Archive | Reflection RSS feed for this section

No Simple Answers – Migrant Boat in BC Waters

18 Oct

Today I was asked by a reporter if Sri Lanka was off the coast of Africa. “Pardon my ignorance,” he said. He was writing a story about a  boat with 76 migrants from Sri Lanka which appeared off the coast of British Columbia on Saturday October 17. “No”, I explained, “Sri Lanka is just below India”.

Another reporter asked me if the migrants would be held in jail. “Yes”, I said. “You mean like criminals?”, the reporter asked. “Yes”, I replied, “with criminals and those charged with crimes in pre-trial detention centres”.

Yet another asked, “can you explain briefly how the process works?”. When I began to explain the interaction between the RCMP and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), how Canada was a signatory to several international conventions and protocols to assist refugees, how the process worked at the Immigration and Refugee Board – Refugee Protection Division (IRB-RPD), and more, the reporter quickly stopped me and wanted to know if there was a simpler way to explain the process.

I raise these examples, not to point fingers at the media, but rather to show how the media in its desire to get the story out, is pushed to report it quickly, with reporters who have had little time to research and prepare, and with a burden to present both sides of the story so as to be “fair”.

I was involved with a similar story back in the Summer of 1999 when four ships arrived of the coast of British Columbia carrying approximately 599 migrants from mainland China (mainly Fujian Province). The hysteria at that time was that Canada was about to be overrun by illegal migrants from China and that Canada was being too lax in granting access to the refugee process from those who had arrived on the ships. A group named DAARE has prepared a detailed report of that episode in Canadian immigration history.

Ten years after that episode what amazes me is that the issues around “irregular” migration flows (that is the terms used to describe those who enter Canada without the appropriate visas or documents), continue to polarize the Canadian public. The media in response to the public interest responds by framing the issues in black and white contrast, the complex middle ground appears to be  too difficult to report.

As I write about this latest episode of migrants coming to Canada’s shores, it is the complex middle ground that interests me. Here are some of my thoughts.

First, the real story is not that this boat came to Canada but why we do not see more boats of migrants off the coasts of Canada. The Canadian public should realize that there are significant irregular migration flows all over the world. Migrants are driven from their home countries by civil wars, persecution, global climate changes, and more. Millions are on the move, 42 million in total of which 16 million are refugees. Canada’s IRB-RPD has projected an intake of about 36,000 new claims for 2008-2009. Now do the math. Canada, due to its geography (separated from most refugee producing countries by big oceans and a well watched land border) and intensive interdiction practices, takes very few of the global flows of refugees.

Second, processing refugees is expensive and complex. In addition to the costs of the IRB-RPD process (approximately $4700 per claim) there are social programs and other costs. Why is this surprising or unacceptable to many Canadians? The costs related to honouring international humanitarian commitments are high, but it is (in part) Canada’s adherence to such commitments that repeatedly results in Canada being ranked as one of the best countries to live in. I would argue that respecting the legal and human rights of migrants is part and parcel of what makes Canada the country that it is. The very people who argue that migrants have too many rights and receive too many “appeals”, I would venture, are the same people who would want to have access to all the legal safeguards and appeals if they (or their loved ones) were charged with an offence.

Third, the challenges related to irregular migration flows will only grow with time. As the results of climate change take hold, as resources decline and as the divide between the “haves” and “have nots” grows, managing global migration flows to Canada will become one of Canada’s major challenges. We can see how some of these pressures are manifesting themselves as Canada tries to manage the flows by imposing and removing visa restrictions on various countries, and by negotiating trade agreements that include the flow of migrant labour (skilled and unskilled) to Canada.

This latest story of the ship which arrived off the coast of British Columbia is symptomatic of a larger complex problem. Sorry folks, no simple answers.


Knowledge, meaning and “I just want my visa”

28 Sep

I found a recent article in the Globe and Mail Globe & Mail on Saturday (12 September, 2009, page A21) entitled, “Information-rich and attention poor” by Peter Nicholson  of great interest. It’s worth a read.

I also found the comments of Susan Swan, a lawyer who posts on Slaw (one of the sites I tend to visit frequently), interesting.

My comments are more about being “data/information rich and knowledge/meaning poor”.

In my practice over the past 17 years I have found a marked increase in clients who are knowledgeable about the Canadian immigration process. When I started in 1992, the internet was still in it’s infancy and the ability to acquire basic knowledge about the Canadian immigration process was difficult. As an Applicant you had to make phone calls or know someone who knew the steps (i.e., lawyers).

Now Citizenship and Immigration Canada hosts one of the governments most visited websites

The “problem” from a practitioner perspective is that the ability to access information now results in clients who want, not a basic level of information, but “meaning”. They want to know how to take the knowledge or data they have gleaned over the internet, and turn it into a successful visa application. Since they were able to gather the initial knowledge for free, there is an expectation that “meaning” will also be for free. But the “meaning” is not for free; I have gained my expertise in this area of law, at some cost, after many years and am reluctant to give it away. The expectation from many client’s who are used to quick and free fulfillment of their information need, is that the knowledge should be given to them for free.

So, how to solve this problem?

I have taken the approach of being up front with potential clients about what I can give them for free and what they should expect to pay for (i.e., a paid consultation or a retainer to provide them legal services). I have also tried to explain to them that the meaning they seek from me is on a continuum. If all they seek is a basic visitor permit or student permit or if they are highly skilled at dealing with bureaucracy, they may not need my services at all. But if they need something more complex or if the matter involves litigation (such as an appeal hearing or a refugee hearing or a matter before the Federal Court of Canada), they will need my services or the services of someone like me.

I also prepared basic explanations entitled “More than just filling out forms” and “Why hire us” and put them at the front of my website to make what I do more explicit.

In this sense, the client chooses but the client does not always understand what they are choosing and why it has a value. The value proposition, for some clients makes itself apparent not at the retainer stage but much later, when they see what experienced legal counsel can do for them and they have an “a ha” moment. I wait for such moments.

Monetizing, a word I dislike, the knowledge I have or my ability to create meaning for my client, is a constant challenge in this time of much data, little attention span and unreasonable expectations. Explaining what I do and setting reasonable expectations, is an approach that works for me.

And so it begins…

25 Sep

I enter the world of blogging with some trepidation.  All too often I see material on blogs that makes me cringe.

In my blog I want to explore topics related to Canadian Immigration/ Refugee/ Citizenship law, migration law in general in the world, the practice of law, and the intersections of art/race/culture. A broad list, but it should be fun to explore these topics and seek comments. Wish me luck!