No abstract

Migrants with precarious immigration status in Canada encounter surveillant assemblages of illegalization that threaten their safety and ability to access social goods. Drawing on qualitative interviews, media stories, and government documents, this article analyses how surveillance is produced through various ways of knowing, by various actors, and in different institutions in Canada. My case study demonstrates that the sites of operation for surveillant assemblages of illegalization extend beyond immigration authorities and into more diffuse sources including the police, the health‐care sector, banks, employment agencies, and acquaintances. I also suggest that there is a level of overlap and integration among such sites, including the use of shared databases and the possibility that any interaction with precarious status migrants can be reported to immigration authorities.

Background In June 2012, the Canadian government cut eligibility to the Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) for some refugees and refugee claimants.Analysis Drawing from news sources, this article examines the ways different actors—politicians and advocates—framed deservingness and undeservingness to support or contest the IFHP cuts. Deservingness refers to the ways value or worth is allocated to differently situated individuals based on their social location.Conclusions and implications The authors explore how deservingness is understood through a lens of citizenship, focusing on immigration status, understandings of “illegality” and criminalization of non-citizens, and varying versions of “Canadian values.” They argue that different interlocutors participated in the drawing and redrawing of boundaries of social and moral worth related to both presence in and access to social goods in Canada.RÉSUMÉContexte  En juin 2012, le gouvernement canadien a réduit l’admissibilité au Programme fédéral de santé intérimaire (PFSI) de certains—certaines réfugiés-réfugiées et demandeursdemandeures d’asile.Analyse Tiré de sources d’actualité, cet article examine la manière dont différents acteurs—des politiciens et des défenseurs—ont conceptualisé le mérite et l’indignité pour appuyer ou contester les réductions du PFSI. Le mérite se réfère aux manières dont la valeur est attribuée aux individus situés différemment en fonction de leur emplacement social.Conclusions et implications Les auteures explorent la manière dont le mérite est compris dans l’optique de la citoyenneté, en se concentrant sur le statut d'immigration, la compréhension de « l’illégalité » et la criminalisation des non-citoyens et diverses versions des « valeurs canadiennes ». Elles soutiennent que différents interlocuteurs ont participé a établir et redéfinir les limites de la valeur sociale et morale liées à la présence et à l’accès aux biens sociaux au Canada.

No abstract