Document 2721344

Keynote speech at the annual Colloquium of the Ontario Continuing Education School Boards Administrators (CESBA); April 26, 2012 1 Immigration, Education and Nation-­‐Building H. Deep Saini Vice-­‐President, University of Toronto Principal, University of Toronto Mississuaga Thank you for this opportunity to speak to the members of CESBA. I am delighted to be here, especially since we have such overlapping missions in the education of our fellow citizens, and you, by serving the continuing education needs of new Canadians, are playing such a critically important role in nation-­‐building. “Immigration, education and nation-­‐building” — it is a subject that I have been getting increasingly interested in, and the one I am discovering is a vast one. For example, just out of fun, I types the title of this talk into Google search a couple of days ago, and the search returned 112 million hits in 0.31 seconds! So one could talk for a long time on this subject. I am sure you don’t want me to spoil your morning – or the entire day for that matter – by embarking on such a long discourse. Instead, let me use my allotted 20 minutes more efficiently, and give you my personal perspective on a few key issues that I spend a lot of time thinking about. A short history of Canadian connection between immigration, education and nation-­‐building Canada is a country built on immigration, and this process is an ongoing one. Today, there is a lot of talk about immigration of highly qualified professionals, skilled workers and so on. But has this always been so? Not really. I came to Canada in 1982 after having earned a PhD – among other previous university degrees – from one of the top institutions in Australia. I came in on a one-­‐year contract with the University of Alberta, and I quickly discovered that if I wanted to settle permanently in Canada, the process would be much quicker had I entered the country illegally or made a refuge claim based on real or bogus evidence. But tough luck if I actually had something to offer to this country by way of skills! Happily the country has moved light-­‐years since those days. The past and the current shift are, to some extent, also understandable, as Canada’s immigration history has gone through various phases in response to the needs of the time. Relationship between professional immigrant and prosperity – the US examples In today’s globalized world, competition for talent is global and the talent goes where it is most appreciated and nurtured. Talent also goes where it will find other talent – smart people like to hang around smart people. Keynote speech at the annual Colloquium of the Ontario Continuing Education School Boards Administrators (CESBA); April 26, 2012 2 One country that has historically done an excellent job of attracting talent from world over and using it effectively to build a great nation is United States. Let’s look at some impressive facts from down south: Research at the Duke University has shown that between 1995 and 2005, immigrants helped found more than one quarter of the engineering and technology companies in that country. The same research also shows that in 2006, foreign nationals residing in the United States were named as inventors or co-­‐inventors on an astonishing 25.6 percent of the patent applications filed in the US. Let’s reflect momentarily on the Silicon Valley, the hub of high tech entrepreneurship in the United States. More than half of the start-­‐ups there during the 1995-­‐2005 decade were founded by immigrants. And what’s more, fully half of these entrepreneurs first entered US as students. The list of such telling stats goes on, but I believe I have made my point. How well is Canada doing? Now let’s see how things are going here in Canada. Canadian information comparable to that for USA is scarce at this point. We are lagging the US in this aspect of our economic development, as are the associated stats. However, some facts on immigration trends give a hint of things to come. In 2010, Canada accepted 280,636 immigrants, of which exactly two thirds were “economic immigrants” or their dependents — a number that has steadily increased since 2006, while other categories, notably family class and refugees have declined. Among these economic immigrants, 85% were in the various “skilled worker” categories. The total numbers in this category has also climbed steadily over the same period. Therefore, on the surface, we seem to be doing the right thing if the aim is to base our immigration on skills However, I have a major concern arising from what is frequently reported in the media and my personal contacts with newly arrived professional immigrants. A good percentage of the so-­‐called “skilled” immigrants are no doubt just that, and they are likely settling well into rewarding positions in the Canadian workforce. Sadly however, a not so insignificant proportion of such immigrants is failing to find employment related to their qualifications. Media reports are full of such stories, and hardly a day goes by when I don’t run into someone with impressive foreign qualifications who has been struggling for years to find a job appropriate to their background. What’s even more disconcerting is that, in my judgement, very few of such people I’ve met would be employable in Canada in their profession. While they have the credentials, they lack the skills that that the jobs in their field would require – hard skills, soft skills, and often both. The root cause of this problem is that what passes in Canada as skill-­‐based immigration is in fact primarily credential-­‐based. It is well known that in many countries that feed our immigration, the quality of educational institutions – and hence the competencies of their graduates – vary wildly. Yet, our immigrant selection process is not only blind to this, it has put nothing in place to screen for the skills that it is ostensibly importing. This is astonishing in a country where skill testing for jobs of all kinds is the norm. Our universities similarly follow rigorous processes of skill testing while admitting students to professional programs. This approach makes eminent sense to anyone seeking to build a strong business. But when it comes Keynote speech at the annual Colloquium of the Ontario Continuing Education School Boards Administrators (CESBA); April 26, 2012 3 to building a smarter, better skilled nation through immigration, we choose the lazy alternative of basing our decision solely on the face value of the degrees or diplomas, often granted by institutions of dubious reliability. Interestingly, Government’s own data clearly show that selecting immigrants on the basis of skills works better: Skilled workers who entered the country in 2010 with already a job offer in hand – i.e. whose skills had already been found acceptable by employers – earn an average of $79,200. In essence, the current approach for the selection of so-­‐called skilled-­‐workers is not only inefficient, it is also dishonest to many who are brought in with an unrealistic hope that jobs are waiting aplenty. The process also serves our national interests poorly. An unhappy immigrant, who can’t make it in the “promised land”, will only become a disillusioned citizen – hardly a sensible way to go about building a country. One way to bypass the problem of mismatch between credentials and skills is to support and nurture the current trend towards greater enrolment of international students into our post-­‐secondary educational institutions. These students receive training at Canadian standards and relevant to our job market needs, and we would do well by encouraging more of them to come, and letting those who find gainful employment stay. Immigrating is an act of entrepreneurship Back in 1978, I left home to study in Australia with just $8 in my pocket. And here I am today. If you ask around, you will find that many immigrants have similar stories to tell. It takes a great deal of courage and entrepreneurship to pack up and leave everything that is familiar, for an unknown fate in a new, unfamiliar country. This is particularly true of economic class immigrants, who already had something going for them in their old country but still left for a better life. We need to better harness this entrepreneurial spirit. Often these people come from countries that we are trying hard to do business with – the emerging economies of today. Many of these immigrants have exactly the kind of knowledge, skills and connections that would help build economic and commercial bridges between Canada and their countries of origin. Nevertheless, our entire immigrant settlement system is geared towards preparing these people for the Canadian job market, and there is virtually no support – and tons of obstacles – for self-­‐starters. We need to urgently reconsider our immigrant settlement strategy, and put into place a comprehensive support system for those who have the inclination, skills and connections to venture into the business world. Need for a two-­‐way emotional commitment Let me make this final point by sharing an anecdote from my personal life. I moved, with my family, in 1987 from Edmonton to Montreal for an academic appointment at the Universtité de Montréal. Back then none of us could speak a word of French to save our lives. Over time, we became what would appear to be an ideal immigrant family in Quebec: We bought a house in a largely French neighborhood. Our kids went to French schools by choice when we had the means to short-­‐circuit the system by sending them to English private schools. In fact, they Keynote speech at the annual Colloquium of the Ontario Continuing Education School Boards Administrators (CESBA); April 26, 2012 4 did eventually go to a pricy private high school, but we still chose a French one. I became fluent in French, teaching at Québec’s leading French university for over 16 years. My wife went into business, at one time employing as many as 13 people – all of them francophone. I became very active in the community and local political life, and was once even approached to run for the provincial legislature. Although our private lives were lived largely in English and Punjabi, we conducted pretty much all our public life in French. And so on. Then came the 1995 referendum. We voted ‘No’ to the question, as had many others – anglophones, allophones, and yes, francophones. At the end of the day came the infamous speech by Jacques Parizeau: “… It is true that we were defeated, basically, by what? By money and the ethnic vote, essentially… So… that means that the next time, instead of 60 or 61% (of us) voting yes, we will be 63 or 64. And that will do it…” It suddenly hit us that despite all we had done in, with and for the Quebec society, we were still not part of the chosen “us”. That was the beginning of the end of our romance with Quebec, in spite of the fact that a lot of good things happened to us in that province. Eventually, we left. By all accounts, we were a successful, well-­‐integrated family in Quebec. We felt that we had kept our end of the deal by integrating fully into the society on the terms that had been set by the society. But the society failed to keep its end of the bargain. The point of this is not to be uniquely critical of the Quebec society of the Quebecois, or to suggest that this kind of mentality is limited to Quebec. The point is to highlight the experiences that can drive away precisely the kind of immigrants that have the most to contribute. These are also the type of people who are able to move with relative ease. Countries and jurisdictions seeking to develop on the foundations of knowledge, talent and smarts, would do well to pay attention. Now, there is the other side to what must be a two-­‐way commitment. Immigration can’t simply be an economic transaction, nor should it be just the provision of a sanctuary by the host country. While it would be unrealistic to expect that every immigrant would fall in the proverbial “love at first sight”, eventually the relationship must involve an emotional commitment from the immigrant. Please allow me to share the story of my own evolution in this regard. I became a landed immigrant here in 1985 but waited for many years before acquiring the Canadian citizenship. I wanted to be sure that I would be able to make the appropriate emotional commitment. I had a very personal yardstick to measure this commitment: I kept asking myself, “If Canada and India (the country of my birth and previous citizenship) ever went to war against each other, which side would I fight on?” When I could honestly answer “Canada”, I became a citizen. I dealt with the evolution of this bond on my own, but I do believe that in many cases it can’t be left simply to spontaneity. We, as a nation, have to start laying a blueprint for what we expect of those who seek to become members. Keynote speech at the annual Colloquium of the Ontario Continuing Education School Boards Administrators (CESBA); April 26, 2012 5 Where would a prospective immigrant find some measure of such a blueprint? The first place I would look is the official website of ‘Citizenship and Immigration Canada’. So I did. You would think that here you would find a good deal of information on what Canada expects of its immigrants and future citizens. Well, good luck! I invite you to search for yourselves. The essence of this was captured very nicely in a 2006 article in the Toronto Star by a former colleague of mine, Ken Coates, the former Dean of Arts at the University of Waterloo and a distinguished Canadian historian: “Canada has become, perhaps appropriately, the national version of the United Church of Canada… Attendance is down, as is its once potent political influence. There are many reasons for the slow and sad decline, but perhaps the underlying cause is that the United Church does not demand very much of its adherents. In its profound gentleness and decency, the United Church is flexible on attendance, expectations of financial support, and, most tellingly, theology.” Canada is a very decent country and a welcoming society. We are arguably the most flexible society you would find anywhere, and in appropriate measure, that is a good thing. However, somewhere along the line we have forgotten the place of cohesion in the health of a nation. Look back into the history and you will find virtually no example of a nation that has achieved greatness without having some strong threads running through it that bind the society in a common purpose. That purpose has to be more than just an occasional burst of nationalism over a hockey game. Our recent and current approach to immigration encourages increased diversity, and in a globalized world, that is a huge strength. We celebrate diversity through our multiculturalism policies, and rightly so. But we do not attach this freedom and pluralism to any clear sense of reciprocity of commitment to this country. We are increasingly defining our identity in terms of what we accept rather than what we expect. Therein lies a great deal of danger, and the challenge for all of us involved in helping to settle new Canadians.