a Failed Discourse of Distrust Amid Significant Procedural Change: The Harper Government´s Legacy in Immigration and Refugee Law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines two legacies of the Harper government in immigration and refugee law. The first is a discursive legacy, that is, a legacy pertaining to the governments particular characterization of claimants for refugee and immigrant status seen through a series of its legal initiatives. The government engaged in a ofdistrust with respect to claimants, repeatedly identifying them as persons trying to fool or take advantage of Canada's immigration and social welfare schemes. The second legacy pertains more to a number of institutional and procedural changes in the immigration system. These initiatives have not received the same attention given the higher profile measures that comprise the discourse ofdistrust. However, they embody trends in Canadian immigration law toward enhancing the authority of executive government in administering the country's immigration programs, together with a consequent loss of security for the prospective and recent newcomer to Canada. In the end the discursive legacy of the Harper government appears to have outweighed its institutional legacy. The Conservative Government took a sword to many of the long-established understandings that informed Canada's immigration law - and it seems that the Governments truculence in matters dealing with immigrants and refugees served as one of the bases on which the election of October 2015 turned. For the foreseeable future, political discussions about immigration issues in Canada will start from a different place than the distrust and fear of the stranger
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.056 | 0.128 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".