It is time to depoliticize this question, and we will surely not succeed in doing so in an election campaign.the president and CEO of the Federation of Quebec Chambers of Commerce (FCCQ), Charles Milliard.
Given that the 2020-2022 immigration plan is coming to an end, the government was supposed to hold consultations this year, so that interested groups could have their say on immigration thresholds, a pressing issue in the news.
In 2019, this consultation took only four days of hearings to hear from thirty stakeholders. He went,
In the context of this year’s electionsThe government preferred to postpone this exercise to 2023.
Conducting a multi-year planning exercise, accompanied by public consultation in a parliamentary committee, posed the risk of non-compliance with the work scheduleexplains via e-mail the French Ministry of Immigration and Integration.
Mr. Milliard makes no secret of his disappointment that the next forum where we’re likely to really discuss immigration is this fall’s regional election campaign, a prospect that doesn’t bode well, he said.
” I don’t think Quebeckers pull winners out of a discussion where we can take some shortcuts in the context of an election campaign, when that’s such a critical issue. »
The Canadian Federation of Independent Business is also disappointed by this turn of events.
It was a great opportunity to break out of a potential split on this issue.refers to the Vice President of Quebec, Francois Vincent.
There has never been a time when conditions were more favorable for successful immigrant integration. Small and medium-sized businesses should reject sales and contracts everywhere in QuebecHe said.
” These consultations […] It would have been relevant to making the best decision for Quebec, for its economy and the prosperity of its privileged community. »
And Immigration Minister Jean Boulet indicated, Thursday, that it seemed to him
within reason Quebec can take in up to 58,000 immigrants a year, as recommended by experts, while Legault’s government previously spoke of a maximum of 50,000 immigrants.
Mr. Boulet, however, determined that
Thresholds will be determined after consultations who will get
Possible in 2023.
A few hours later, the minister changed his face on Twitter.
I made a mistake and misunderstood […] Our capacity to receive and integrate is limited to 50,000 immigrantshe wrote.
Judgment by ballot
By delaying consultation on immigration thresholds, the government is only proving it
You don’t want to discuss itAccording to Me Maxime Lapointe, an attorney who specializes in immigration law.
We’re at the end of our mandate, so it doesn’t seem to be a priority for them to see what people around us might think about Quebec’s immigration thresholds.he thinks.
at recent days , CAQcommissioned to conduct a survey, the results of which were published by Quebec newspaper It showed that two out of three participants wanted no more than 50,000 immigrants per year in the county.
We have a government that controls the ballot for four yearsLa Pointe criticizes me.
” It is the color of the government CAQ : We do not take into account the opinion of people who interfere every day in certain sectors of society. We go as we think. »
On the other hand, attorney Ho Sung Kim, vice president of the Quebec Immigration Lawyers Association, argues that postponing counseling
It doesn’t cause a lot of problems and he
I think it is still respectable that they do not want to tie the newly elected government to their three-year planKim introduces me.
Still, Me Lapointe believes the counseling was a great opportunity to explain to Quebecers how the immigration system really works.
This would have made it possible, in his opinion, to show that the immigration thresholds
Very low compared to current file inventories.
Here’s the main point: we have to explain to the residents that the 50,000 we’re letting in are people who are actually the majority here.continued.
Persons awaiting permanent residence,
The people here can be in the area, it could be the cashier on the corner, your banker, or your legal assistant in the attorney’s office.Lapointe cites me as an example.
“Subtly charming problem solver. Extreme tv enthusiast. Web scholar. Evil beer expert. Music nerd. Food junkie.”