Plenary Session
Third International Metropolis Conference
Zichron Yaacov, Israel

Good Morning,

My name is Michel Dorais, I am Associate Deputy Minister for Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and also brand new to the Immigration portfolio, having been appointed only a few weeks ago. No doubt I will be taking more out of this conference than you will be getting from me but, as time goes by, I hope to be able to repay my debt to Metropolis and contribute, in my own way, to the work taking place.

I am very pleased to be here this morning representing the Government of Canada and the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, the Honourable Lucienne Robillard. Minister Robillard asked me to convey her sincerest regrets that she could not join us. Unfortunately, parliamentary duties arose which did not permit her to personally attend the conference. I know she would have liked to be with us this morning.

Si vous me le permettez, je voudrais d’abord remercier les organisateurs de cette conférence. Peu après mon arrivée, Meyer Burnstein a pris soin de m’expliquer au nom de Metropolis, l’importance de joindre les chercheurs à ceux et celles qui élaborent les politiques d’immigration. Une conférence comme celle-ci nous permet de renforcir ce dialogue essentiel.

Nous avons devant nous un programme chargé et je serai bref dans mes remarques. Cependant je voudrais saisir cette occasion pour souligner certains défis auxquels nous faisons face et vous communiquer certaines observations canadiennes.

At the present time in Canada, we are undertaking a comprehensive review of our Immigration Legislation, the first such review in almost a quarter century. One of the central themes of this review is the establishment of the principles and mechanisms for allowing newcomers to enter and integrate successfully into Canadian society.

Like many social issues, Immigration is a dynamic field. What was true twenty years ago or even two years ago may not be true today.

I have already seen the myriad of choices that may be acceptable in shaping and managing immigration programs. Trade-offs must be made; resources are not unlimited; and most germane to this Conference, there is often a lack of reliable or current information.

The theme of this session - societal membership and the management of pluralistic societies and cities - is of special interest to Canada at this time. Since an independent report made public in January of this year suggested significant changes to our immigration program, there has been public consultations and internal discussions led by our Minister to prepare the Canadian Government’s approach. Metropolis researchers were directly involved at several points, and representatives of the Canadian centres took part in a policy round table with Madame Robillard.

Canada has been a country of immigration. A tradition that all Canadians are very proud of, which is part of our historical experience, and a positive force in building our nation. In reviewing our immigration legislation, we have concluded that the foundations are sound, but that changes in the global environment over the past two decades require a re-thinking of some specific policies.

The questions that migrant receiving countries must ask themselves are difficult to answer but relatively straightforward: Who should get in and who shouldn’t? How many people should be admitted? Who should be helped? Who should pay? And, if these questions are not difficult enough, behind them lie still more fundamental questions: Why should a country admit migrants? What opportunities are created by migration? What challenges attend the decision to admit large numbers of people of different cultures and values?

To negotiate the path before us, all of us will need guideposts. We need to clearly express and understand our objectives for our immigration programs. We need research that is informed by these objectives. We need to understand and recognize similarities and differences among us. I’d like to spend a few moments talking about some of the guideposts that I think are important, and that form the foundation of a country’s management regime - economic objectives, social impacts, and public opinion.

Economic Objectives

The economic consequences of immigration are often a feature of national debate around migration. All nations have economic objectives and immigrants are economic actors. We need to know, however, to what extent Metropolis members share a common set of economic values. Nations place different values on self-sufficiency; they have different demographic visions; they hold different views about the role of the state in the economy; and they value different income distributions.

I would anticipate that a fairly strong consensus exists on the economic front. From what I have seen to date, there is probably universal agreement that immigration contributes directly to the attainment of national economic objectives, stimulates economic growth, smooths demographic transitions, assists the labour market in making structural adjustments, and instils economic vitality in the form of entrepreneurship and capital.

Social Impact

Recently, when I visited the Immigration Office at Toronto’s International Airport, where we grant permanent residence to, on average, close to 250 persons per day, I was reminded that immigration is first and foremost about people, the movement of individuals and families. That is why, in Canada’s case, we manage immigration within the framework of our social and humanitarian tradition. We seek immigrants who will not only contribute to our economy, but join, participate in, and make meaninful and rich contributions to to our society.

Assessing the contribution and value of immigration is something immigrant receiving countries need to champion. At the surface, immigration endows a country with new facades, new restaurants, different neighbourhoods. At a deeper level, immigration produces changes in literature, music and art. It results in different interpretations of the human experience, different ideas about family, about the relationship between society and individual, between society and nature, and different religious and philosophical beliefs. As a biologist by training, I learned early that systems draw their stability from this diversity and complexity.

Making judgements about the deeper impacts of immigration is not a strictly empirical question; it is a matter of personal and national values. By documenting the changes that are taking place, research allows us to project the future and make informed choices.

Public Attitudes

Canada has historically received newcomers with enthusiasm, with fairness, and with compassion. This, we feel, is an important arena for governance because the successful settlement of newcomers depends on public attitudes and on the willingness of the host population to support a complex set of integration measures. It is therefore important to know how citizens view immigration, and how their views are formed.

Researchers will need to be careful with how they formulate policy advice here. Strong national differences exist in our capacities to welcome and integrate immigrants. Some of these capacity differences are rooted in public attitudes and may arise from our varying assessments of the impact of immigration. Of course we would like these assessments to be grounded in scientific facts, but public attitudes arise from many sources, not all of them factual. They can also be affected, for better or worse, by contemporary mythology and broader social conditions such as unemployment or crime rates. It will be very important to sort out the commonalities and differences between our societies if Metropolis is to develop realistic policy options in this area.

Conclusion

Regardless of the issue, given the importance of what is at stake, the creation of socially cohesive societies, it is vital that migrant inclusion be managed according to the best scientific knowledge that we are able to generate. Rapid demographic change can create strains even within tolerant and open communities. We need to understand the forces that cause this tolerance and openness to give way to intolerance and resentment. The promotion of positive integration takes sound policy rooted in perceptive research.

The Metropolis literature talks about challenges and opportunities. It also talks about the role of research. Research as an instrument for clarifying questions. Research is our principal tool for engaging each other in a meaningful way, for exploring convergence and for preserving difference without violating ethical considerations or betraying public trust. Research, humane values, and judicious foresight, are the pillars of good policy.

As a scientist by training, I need no convincing of the importance of pure research. I also understand the necessity to ask the right questions. Questions must be broad enough to ensure that related issues are caught in their sweep, yet focussed enough to ensure that the findings make their way into policies.

I wish Metropolis and all of its supporters continued success, and like you I hope to learn much this week through the sharing of research and experience.

Doris Meissner

I would now like to introduce Doris Meissner, who has been the Head of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service since October 1993. As President Clinton noted when he nominated her, she is bringing to the INS a "unique combination of management and policy experience" in immigration affairs.

The Panel

Barbara John is currently the Berlin Senate Commissioner for Migrant and Foreigner Population Affairs.

Antonia Hernandez is president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund. Through law, community education and research Hernandez has worked tirelessly to advance the rights of the country's 24 million Latinos.

Madeleine Gagné oeuvre au sein du ministère des Relations avec les citoyens et de l’Immigration du Québec depuis 1971. Elle détient depuis le mois d’aviril le poste de sous-ministre adjointe à l’Immigration et à l’Établissement. Son expérience et sa connaissance approfondie de l’immigration constituent un atout important pour le Québec et le Canada.

Thank you.

Return to Programme.

Retour au Programme