My answer to this question is that it is neither one nor the other option, but it is both at the same time. This answer may seem complex and contradictory but it isn’t. We have to understand all the facts that this system implies and we will see that it is one or
the other or none of them according to the perspective.The system was implemented in first place in order to avoid direct discrimination. That means that it didn’t matter whether the immigrant was black, Asian, Latin, European, Muslim, catholic, gay, white or whatever; the only factor determining if he/she was a desired “future Canadian citizen” was his own personal skills. Nevertheless the system is by nature promoting discrimination. It was not a racial or religious explicit discrimination but however discrimination. It discriminated for example people coming from undeveloped countries that were looking for a better future for they and their families but unfortunately hadn’t had the opportunity for qualified education.
The problem is that by trying to attract only qualified and skilled people they were making a big mistake. They were not thinking about the long term (unqualified worker’s sons could be qualified workers in the future for example) and they have payed a high tax for it. Another big mistake was that by emphasizing skilled immigration through its points system, “Canada has selected for itself the very individuals with the most flexibility and maneuverability in the global, transnational economy, and therefore with the least incentive to stay in Canada or any one spot”; that means that the migrants coming to Canada have a high chance of not staying there due to the increasing possibilities of better jobs and payments (=better lifestyle) in other countries.
Another failure seen about this system was the possibility to violate it. “The efficacy of the points system, with its emphasis on immigrants of a skilled or professional occupational profile, has been mitigated by the number of individuals admitted to Canada as dependents, family members, or refugees”, meaning that it was easy to avoid the point system by fitting in one of these kinds of immigrants (which were noticeably higher than the number of the “wanted skilled immigrants”). “Family class immigrants tend to have lower incomes and higher unemployment and social assistance use”. This proves that the system that was intended to attract only qualified workers in order to promote economic growth, protect Canadian borders of those “unwanted” visitors, and avoid any direct discrimination; finally turned against itself generating some of the problems that was trying to solve.
References:
Verbeeten, Dvid. The past and future of immigration to Canada.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario