Bureaucratic implementation practices and the making of Canada’s merit-based immigration policy

ABSTRACT

This article extends theories of how, in the mid-twentieth century, ‘merit-based’ immigration policies, which select immigrants based on individual human capital and social ties, replaced explicitly racist immigration policies that selected on national and racial group origins. It does so in reference to the historical Canadian case, where existing scholarship emphasises the role of macro and meso-level economic, cultural, and political factors in driving immigration policy change. Using a qualitative content analysis of unique archival data on admissions and deportation appeals, the article identifies high-level bureaucrats’ implementation practices as a micro-level mechanism of postwar immigration policy change. This mechanism allowed for low-risk policy experimentation and subsequently paved the way for a more systemic policy shift. The analysis also shows that individual-level assessments of traits like ‘merit’ were not designed to be ‘race free’ but emerged as a way of managing race, at the intersection of class and status. This gave the formal merit-based policy that later emerged a decidedly middle-class inflection. While focused on the historical Canadian case, the findings presented are relevant to broader debates about the role of immigration bureaucrats in policymaking and how race shapes nation-building under merit-based immigration policies.

KEYWORDS:

• Immigration policy
• immigration bureaucrats
• skilled workers
• race
• class

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1 Immigration Manual, version from 18.2.1954. In RG 76, Vol. 933, Binder 4.

2 All records referenced here are contained in RG 26, Vol 89, in files disaggregated by year. There were no relevant admissions in these records for the year 1960. The detailed breakdown by year of admissions notwithstanding Section 20 referenced here is: 1954 (65); 1955 (632); 1956 (616); 1957 (62); 1958 (50); 1959 (61); 1960 (0); 1961 (245). The majority of admissions are family-related; those cases are not examined here.

3 The British West Indies was the only majority non-European, non-Western Hemisphere country of origin whose citizens qualified for consideration as cases of exceptional merit under the Immigration Regulations in the early 1950s. The merit provision was not included among the ones that applied to admissions from India, Pakistan, Ceylon and of ‘other Asians’, a common descriptor applied to Chinese and Japanese. Details can be found in: Canada. Parliament. House of Commons. Debates. 21st Parl., 6th sess., vol. IV (1952): 4270–4271.

4 In most cases multiple reasons were given to justify the admissibility of an individual.

5 According to Library and Archives Canada, the files they have are a small sample, held for the purpose of ‘illustrating procedure and legal precedent’ https://www.lac-bac.gc.ca/005/005-1142.25-e.html. Accessed on 7 November 2019.

6 Letter from Deputy Minister to Hon. John R. Nicholson, 30 August 1965. In RG 76, Vol. 723, 551-25-2 Part 1. See also the following on the direct link between ‘unskilled’ immigration from The British West Indies and the ‘racial riots’ in the United Kingdom: Memorandum from the Assistant Deputy Minister to the Deputy Minister, Re: Future Immigration From West Indian Federation and Outside Colonies in the Caribbean Areas, 15 September 1958. In RG 26, Vol 124, File 3-33-6 Part 2.

7 Memorandum from the Assistant Deputy Minister to the Deputy Minister, Re: Future Immigration from West Indian Federation and Outside Colonies in the Caribbean Areas, 15 September 1958. In RG 26, Vol. 124, file 3-33-6 Part 1.

8 Memorandum form the Director of Immigration to the Deputy Minister, Re: A Review of Immigration from the British West Indies, 14 January 1955. In RG 26, Vol 124, File 3-33-6 Part 1.

9 Letter from Deputy Minister to Hon. John R. Nicholson, 30 August 1965. In RG 76, Vol. 723, 551-25-2 Part 1.

10 Memorandum from Minister to the Assistant to the Deputy Minister, 24 May 1960. In RG 26, Vol. 133, File 3-35-2 Part 8.

11 See, for example: (1) Letter from the Deputy Minister to the Head of the Commonwealth Division of the Department of External Affairs, 23 November 1961. In RG 26, Vol. 131, File 3-33-35 Part 3. (2) Notes on Canadian Immigration Policy, Deputy Minister’s Copy, Revised January 1961. In RG 26, Vol. 133, File 3-35-2 Part 8. (3) Draft memorandum from the Deputy Minister to the Minister, Re: Immigration White Paper – Submissions to Cabinet on Sponsorship and Immigration Appeals, 24 August 1965. In RG 76, Vol. 723, File 551-25-2 Part 1.

12 Memorandum from the Assistant Deputy Minister to the Deputy Minister, Re: Future Immigration from West Indian Federation and Outside Colonies in the Caribbean Areas, 15 September 1958. In RG 26, Vol. 124, File 3-33-6 Part 2.

13 Order-In-Council P.C. 1967-1616 of 16th August, 1967. Schedule A – Norms of Assessment of Independent Applicants.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada: [Insight Development Grant SSHRC 430-2017-00276 and CGS-SSHRC Doctoral Scholarship Award No. 767-2009-0172].