Lawyer and spokesperson for Our Alberta Advantage Avnish Nanda joins Alberta Primetime host Michael Higgins to discuss an online petition in opposition of the Alberta government’s upcoming referendum. This interview has been edited for clarity and length. Michael Higgins: What’s the motivation for your petition? Avnish Nanda: This referendum is about demonizing immigrants. It’s about making Alberta no longer a place that is welcoming to newcomers. This is not about policy. It’s about politics. None of the referendum questions are things within the provincial government to control, and they’re premised on false understandings of how immigration works and what temporary foreign workers do. For instance, people here on work visas or on student visas pay taxes. They pay taxes for the same services this government now wants to charge them for. With refugee claimants, the Alberta government doesn’t pay their health care expenses. That’s the federal government. So the referendum questions are misleading. They’re based on false pretenses, and you have to question why they’re being advanced. Why are we spending millions of dollars, maybe tens of million dollars, for a referendum that won’t change anything and is based on misleading facts? The only logical conclusion is this government wants to make Albertans forget about the other issues in this province within its control by blaming and scapegoating immigrants. MH: Why an online petition instead of a citizen-led initiative? AN: This has already started. It’s going to be on the ballot in October so a citizen-led initiative doesn’t really make sense. Why this started was we saw the landscape here, and we didn’t see anyone really standing up. We’re not politicians. We’re not people who are seeking elected office. We’re folks who are concerned with the narrative that’s going on in this province. We need immigrants. We’ve had immigrants come to this province since it was created and really build this place into the economic powerhouse that it is. Our agricultural sector, our oil sands, and our urban centers have become major players economically in this country and internationally because of the contribution of immigrants. We need immigrants to continue to be a prosperous and thriving place. This rhetoric from the very top of our elected officials undermines that. Why would anyone come here as an engineer, a doctor, or other necessary kind of labor when we have a government saying we’re going to charge you more and we’re going to demonize you? It doesn’t make sense. It’s counterintuitive. It’s counterproductive. MH: The questions ask about introducing a law mandating only Canadian citizens, permanent residents, and people with “Alberta-approved immigration status” be eligible for provincially-funded programs. What do you take away from that reference to “Alberta-approved immigration status”? AN: It is vague, it is misleading. Let’s just take a step back and look at what we’re dealing with here. For people who don’t fall under those first two categories, let’s say they’re temporary residents, people on temporary work permits or students. They pay taxes already. They are paying taxes for the same services. The Alberta government now wants to deny them for other temporary residents, let’s say refugee claimants. The federal government pays for their health care services. It’s not clear who that targets. Again, this is about politics over policy and I’m afraid the ramifications over this short-term political play is going to have broader consequences where Alberta is no longer going to be a competitive place to draw the best immigrants from around the world. MH: Newly introduced legislation will require employers to register with the province before accessing federal temporary foreign worker programs, and create a licensing system for immigration consultants and recruiters. Does that play into your concerns over the government’s direction with control over immigration? AN: It’s extremely frustrating. I’m a person who represents exploited immigrants who have been taken advantage of by unscrupulous immigration consultants or employers. Instead of a referendum, why don’t we do the stuff found in Bill 26 that addresses the situation in terms of people exploiting migrants taking advantage of the system, rather than this referendum? If we really want to improve the system and ensure we have the best immigrants here to fill the jobs we need them to fill without people exploring the system, let’s do that. Why are we having this referendum that’s going to cost tens of millions of dollars to effectively achieve nothing? Because it’s not within Alberta’s control to do any of this. The questions also don’t make any sense because, again, the people that Danielle Smith wants to target actually pay taxes for services and Alberta is not on the hook for their healthcare costs. MH: To what degree do you see your efforts competing with a petition push for a referendum on separation, and how does that play into this larger conversation? AN: It’s actually part and parcel of the political play that’s happening here. It’s sad. I think what this government is doing with these referendum questions is really tearing the social fabric of this province. We are Albertans, but we’re strong Canadians as well. Demonizing immigrants goes to the very core of what makes us Canadian and Albertan. I just don’t know why these decisions are being made. We have other issues in this province, and I would say none of them are reflected in the referendum questions.
