{"id":11817,"date":"2013-08-07T12:23:34","date_gmt":"2013-08-07T22:23:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=11817"},"modified":"2013-08-07T14:27:58","modified_gmt":"2013-08-08T00:27:58","slug":"yomiuri-on-points-system-visa-too-strict-few-takers-under-review-by-justice-ministry-which-institutionally-will-never-be-able-to-fix-it","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=11817","title":{"rendered":"Yomiuri on “Points System” visa: “Too strict”, few takers, under review by Justice Ministry (which institutionally will never be able to fix it)"},"content":{"rendered":"

eBooks, Books, and more from ARUDOU Debito (click on icon):
\n\"Guidebookcover.jpg\"<\/a>\"japaneseonlyebookcovertext\"<\/a>\"Handbook<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\u300c\u30b8\u30e3\u30d1\u30cb\u30fc\u30ba\u30fb\u30aa\u30f3\u30ea\u30fc\u3000\u5c0f\u6a3d\u5165\u6d74\u62d2\u5426\u554f\u984c\u3068\u4eba\u7a2e\u5dee\u5225\u300d\uff08\u660e\u77f3\u66f8\u5e97\uff09\"<\/a>\"sourstrawberriesavatar\"<\/a>\"debitopodcastthumb\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>
\nUPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
\nDEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
\n“LIKE” US on Facebook at http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/debitoorg<\/a>
\nhttp:\/\/www.facebook.com\/handbookimmigrants<\/a>
\nhttps:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JapaneseOnlyTheBook<\/a>
\nhttps:\/\/www.facebook.com\/BookInAppropriate<\/a><\/p>\n

Hi Blog. \u00a0An attempted panacea to Japan’s lack of formal immigration policy floated many moons ago (and discussed here<\/a> and here<\/a>) was a “Points System” visa, here to bring “higher-skilled” workers (koudo jinzai<\/em>). \u00a0I critiqued it for its probable failure in the Japan Times here<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The failure has officially happened. \u00a0Even the Justice Ministry admits below that the visa regime has attracted few people, and that, as Debito.org has reported before, is because its requirements are too strict.<\/p>\n

But to me it’s no wonder it failed. \u00a0It’s not merely (as alluded below) an issue of criteria, but rather institutionalized treatment of immigrants. \u00a0We saw attitudes towards immigration last summer when ministries debated how immigrants should be treated<\/a>, and cross-ministerial officials only weakly offered the same old hackneyed conclusions and lessons unlearned: \u00a0Privilege granted to Nikkei with the right bloodlines, more attention devoted to how to police NJ than how to make them into Japanese citizens (with their civil and human rights protected), insufficient concern given for assimilation and assistance once NJ come to Japan, and almost no consultation with the NJ who are already in Japan making a life as to what assistance they might need.<\/p>\n

This is what happens when you put a people-handling policy solely in the hands of a policing agency (i.e., the Justice Ministry): \u00a0Those people being perpetually treated as potential criminals. \u00a0There is automatically less focus on what good these people will do and latent suspicion about what harm they might. \u00a0It doesn’t help when you also have an administrative regime trying to find any excuse possible to shorten visas and trip immigrants up to “reset the visa clock” for Permanent Residency, through minor administrative infractions<\/a>\u00a0(not to mention the fact that changing from your current visa to this “Points System” visa resets your “visa clock” once again).\u00a0\u00a0It’s official\u00a0ijiwaru<\/em>, and without a separate ministry (i.e., an Imincho) specifically dedicated configuring immigration or integration into Japanese society, things will not be fixed. \u00a0Arudou Debito<\/p>\n

\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/<\/p>\n

Few foreigners tempted by points system<\/strong>
\n August 7, 2013. The Yomiuri Shimbun, courtesy of JK<\/strong>
\nhttp:\/\/the-japan-news.com\/news\/article\/0000435956<\/a><\/p>\n

A points-based preferential immigration system expected to attract 2,000 highly skilled foreign professionals to Japan annually accepted only 17 foreigners in its first 11 months, a dismal result that has prompted the government to review the criteria experts have blamed for the low number, The Yomiuri Shimbun has learned.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The system was adopted by the government last May to encourage skilled foreigners to take up residence in Japan and help boost Japanese economic growth. It gives these specialists privileges such as a shorter minimum-required period of stay for obtaining permanent residence.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Foreigners doing research at universities and other institutions, those with professional skills and corporate managers are eligible to use the system. They are given points in accordance with such criteria as academic credentials, professional and scholastic achievements and promised annual income.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

For instance, a researcher with a doctorate who will work at an academic institution is awarded 30 points, while one with a master\u2019s degree gets 20 points. Applicants who get at least 70 points in total are recognized as \u201chighly skilled professionals\u201d and can receive preferential immigration treatment including the right to acquire permanent residence within five years instead of the normal 10; permission for a spouse to work here; and permission to bring a parent to Japan to help look after the professional\u2019s children.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

However, only 17 foreigners were admitted to Japan under the point system between May 2012 and early April this year. This number rose to 434 when foreigners who were already in Japan and successfully applied for the system are added. The total includes 246 from China, 32 from the United States, 19 from India and 16 from South Korea.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

In April and May, an expert panel at the Justice Ministry discussed reports that the current criteria were too strict.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

One criticism was that the yearly income guideline was based on the salary of company workers, making it difficult for researchers at universities with lower yearly incomes to gain high points. Another was that only applicants with a yearly income of at least 10 million yen are allowed to have a parent accompany them to Japan.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

After hearing these reports, the goverment began considering the easing of the criteria. Some possibilities include raising the points given for research papers submitted or patents obtained from the current ceiling of 15 points, shortening the minimum-required period of stay from five years to three for applying for permanent residence, and allowing foreigners on lower yearly incomes to bring an accompanying parent.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

These issues will be worked out among the Justice, Foreign and Health, Labor and Welfare ministries, with the government planning to amend the system by year-end.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The government\u2019s policy of increasing the number of foreigners to be admitted into Japan via the points system was specified in its growth strategy compiled in June.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cTo help our country win in the global competition for excellent manpower, we\u2019ll review the system and call on universities and companies to make better use of it,\u201d said a senior official at the Justice Ministry, which is in charge of immigration control.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

ENDS<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

An attempted panacea to Japan’s lack of formal immigration policy floated many moons ago (and discussed here and here) was a “Points System” visa, here to bring “higher-skilled” workers (koudo jinzai). I critiqued it for its probable failure in the Japan Times. Now the failure has officially happened. Even the Justice Ministry admits below that the visa regime has attracted few people, and that, as Debito.org has reported before, is because its requirements are too strict. <\/p>\n

But to me it’s no wonder it failed. It’s not merely (as alluded below) an issue of criteria, but rather institutionalized treatment of immigrants. We saw attitudes towards immigration last summer when ministries debated how immigrants should be treated, and cross-ministerial officials only weakly offered the same old hackneyed conclusions and lessons unlearned: Privilege granted to Nikkei with the right bloodlines, more attention devoted to how to police NJ than how to make them into Japanese citizens (with their civil and human rights protected), insufficient concern given for assimilation and assistance once NJ come to Japan, and almost no consultation with the NJ who are already in Japan making a life as to what assistance they might need.<\/p>\n

This is what happens when you put a people-handling policy solely in the hands of a policing agency (i.e., the Justice Ministry): Those people being perpetually treated as potential criminals. There is automatically less focus on what good these people will do and latent suspicion about what harm they might. It doesn’t help when you also have an administrative regime trying to find any excuse possible to shorten visas and trip immigrants up to “reset the visa clock” for Permanent Residency, through minor administrative infractions (not to mention the fact that changing from your current visa to this “Points System” visa resets your “visa clock” once again). It’s official ijiwaru, and without a separate ministry (i.e., an Imincho) specifically dedicated configuring immigration or integration into Japanese society, things will not be fixed. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[36,12,26,4,16,60,46,64,53],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11817","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bad-social-science","category-immigration-assimilation","category-ironies-hypocrisies","category-japanese-government","category-labor-issues","category-nj-voices-ignored","category-practical-advice","category-sitys","category-unsustainable-japanese-society"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11817","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11817"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11817\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11817"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11817"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11817"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}