As of June 26,2010, every immigration applicant in the Skilled Worker or the Canada Experience Class categories must take a language proficiency test, either IELTS for English or TEF for French, no exceptions. This is ridiculous , as highlighted in the story from the Globe and Mail below, published today, where American PhDs in English teaching as professors of literature at a Canadian university are requested to take a language test.
This situation is the result of political correctness taken to its highest level of stupidity. Why? How did this ridiculous result cam about? Here is why:
Language proficiency for immigrants is a MUST. Evey single study shows that lack of language proficiency impairs immigrants' abilities to adapt to society and integrate into the labour force, as employers demand appropriate speaking, reading and writing skills. That is beyond any question and is a laudable goal. It is also a key building block of society. But why require US, UK, or French -born and educated people to do this? Isn't this ridiculous? Yes, but the bureaucrats, in their wisdom, decided not to make exceptions. presumably due to fear of being accused to favour immigrants from certain countries to the detriment of those who are not English or French speaking.
It would be very easy for the government to create a list of countries whose citizens, as long as they are born, educated and living there, should be exempt from the language tests. Obvious examples are those born in the US, UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc,. who are born and educated in English , or those born and educated in France or other officially French-speaking nations. Where the sticking point lies is in how to deal with those who are born in countries where English or French are not the official language, but then migrate to other countries to be educated or work in English or French, often their language abilities are somewhat below average, particularly if they study or work in subjects where language is not a critical component (i.e computer science, math, chemistry, etc). The other area of concern are those who come from countries where, although English or French are official languages, the education level is so poor that their language abilities are substantially below par: some countries in the developing world fit that description.
Having said all this, there has to be a better and more common sense way to deal with this problem, other than requiring US, French and UK citizens to take the test. Common sense must find a voice in the immigration process. While the government demands language tests from all skilled workers, the real problem is the lack of language ability by sponsored relatives and refugees, which imposes an unacceptably high cost on taxpayer-funded language classes and has long-term financial consequences for the migrants, who have a hard time finding jobs and integrating into the labour force. That is the real crux of the problem, but governments do not wish to deal with that due to the potential political fallout.
English profs not amused by Canada’s immigration pop quiz - The Globe and Mail
English profs not amused by Canada’s immigration pop quiz
Sara Landreth and her husband, James Brooke-Smith, teach English literature at the University of Ottawa. Both have doctorates in English literature, but Canada's immigration rules require each of them to take a $280 test proving they are fluent in the language. Brigitte Bouvier for The Globe and Mail
New rules require a $280 language test, even if you hold a PhD in literature
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
Published on Wednesday, Jul. 28, 2010 10:30PM EDT
Last updated on Thursday, Jul. 29, 2010 12:24AM EDT
She has a PhD in English literature. She has been hired to teach English literature to Canada’s budding scholars. Yet her application for immigration will not be processed unless she submits to a $280 English language test, thanks to a ministerial instruction signed by Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney last month.
“It certainly strikes me as ridiculous and a bit ludicrous,” Dr. Landreth said. “The irony of someone who’s immigrating to Canada to teach English being asked to take an English test is probably not lost on most people.”
It might seem no more than a bureaucratic hassle, but critics say the decision runs roughshod over immigration law, which states that applicants don’t have to write the test if they can provide other evidence, in writing, of their proficiency in an official language. In response, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration said that in the past, written submissions had to be evaluated by immigration officers; an independently administered test will help prevent fraud and ensure a fair and transparent method of evaluation, a spokeswoman said.
Dr. Landreth, 30, has a tenure-track position at the University of Ottawa, where she has worked for the last year on a temporary permit. She is American by birth and moved to Canada after finishing her PhD at New York University. Her husband, James Brooke-Smith, a British citizen who also holds a PhD in English literature, has been working as a lecturer in Ottawa and will also have to take the test.
“What struck me was the complete inflexibility, that there’s just no way I can waive this,” she said. “That there was no clause for professional capabilities or mother tongue seemed very strange. The reality is it just creates unnecessary red tape.”
David Matas, an immigration lawyer in Winnipeg, said what disturbs him about the change is the way it was enacted. Section 79 of the regulations of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act states that skilled worker applicants may choose to submit to a language test or provide written evidence of their proficiency. Last month, Mr. Kenney issued a ministerial instruction, effective immediately, that said only applicants who write a test will be considered.
“What he’s doing is taking a power over processing and using it, in effect, to amend the law,” Mr. Matas said. “Frankly [it] gives me a good deal of concern and isn’t just about language testing or immigration. It’s the sort of power that, if accepted, would wreak havoc with all our laws.”
He went so far as to call it an abuse of the system. “If it goes without comment, I think we’re just going to see more and more of it, not just in this field but in others,” Mr. Matas added.
Toronto lawyer Cathryn Sawicki has launched a legal challenge to the new rules in Federal Court.
Mr. Kenney referred questions on Wednesday to Kelli Fraser, a departmental spokeswoman, who said the change was made through ministerial instruction to speed processing before a formal regulation change is enacted.
Ms. Fraser said that, in making the decision, the government referred to research that found official language literacy had a significant impact on immigrant earnings, and that where literacy matched that of Canadian-born citizens, there was almost no gap in earnings for immigrants. Since non-native English or French speakers often used the documentation option, visa officers found it difficult to assess their abilities, Ms. Fraser said.
“We felt that going to a language test option was the most fair, transparent, objective, consistent and accurate way to evaluate different applicants’ language skills,” she said.
No comments:
Post a Comment