. Historically, these exact integration problems have caused major political conflicts globally. Examples of this include the civil war in Lebanon creates by the infiltration of Palestinians after Black September terrorist attack. The Palestinians refused to integrate and creating a “state within a state” (PBS, n.d). These pockets of non-integrated Palestinians continued attacks on Israel from Lebanon which left the Lebanese feeling disrespected and eventually revolting against them, in a 15-year civil war.
Unplanned immigration can also lead to a strain in resources such as public transport, schools, and housing/shelter. This can lead to a breakdown in services which work towards destroying the town for everyone instead of letting it help some if only a few immigrants had been given access. A study of 12 years-worth of data from 1999-2011 by Statistics Canada has concluded that “65% to 85% of refugee claimants received social assistance shortly after arriving in Canada” and “the percentage of refugee claimants receiving social assistance declined considerably with time in Canada. However, four years after arrival, the rate was still three to five times higher than the rate for Canada overall”. (StatsCan, October 2015) It was observed in California that immigrants used welfare programs at twice the rate of the native population (Camarota, 2007). Many of them lacking necessary education or transferrable credentials.
My rationale is therefore for the Canada to adopt a balanced approach. The current government in place is pro-immigration. The current UN expectations on immigration are extremely unrealistic and it would be better for our government to set its own policy with more stringent standards for acceptance. In Hungary, the parliament has already restricted alien populations from entering the country and only two gain admission each day. There are also stricter policies in place to deal with the entry of illegal aliens which is not within the UN standards for treatment of refugees (UNHCR 2018). These two conflicting policies on immigration are at either end of the spectrum and there should be a focus on finding a happy medium.
Strict and selective border control has proved to be effective in reducing the number of immigrants that can enter a country “irregularly”. Some recent examples of successful border walls included the Israel-Egypt border wall where findings from Harvard International Review Israel’s discovered that while the wall has not stopped all illegal immigration, it has assisted in cutting it down significantly from 17,000 illegal African immigrants in 2011 to just 43 in 2013 (Flores, 2017)
Canada’s unorganized immigration system and relaxed policy in the past has help facilitate terrorist attacks after border security allowed risky individuals into the country. A prime example of this is the case of Algiers terrorist Ahmed Ressam who entered Canada illegally. Although he was detained when caught with a fake passport, he was released after he requested asylum on grounds that he was a victim of state persecution. The asylum request was granted on humanitarian grounds and he was released. Later on he forced a fake Canadian passport and assumed a false identity to evade Canadian officials. Ahmed was arrested in 1999 as he attempted to bomb the LAX airport (Frontline). Canada’s open policy has therefore led to it being a planning point for international terrorism.
