MORE FIREWORKS ON PROPOSED IMMIGRATION LEGISLATION

New law would put skilled immigrants before families, opposition MPs say

GLORIA GALLOWAY

From Tuesday's Globe and Mail

April 29, 2008 at 4:19 AM EDT

OTTAWA — Opposition MPs accused Immigration Minister Diane Finley yesterday of secretly planning to cut back on the number of immigrants who are allowed to come to Canada to be reunited with family members.

Ms. Finley says the intent of immigration legislation that has been tucked into an omnibus budget bill is not to reduce the number of family-class immigrants. The aim, she told the Commons finance committee, is to shorten the queue of immigrants that has developed because her department must process applications in the order they are received.

She said that means the skilled workers that businesses need might wait for years to come to Canada.

The new law would allow her to establish the categories of workers that will be processed - and reject applications from potential newcomers who don't meet those criteria.

But Liberal finance critic John McCallum pointed out that the new law would also allow the Immigration Minister to reduce the number of people who come to Canada to be reunited with loved ones.

Mr. McCallum said it is logical to assume that, if certain skilled workers are given high priority, family reunifications will be given a lower priority.

"If you are fast-tracking one group, you are slow-tracking another group, which is the family class," he said. "Essentially, you are putting more emphasis on newcomers as commodities, as workers, rather than newcomers as people."

Ms. Finley responded that the Conservative government does consider family reunifications a priority. "And, if at a future point in time, we decide that is the priority, they could be fast-tracked just like any of the worker categories."

Ms. Finley replied that there are millions of people in China and India alone who qualify for admission. "That doesn't mean that we can accept them all," she said.

Because the immigration changes are included in a budget bill, a confidence matter, they must be passed by the House of Commons or the country would face an election.

When asked why she decided against introducing standalone legislation, Ms. Finley said some good laws have been sidelined for up to two years in the minority Parliament. "We couldn't afford to let that happen with immigration. We have to act now," she said.

And it seems the Liberals' distaste for an election means the tactic will work.

Despite their opposition to what is being proposed, the Liberals have given no indication that they are prepared to bring the government down over immigration policy.

"We are certainly going to be against it. Whether we vote against it in sufficient numbers to provoke an election is a decision for our leader," Mr. McCallum told reporters. The Liberals would rescind any Conservative immigration changes they deem unpalatable when they return to office, he said.

When it was pointed out to Mr. McCallum that the Conservatives could form the government for many years, and any legislation passed by this Parliament could be in effect for a long time, he said, "That's possible, but it's not my decision as to the timing of the election."