Recently Quebec Immigration Minister Kathleen Weil published a consultation paper on immigration policy. It deals with the number of permanent immigrants Quebec plans to welcome, and with the relative proportion of the various types of immigrants (for example, those who come for family reconstitution, refugees, economic immigrants). It describes, often in very technocratic terms, the administrative procedures surrounding the management of migratory movements.
Up to the middle of the 20th century, the immigrants whom Canada admitted were almost entirely of European origin, with Great Britain the preferred source country. This practice followed the general ideology of the hierarchy of race and ethnicity against which the horrors of the Second World War and the decolonization process had still not fully immunized the West.
In the 1960s, this method was progressively replaced by a universal and egalitarian approach, with no regard to race, colour, nationality, religion, mother tongue or sex. When Quebec obtained powers that allowed it to choose a large part of its immigrants, it automatically adhered to this principle of nondiscrimination, which went along perfectly with its charter of rights and freedoms.
But in 2004, some surprising provisions were introduced to the Immigration Act. Under the pretext that immigrant selection had been put in place to promote the enrichment of Quebec’s socio-cultural heritage, it was decided that the number of immigrants admitted into Quebec could now be divided by geographic region. A clause was even introduced to authorize the suspension of consideration of requests from one region or another - in other words, to set in place quotas based on geographic origin.
The document recently made public by Weil goes a bit farther, in that it essentially plans to limit to 30 per cent the proportion of immigrants coming from one region or another. Whichever way we choose to look at this, it is a return to practices that were in place before the adoption of the Canadian and Quebec charters of rights and that cannot be reconciled with the principle of universality of immigration policy and equality of all persons under the law.
What were the justifications brought forth to support such measures coming straight from what we thought was a bygone era?
The argument for enriching the socio-cultural heritage is surprising. Taken literally, it should direct the authorities to concentrate their selection efforts everywhere except Europe, since Quebec’s population, both "old stock" and immigrant, is solidly of European origin.
The argument is also made that immigrants from certain areas encounter problems with integration. On that front, two issues must be examined.
On one hand, some studies have cited the discrimination that some new arrivals experience in the workplace. But should the role of the state be to reinforce this discrimination by extending it to the selection method itself ? Would it not be more productive to put in place better means to work against it?
On the other hand, before accusing all Quebec employers of racism, we should consider another element of the situation. It is possible, even probable, that the linguistic knowledge, quality of education received, or work experience acquired by residents of some countries is not always at the level required in Quebec’s employment market. And, as the consultation paper suggests, verification of the level of immigrant claimants’ education or work skills made when their requests are investigated might not be sufficiently thorough. This might partly explain the lack of compatibility between the abilities of some immigrants and the needs of Quebec employers.
What is needed, then, is not so much the implementation of blind quotas based on geographic origin (in reality, a synonym for race, colour or ethnicity) but a better and more stringent selection process, particularly in terms of evaluating linguistic knowledge, training and professional abilities.
Implementing such an approach would naturally require more resources for the selection process even if, at first, a reduction in the volume of admissions might be felt. A large dose of imagination and courage would also be required of the authorities.
Trying to contain North African immigration with antiquated methods is not in Quebec’s higher interest. For the first time in its history, Quebec is the destination of choice for a largely French-speaking immigrating population wanting to join the ranks of the majority. Adopting discriminatory and vexatious measures against those immigrants runs the risk of turning them, as were others who came before them, away from the francophone majority and thus contributing to the marginalization of the only French-speaking people in North America.
CONTRIBUTORS:
Pierre Anctil, professor, Department of History, University of Ottawa; 2002-03 president of the Quebec Intercultural Relations Council
Françoise Armand, professor, Department of Education, Université de Montréal
Mireille Baillargeon, retiree from the research administration of the Quebec Ministry of Immigration and Cultural Communities
Alain Bélanger, director of demographic programs, Institut national de la recherche scientifique
André Boisclair, consultant in strategic development and public affairs; Quebec minister of citizen relations and immigration, 1996-98
Gérard Bouchard, Canada Research Chair in Comparative Study of Collective Imaginaries, Université du Québec à Chicoutimi; co-chair of the 2007-08 Bouchard-Taylor commission on reasonable accommodation
François Crépeau, professor of international law, McGill University
Micheline Dumont, historian, professor emeritus, Université de Sherbrooke
Madeleine Gagné, former director of research and former assistant deputy minister, Quebec Ministry of Immigration and Cultural Communities
Élisabeth Garant, director-general, Centre justice et foi, Revue Relations
Micheline Labelle, chair of research in immigration, ethnicity and citizenship, Department of Sociology, Université du Québec à Montréal
Annick Lenoir, professor, Department of Social Service, Université de Sherbrooke
Guillaume Marois, demographer
Marie McAndrew, Canada Research Chair in education and ethnic relations, Université de Montréal; co-director, Centre d’études ethniques des universités montréalaises
Victor Piché, Oppenheimer Chair in international public law, McGill University
Gérard Pinsonneault, retired from the research administration of the Quebec Ministry of Immigration and Cultural Communities; associate researcher in ethnic relations, Université de Montréal
Maryse Potvin, professor, Department of Education and Specialized Training, Université du Québec à Montréal
Stephan Reichhold, director, Table de concertation des organismes au service des personnes réfugiées et immigrantes
Jean Renaud, professor emeritus, Department of Sociology, Université de Montréal; former director, Centre d’études ethniques des universités montréalaises
Gisèle Ste-Marie, retired from the research administration of the Quebec Ministry of Immigration and Cultural Communities
Michèle Vatz Laaroussi, professor, Department of Social Service, Université de Sherbrooke; administrator, Réseau international de recherche sur l’immigration en dehors des grands centres
Bilkis Vissandjee, professor, Faculty of Nursing Science, Université de Montréal
Daniel Weinstock, professor, Department of Philosophy, Université de Montréal; Canada Research Chair in ethics and political philosophy, Université de Montréal