Strict language rules for immigrants proposed

dumpthemonarchy

House Member
Jan 18, 2005
4,235
14
38
Vancouver
www.cynicsunlimited.com
It's about time, speaking the language nowadays has to be a basic requirement of citizenship. It is key for employment and assimilation. Not to mention saving us billions in taxes. I want immigrants to join the mainstream, we are encouraging them not to, and what do we get? The Toronto 18, who wanted to bomb parliament, the stock exchange and cut off the heads of politicians.



Strict language rules for immigrants proposed


Strict language rules for immigrants proposed



Newcomers could be forced to prove English or French proficiency before taking citizenship test



By Thandi Fletcher, Postmedia News October 15, 2011


The Harper government wants to force immigrants to prove their proficiency in English or French before being able to write an exam and be considered for Canadian citizenship.

Currently, immigrants ages 18 to 54 must only prove their language proficiency by taking a multiple-choice written test on citizenship questions, which federal officials believe "does not adequately assess [for the] listening and speaking skills" needed for effective integration into Canadian society.

The proposed changes, which would affect about 134,000 applicants a year, would require immigrants to prove they can speak English or French when they submit their first application for citizenship, which immigration officials believe will streamline processing of the applications.

They would have to submit results of an English or French proficiency test approved by Citizenship and Immigration Canada, proof of secondary or post-secondary education in French or English, or proof of completion of a language-training course such as the federally funded Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada.

"The ability to communicate effectively in either French or English is key to the success of new citizens in Canada," said Immigration Minister Jason Kenney in a statement on Friday. "This change will encourage applicants to ensure that they can speak English or French when they apply for citizenship, thereby improving the integrity and effectiveness of the citizenship program for Canada and for new Canadians alike."

"It is expected that the majority of citizenship applicants would already have evidence that they could submit with their application," a government notice of the proposal stated. "Therefore, the requirement is not anticipated to pose a burden on the majority of applicants."

Max Berger, a Toronto immigration lawyer, said the changes would pose "an unnecessary burden" on economic immigrants who have already demonstrated their English or French proficiency in order to receive permanent residency.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it," he said. "There's no burning need for these changes."
Those who would be affected by the new rules are refugees, citizens who sponsor a husband or wife and the spouses of economic immigrants, he said.

In the past, the citizenship test has "always been considered good enough to assess one's ability in one of the two official languages," he said. "If you've ever looked at the citizenship guide, you have to have a pretty good knowledge of English or French to get through and understand it. . The citizenship test has proven the test of time."

David Matas, a Winnipegbased immigration lawyer, said the new rules make application processing easier for the federal government, but make the application more cumbersome for immigrants.

"I think government should be user-friendly," he said. "Putting people through hoops for bureaucratic efficiency, I don't think that's user-friendly."

Studies provided by Kenney's office show the reasoning behind the proposed changes and suggest that Canadian citizens who speak English or French earn higher incomes than those who do not speak either of the national languages.
Donald Galloway, a law professor at the University of Victoria, said the proposal shows the Harper government puts the economy above the humanitarian needs of its residents.

"The government is saying the economic benefits are much more valuable than family unification benefits," said Galloway.

"I think that's a very limited vision of what immigration success is about."

If the proposed changes are made into regulations, Galloway said the extra cost and hassle of taking a language proficiency test could deter qualified applicants from coming to Canada.

"People will make that costbenefit analysis," he said.

"If we really are interested in getting the brightest and the best to come here rather than to another country, our immigration process is going to deter people who speak perfect English or French from applying."


 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
Wow the last time we talked about assimilation it was nearly a hundred years ago.
Back then we put the native kids in residential schools and abused them. We took
time to make sure we destroyed their culture, forbid them to speak their language,
and as a pass time they were sexually abused as well. Are you sure we want to go
through that episode again? Why do people have to be forcefully assimilated?
It usually works out that in three generations it happens anyway, so why do we want
to enforce dictatorial rules to defend democracy?
I find that more of the immigrants are learning English and paying big money to do so.
How many of us born in Canada folks are learning French, or French speaking people
learning English. Hm maybe we could all at least think about practicing what we
preach. The other aspect of this is, why not learn as many languages as possible,
that way we can learn more about the foundations our country was built on.
There are some interesting things about this country, the Chinese for example have
been here for over a century, the Sikhs have been here for more than a hundred
years, the Japanese have been here for over a hundred years. Lets see, people
from Eastern Europe have been here for a hundred years. The British and French
have been here for a few hundred years.
All this for what? The native Indian population has been here for at least ten thousand
years so which of the native tongues do we speak? We are all immigrants including
the Aboriginals so the length of time we have been here means nothing and no one
should be privileged. Our country is richer for having a varied background we have had
scientific and cultural progress come from many parts of the world and our collective
experience is what has made this a great country.
I like the idea that people can come from every where and teach each other how we can
live in peace if we try.
This is why I don't think immigrants are the problem or that they are a burden, I think people
who want to prevent the tide from coming in are the problem, for such ideas are as old
as saying women should not have the right to vote.
Like it or not, Canada is a Multicultural nation, if they can't get work in the mainstream they
will create their own jobs. What is the mainstream in this country anyway, I suggest
being a citizen, no matter what language you speak is part of the mainstream because all
citizens are equal before the law, do you have a problem with human rights and equality
or were you just musing about the future?
 

Omicron

Privy Council
Jul 28, 2010
1,694
3
38
Vancouver
Actually, I get it. Ever done business with Taiwanese? The issue was not vocabulary. It was grammar.

Now here is what is guaranteed to freak everyone out. Vocabulary is just words, but grammar is the logic, and the greatest grammar logistician was Noam Chomsky. He showed how to write an algorithm to deconstruct any grammar and re-construct it into another, but because he told the war mongers of Vietnam that they wouldn't know how to suck a dick if it was pushed in... the rest is history.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
109,241
11,367
113
Low Earth Orbit
Screw language. Anyone can learn it in a few months. The program that floats my boat is getting the immigrant kids into hockey so they have a commonality with the other kids and it brings parents together to cheer on their kids.
 

wulfie68

Council Member
Mar 29, 2009
2,014
24
38
Calgary, AB
Screw language. Anyone can learn it in a few months. The program that floats my boat is getting the immigrant kids into hockey so they have a commonality with the other kids and it brings parents together to cheer on their kids.

This actually makes more sense to me than forcing the language issue, which solves itself on its own. If you want to build communities, you build bridges starting on common ground and the competitive nature of sports can help: the antagonist isn't the people with the accent, its the guy in the wrong coloured jersey... and the next game or season that guy might be on your team.
 
Last edited:

towtruck17

New Member
Aug 11, 2011
1
0
1
windermere bc
of course it would make sense to speak english or french in this country after all they are the official languages of this country. What some shyster lawyers opinion is about how user freindly it is is of no consequence. Enough of the lawyers and their bull****, change the law and make them responsible for the people they are flooding into this country who neither have the language skills or any measurable work skills beyond minimum wage earners. These people drain the resourses want to make cultural and legal legislative changes as well as negatively effect our comunities with crime and terror not to mention their trash. Enough already with these third world dregs what ever happended to the quality immigrants that brought skills and their own financial support that sought to merge their culture with ours and enrich Canada no more of this riff raff need apply or come to this country. The governmement says we have unemployment then why are there people on welfare or ei put them to work before you bring more people here to go on some sort of taxpayer funded holiday.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
It's about time, speaking the language nowadays has to be a basic requirement of citizenship. It is key for employment and assimilation. Not to mention saving us billions in taxes. I want immigrants to join the mainstream, we are encouraging them not to, and what do we get? The Toronto 18, who wanted to bomb parliament, the stock exchange and cut off the heads of politicians.



Strict language rules for immigrants proposed


Strict language rules for immigrants proposed



Newcomers could be forced to prove English or French proficiency before taking citizenship test



By Thandi Fletcher, Postmedia News October 15, 2011



The Harper government wants to force immigrants to prove their proficiency in English or French before being able to write an exam and be considered for Canadian citizenship.

Currently, immigrants ages 18 to 54 must only prove their language proficiency by taking a multiple-choice written test on citizenship questions, which federal officials believe "does not adequately assess [for the] listening and speaking skills" needed for effective integration into Canadian society.

The proposed changes, which would affect about 134,000 applicants a year, would require immigrants to prove they can speak English or French when they submit their first application for citizenship, which immigration officials believe will streamline processing of the applications.

They would have to submit results of an English or French proficiency test approved by Citizenship and Immigration Canada, proof of secondary or post-secondary education in French or English, or proof of completion of a language-training course such as the federally funded Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada.

"The ability to communicate effectively in either French or English is key to the success of new citizens in Canada," said Immigration Minister Jason Kenney in a statement on Friday. "This change will encourage applicants to ensure that they can speak English or French when they apply for citizenship, thereby improving the integrity and effectiveness of the citizenship program for Canada and for new Canadians alike."

"It is expected that the majority of citizenship applicants would already have evidence that they could submit with their application," a government notice of the proposal stated. "Therefore, the requirement is not anticipated to pose a burden on the majority of applicants."

Max Berger, a Toronto immigration lawyer, said the changes would pose "an unnecessary burden" on economic immigrants who have already demonstrated their English or French proficiency in order to receive permanent residency.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it," he said. "There's no burning need for these changes."
Those who would be affected by the new rules are refugees, citizens who sponsor a husband or wife and the spouses of economic immigrants, he said.

In the past, the citizenship test has "always been considered good enough to assess one's ability in one of the two official languages," he said. "If you've ever looked at the citizenship guide, you have to have a pretty good knowledge of English or French to get through and understand it. . The citizenship test has proven the test of time."

David Matas, a Winnipegbased immigration lawyer, said the new rules make application processing easier for the federal government, but make the application more cumbersome for immigrants.

"I think government should be user-friendly," he said. "Putting people through hoops for bureaucratic efficiency, I don't think that's user-friendly."

Studies provided by Kenney's office show the reasoning behind the proposed changes and suggest that Canadian citizens who speak English or French earn higher incomes than those who do not speak either of the national languages.
Donald Galloway, a law professor at the University of Victoria, said the proposal shows the Harper government puts the economy above the humanitarian needs of its residents.

"The government is saying the economic benefits are much more valuable than family unification benefits," said Galloway.

"I think that's a very limited vision of what immigration success is about."

If the proposed changes are made into regulations, Galloway said the extra cost and hassle of taking a language proficiency test could deter qualified applicants from coming to Canada.

"People will make that costbenefit analysis," he said.

"If we really are interested in getting the brightest and the best to come here rather than to another country, our immigration process is going to deter people who speak perfect English or French from applying."





I do agree with this in principle. Sure the langauge in the citizenship guide is quite difficult, and the grammar average, maybe slightly above agerage in its level of difficulty, so in theory simply taking the citizenship test in either language should suffice as long as it required the writing of complete sentences and not just multiple choice. However, I have met citizens from abroad who still could not speak English, so clearly something's not working there, and for that reason, yet I agree with this new policy in principle. It's not about assimilation, but integration. Inasmuch as we dont' want to assimilate anyone, we must still ensure they integrate.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Makes sense.

I think there is a real problem, when people are using interpreters in PAL and hunting courses. Or MNR CO's have to wait hours, for assistance from the OPP, to lay charges, because someone claims they don't speak English or French.

If you want a license of any kind in Canada, being proficient in either official language, and able to easily and accurately communicate with instructors/examiners, and law enforcement, should be mandatory.
 
Last edited:

VanIsle

Always thinking
Nov 12, 2008
7,046
43
48
They have to learn the language. Both for their sake and ours. What if they need help? What if they just need a restroom? Far too many reasons to learn the language. Sports are great and they will join them in due time if they want to. Language is key.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I do agree with this in principle. Sure the langauge in the citizenship guide is quite difficult, and the grammar average, maybe slightly above agerage in its level of difficulty, so in theory simply taking the citizenship test in either language should suffice as long as it required the writing of complete sentences and not just multiple choice. However, I have met citizens from abroad who still could not speak English, so clearly something's not working there, and for that reason, yet I agree with this new policy in principle. It's not about assimilation, but integration. Inasmuch as we dont' want to assimilate anyone, we must still ensure they integrate.

Sorry, I take my original post back, or at least to a degree. I would make exception for religious refugees and others of the sort at risk of persecution, such as iranian baha'is for instance, for obvious humanitarian reasons. And I do hope an exception is being made for them. Also, tehre should be no exception for spouces the reason being this would merely encourage marriages of convenience and thus encourage more marriage fraud and thus more Canadian victims.

I agree, if you don't speak English or French, you should be allowed to visit, but not immigrate.

Even visitors. I remember of one anecdotal case in Switzerland where a foreign tourist driving a car hit a pedestrian tourist at night with no witnesses but another tourist who was walking with the other pedestrian who got hit. When paramedics and police arrived, no one could communicate if the one who gotten hit had any medical condition paramedics might need to be aware of, or to explain to police what happened, etc.

I could see some kind of language-passport scheme, whereby once you pass a language test, you can get some kind of 5-year tourist card allowing you to enter the country with a passport but with no need of visas. But seeing that you never know what can happen, it would be reasonable to even require tourists to know the local language, unless they're under a certain age or are medically incapable of learning the language and such other such cases.

And on the topic of sports, I enjoy certain sports, but mostly such as rock climbing, hiking, etc. but competitive sports not as much. We're not going to start selecting people based on sports interests I hope.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
I don't see the issue. The language barrier hurts no one but the initial immigrant and it usually sorts itself out within one generation. No fuss no muss.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,466
138
63
Location, Location
Even visitors.

Using that idea would rule out an awful lot of tourism; I loved China, and would go back again, but I don't speak Chinese.

I don't see the issue. The language barrier hurts no one but the initial immigrant and it usually sorts itself out within one generation. No fuss no muss.

Ummm, not quite. We spend a lot of money on social agencies helping immigrants learn the language.