Immigration reform

[Homeownertoo]

"Foreigners seeking French nationality face tougher requirements as of January 1, when new rules drawn up by Interior Minister Claude Guéant come into force.

"Candidates will be tested on French culture and history, and will have to prove their French language skills are equivalent to those of a 15-year-old mother tongue speaker. They will also be required to sign a new charter establishing their rights and responsibilities.

“Becoming French is not a mere administrative step. It is a decision that requires a lot of thought”, reads the charter, drafted by France’s High Council for Integration (HCI).

Guéant, a member of President Nicolas Sarkozy’s ruling UMP party, described the process as “a solemn occasion between the host nation and the applicant”, adding that migrants should be integrated through language and “an adherence to the principals, values and symbols of our democracy”. ..."

http://www.france24.com/en/20111229-france-tightens-screws-immigration-election-looms-sarkozy-gueant-citizenship

Is this the direction Canada should go? I think so. Of course, it assumes that the host nation has a culture that is defined as something more than mere multiculturalism, and that policy is directed away from a model of multiculturalism, goals that I also support as a long-term direction for this country.

[grammafreddy]

I could support that. Canada and Canadians have never been able to define "What is Canadian?". Our culture is touted as multicutural - and I have always felt this was a mistake. After confederation, people new to the country followed the norms of the Canadian societal culture and made an effort to learn the language and the laws and wanted to "fit in" in their new country. Not so today - now they expect handouts without ever being deserving of them, they want laws changed to reflect their old country's ways and they make no effort to learn the language or to fit in - they want the country and its citizens to bend to their ways, laws and culture. The old Canada is now ruled by guilty consciences and political correctness, plus the silly desire to not offend anyone in any way. We are a land of hyphenated Canadians with the country of origin coming first before the Canadian part. It doesn't bode well for us as a nation.

[occasional thoughts]

Good luck, and more power to them, but I'd say that France is travelling down the "closing the barn door after the horse got out" path, if what is described is what it is up to. For Europe, I believe the situation started as colonialism began to break down, after WWII, and the question was asked, did colonials of colonial nations have citizenship rights; and nations such as England and France were forced to answer in the positive from time to time and welcome their colonials in.

For Canada, the situation is highly akin, but of longer-standing. It was less evident when immigrants were of European origin with rough kinshiip in colour and religion (but not language). Assimilation happened, and for the most part I think the immigrants then, probably with lingering regrets, accepted if not welcomed it. Today, there are new realities, with latin americans aggressively keeping their Spanish language, and other nationals taking dual citizenship with no real value of or commitment to "Canadian culture".

Canada has two founding "races" or maybe two founding languages, and that has not changed. From there it gets murky. We continue to have the Official Languages Act, and somehow I don't see that changing for a long time. But language, I believe, is only a proxy for the real variables, values. That is what makes us Canadian, as practised on a widespread basis and as enshrined in law, and that should not change. The rule of law; all equal before it. No alternate religious law and no separate legal classes for some members of the population such as aboriginals please.

[Homeownertoo]

I agree with you, Occasional. As for France, yup, it's very late, but waiting till later does not promise a better outcome either.

A question that goes unasked is, are some cultures more amenable to the Canadian experience than others? The answer seems obvious but cannot be stated officially, because the next step would be, what do we do with that knowledge. And would a policy based on that truth be a barrier to individuals who may well make great Canadians? I suspect so. It's a nut no politician would be willing to take a crack at.

[occasional thoughts]

I think another umnentionable, unaskable question that has to be asked is whether some cultures are deliberately immigrating to countries that are otherwise inhospitable for the purpose of overwhelming the recipient culture with the arriving culture.

Why, for instance, would Algerians want to have immigrated to France in the 1950s and on if they knew that France was one of the Christian stalwarts in the hated Crusades?

Why would Afghanis (and others) want to immigrate to Canada/Quebec if they know that honour killings will get them in jail and will derive no honour for them here?

Why would some people come to pressure for our law to be supplanted by Sharia. Why would others come to perpetuate baby female mutilation? Doesn't make sense to me unless there's something afoot on a grand scale.

[Captain Awesome]

Why, for instance, would Algerians want to have immigrated to France in the 1950s and on if they knew that France was one of the Christian stalwarts in the hated Crusades?

Because Algeria used to be one of French colonies. So, it's much easier for them to immigrate to France than any other country.

Why would Afghanis (and others) want to immigrate to Canada/Quebec if they know that honour killings will get them in jail and will derive no honour for them here?

The whole honor killings thing is greatly overstated and sensationalized. But most Afghanis don't immigrate here, they go after a refugee status. Why? Because Canada allows it and living in poverty in Canada is 500 times better than living in poverty in Afghanistan.

[Homeownertoo]

Change is in the air in Holland.

A new integration bill (covering letter and 15-page action plan), which Dutch Interior Minister Piet Hein Donner presented to parliament on June 16, reads: “The government shares the social dissatisfaction over the multicultural society model and plans to shift priority to the values of the Dutch people. In the new integration system, the values of the Dutch society play a central role. With this change, the government steps away from the model of a multicultural society…”

The government will also stop offering special subsidies for Muslim immigrants because, according to Donner, “it is not the government’s job to integrate immigrants.” The government will introduce new legislation that outlaws forced marriages and will also impose tougher measures against Muslim immigrants who lower their chances of employment by the way they dress. More specifically, the government will impose a ban on face-covering Islamic burqas as of January 1, 2013.

If necessary, the government will introduce extra measures to allow the removal of residence permits from immigrants who fail their integration course…"

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/313142/donner-und-blitzen-mark-steyn

In the recent past, for comparison, the same minister said: “A tone that I do not like has crept into the political debate on integration. A tone of: ‘Thou shalt assimilate. Thou shalt adopt our values in public. Be reasonable, do it our way.’ That is not my approach.”

[occasional thoughts]

That (ref. Holland) is astounding, to the point that I wondered whether it was satire or a joke. More power to them so long as it does not mask racism, nazi-like approaches, etc., etc. I do not believe that it is illegitimate to expect people to integrate or assimilate within certain tolerances to the culture and values they are moving into, although I'd argue there'll always be a nice enrichment in our own culture by being open to the positive values and aspects of the minorities in our midst. We can discuss fine points on that, but I don't particularly welcome honour killings, female mutilation, subjugation and the forced invisiblity of women, etc., etc.

[Homeownertoo]

Holland is a very open society, a value widely shared there. I don't think there's any concern about some mushrooming racism. More a fear that their culture is in danger of being overwhelmed by a frankly alien one (alien meaning incompatible).