A Pan - Canadian Settlement Voice : Constraints and Opportunities

Each year, more than 200,000 persons arrive in Canada seeking to make a new home here. They form part of a growing transnational flow of individuals, goods, services, information, and ideas that characterize a globalized world. Canada needs these newcomers and has a strong interest in ensuring their settlement, including labour market integration, access to education, and civic participation. Newcomers also bring with them new perspectives on governance and social issues. As they move to claim social and political citizenship in Canada, thereby placing their own demands on the system, they challenge the nature of existing institutions and policies. Under conditions of globalization, governance occurs at various levels, in the economic marketplace and in society, within states and transnationally. Power is fragmented and reconstituted in many different centres. In Canada, a three-tier structure of federal, provincial, and municipal governments may be inadequate for meeting the complexities of contemporary immigration. Similarly, existing nongovernmental voices on issues of immigration and settlement may lack the resources to master these complexities. This briefing paper discusses advocacy pertaining to immigration and settlement issues within the context of various legislative, constitutional, and political factors found at various levels of government. Its purpose is to provide a background for discussions regarding the creation of a new pan-Canadian settlement voice. It begins with a brief overview of past advocacy efforts in Canada, including relations between the state and various ethnic organizations. Next, questions of representation for ethnoracial minorities and newcomers are addressed. Third, we examine jurisdictional questions as outlined in Canada's constitution and legislation. Fourth, we look at several factors in the overall political environment that impact advocacy organizations in Canada: decentralized governance, a model for relations between the state and advocacy organizations that favors cooperation over conflict, and funding dependency. The concluding section reviews the contents of the paper in brief and restates our central finding: the impact of advocacy efforts is contingent on a complex set of evolving relations with government agencies, involving both collaboration and conflict.