Thanks Pierre…?
-
The Canadian government did not consider the expelled Ugandan Asians as refugees when Ugandan president Idi Amin ordered the expulsion of all Asians from Uganda in 1972 for dominating the Ugandan economy and supposed disloyalty. Canadian officials from the Department of Manpower and Immigration—which the creation of said conjoined department for immigration and labour in 1966 in itself seems objectifying of immigrants, as though the Canadian government solely saw immigrants as a body to exploit for labour to expand the Canadian economy, but I digress—Canadian officials from the Department of Manpower and Immigration warned the government not to treat or name Asian Ugandans as refugees as that would put them in a “position of having to react similarly in every country where the government wants to get rid of unpopular minorities by forcing them to migrate.” To absolve them of any responsibility to other refugees in the name of fairness, they labeled these Asian Ugandans as “stateless” or “Ugandan expellees”. The Canadian government also claimed that they were not refugees because they had the legal option to accept citizenship to Britain, India, Pakistan, or Bangladesh (although there were many who did not, especially Ismaelis, who renounced their previous citizenships in order to obtain Ugandan citizenship). Also, under the United Nations’ 1951 Convention, they were technically considered to be an oppressed minority instead of a refugee. Likewise, Canada did not have an official refugee policy until 1976.
It is curious that the government did not want to represent these South Asian Ugandans as refugees, but rather as immigrants, still wanting them to pass Canada’s immigration points system. There were many fears about the prospective Asian Ugandans coming to Canada, but this labeling of them as stateless immigrants rather than refugees was perhaps to suppress growing fears among Canadians that expellees would be a financial burden to government welfare and unemployment insurance programs. This fear was addressed by Reginald Smith, the High Commissioner for Canada in Uganda, “these people are not destitute refugees, they are the most desirable type of immigrants. It’s a windfall for us.” I found this interesting because Canadian officials labeled Asian Ugandans as well-educated, entrepreneurial, and highly skilled immigrants, while simultaneously arguing that immigrants like Asian Ugandans “have historically picked up jobs rejected by other Canadians” to address fears that they would be taking jobs away from Canadians (noteworthy that at this time, many Canadians were under financial stress as unemployment reached 6% in 1972). This paradox in labeling them a highly-skilled model minority to expand Canada’s economy as well as poor and desperate to take undesirable jobs is the perfect example of Canada’s veneer for “inclusive multiculturalism”.
Many Canadian immigrants, like my mother who has her masters in chemistry at Pakistan’s University of Sindh, came to Canada only to be disappointed that their qualifications and credentials are not recognized in Canada. The chapter’s name “Thank you Pierre” does seem fitting. I grew up hearing praise of Pierre Elliot Trudeau, for not only did he have boundary pushing fashion sensibilities, but also an open-minded, refreshing attitude to immigration. His policies did open considerable doors to immigrants coming to Canada in the 70’s and why many immigrants are grateful and revere Pierre, but I am skeptical to call his immigration policies altruistic, but more to save face after decades of racist and exclusionary policies (such as the 1885 Chinese Immigration Act head tax, 1914 Komagata Maru incident, and many more).
