The (mainly) media-centric and completely pre-planned presence of Mr. Kenney in the meeting of the immigration committee of the federal parliament dated on October 20th is so important and should not be considered just as an ordinary report to the parliament. The meeting has been held exactly one week before the meeting dated on October 27th which will testify against the minister in order to prepare the members of the committee to accept the existing facts.
But what are these facts?
Mr. Kenney does say that there are long waiting lists and a lot of applications and that Canada should think about the waste of time of the waiting people but he immediately says that the solution is not to increase the number of human resources in the immigration office.
At the first glance, what he says seems to be true, but he does not explain why the existing forces were about 25 to 30 percent more productive last year; why on the election eve, the Canadian immigration office breaks record in examining the files and being present in the local immigration-accepting communities, Mr. Kenney talks about increasing policies about immigrants, but right a few days after his party wins by a large majority in the federal parliament, everything comes to an end.
Would not we encounter a decreasing trend in the number of files after the limitations enforced in 2010 and 2011, if we continued with the same pace and speed of the last year i.e. without this abrupt decrease? Is his main concern really is to shorten the waiting line? Is it not true that he intentionally wants to make the media and people believe that the only right and possible policy is the preventive policies together with putting obstacles on the way of immigrants? Does he not intend to say in the next years that "Because of some conformity between the Canadian labor market and that of some countries, we will accept immigrants just from those countries (a list of selected countries!!!!)"?
He does not exactly explain the difference between "to limit" and "to put an end on".
What has happened at the moment in half of immigration programs is the control through "wiping off the problem statement" and there is no clear future for solving the problem. For instance, if the immigration office treated the federal investment files as it does at the moment, this program would be stopped in the next year, as no positive action is supposed to be done in order to shorten the waiting list and the minister just wants to use the excuse of "a long waiting list" to stop the programs.
In fact, he must explain what else he has done other than stopping and putting an end to the Canadian immigration programs, as the minister and having all the privileges he has been given according to the Article C-50. He should also explain if what he has done practically and really means anything other than fundamentally redefining the policies and immigration programs of Canada without the supervision of the media and what the MPs want.
He also does not say according to which law, the justice about those waiting people for whom he expresses support, allows him to send their files to the inactive archive, contradicting all the past 2-3-year promises. Will their problems be solved with this approach?
But you can find how honest and cunning the minister is in the example he provided us with. Among various immigration programs with thousands of files, he brought up the parents sponsorship program which evokes sensitivity among Canadian citizens because of overhead medical and treatment expenses for the Canadian tax-givers, but he does not say, for example, why the federal investment or entrepreneurship programs which can be useful for the Canadian economy and for promoting jobs and careers in this country, have been stopped.
However, from the example the minister gave us and the immigration attorney friend of the reporter, who suddenly came out of nowhere and approved the explanations of the minister and suggested 75 thousand dollars for getting the parents residency permit! , we can figure out what all this fuss is about. Some time ago, Mr. Kenney had said that people should know that the Canadian citizenship and passport are not for sale.
It seems that he and his party fellows are going to complete this motto in the next months or years as: "The Canadian citizenship and passport are not for sale except for those who pay its price." We will see that two policies will be followed behind the scene of all these unreasonable stoppage and constant regressions: to classify the immigration applicants in the form that is pleasing for the conservative party and "to put a price tag on the Canadian citizenship".
Time will show how real is the pessimism of the author, but I personally am eager to see how Mr. Kenney will answer to a lot of people who did not have extra 75 thousand dollars to pay for their parents' entrance to Canada, four years later when he will be in the Canadian local and immigrant communities to talk about the intelligence and wisdom of himself and his party fellows.