By Howard Schneider
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, March 4 1998; Page A17

Nasser Assaer came to Canada from Iran, expecting that the country would surely accept him as a refugee from what he felt was imminent arrest back home for his political activities. That was eight years ago, and the fact that Assaer's status is still unresolved suggests why many in this country feel their immigration and refugee system is badly broken.

Regardless of the facts of Assaer's case – he is currently fighting a deportation order after his claim for refugee status was denied at one level – few disagree that the current system is slow, unreliable and has a poor record for distinguishing between the people Canada wants to stay and those that it doesn't.

A controversial plan under study by federal officials proposes fixing those and other problems by screening refugees more quickly and more aggressively and by imposing tough new language and education requirements aimed at ensuring that new immigrants "integrate" more easily into Canada without burdening the social system.

It is a radical proposal for a system regarded as one of the world's most liberal, in a country that has built a civic mythology around letting its new arrivals assemble into a "mosaic" of different languages and cultures instead of demanding assimilation.

And it has touched a nerve among people who fear it marks a hardening of attitudes toward those who aren't educated and can't speak English or French – this country's official languages.

"What they want to do is bring all the rich people from Third World countries," while accepting as few poor ones as possible, said Mohsen Alband, a Canadian citizen who emigrated from Iran and now works with the Federation of Iranian Refugees. "This is only for rich people."

Alband's group was protesting outside a convention hall here today while federal officials inside conducted the latest in a nationwide series of public hearings on what would be, if enacted, a thorough rewriting of Canada's policies for admitting immigrants and refugees.

Canada accepts around 220,000 immigrants each year and allows roughly another 30,000 people into the country as refugees from war or persecution. That is less than 1 percent of the country's population, but almost all settle in Toronto, Vancouver or Montreal, a reality that is challenging what Immigration Minister Lucienne Robillard calls the "absorptive capacity" of those cities. Toronto, for example, spends around $300 million a year teaching English as a second language.

Recognizing a broad range of immigration problems, from the country's slow action on deporting war criminals to its backlog of 29,000 refugee claims, a three-member study group was established to recommend changes. It concluded that Canadians have lost faith in the current system for good reason.

Some newcomers arrive with promises to invest in businesses, for example, but don't follow through. Others come with skills that allow them to work, but then bring parents or other family members who, despite promises of support, end up relying on public assistance. The refugee system, meanwhile, has lost its ability to determine who most needs Canada's assistance and seems to favor those who simply arrive at a Canadian port of entry over those who follow proper steps by applying from abroad.

The panel's recommendations, under review for inclusion in possible legislation next year, would more directly target people who can immediately pay their own way. Those hoping to be admitted to Canada as immigrants, and presumably future citizens, would have to be proficient in English or French, have the equivalent of at least two years of higher education, be between 21 and 45 years old and either have a firm job offer or enough cash to support their families for six months.

The new set of requirements, according to the study, "encapsulates what Canadians expect of this stream of immigration – characteristics such as self-reliance and resourcefulness, an ability to contribute and an appreciation that . . . social welfare should be used as a last resort."

While the report recommends broadening the circle of family members new immigrants can bring once they are in Canada – going beyond husbands, wives and children, to include common law and same-sex spouses, parents, and even close friends – those newcomers would also be required to learn English or French, and could only come with the promise of financial support for up to 10 years.

Even though such language requirements might make the job of educating Toronto's diverse population easier, the city's head of curriculum and programs called the new plan misguided. Rick Kollins said his grandparents came from the Ukraine unable to speak English, and to demand otherwise "is a very elitist approach that goes counter to the traditions of this country. . . . It is a narrow, short-sighted view."