C/O Jessica Yang
North Korean human rights advocacy group HanVoice is helping refugees resettle in Canada
According to Human Rights Watch, North Korea’s government is among the world’s most repressive, severely limiting the freedoms of its citizens. The North Korean government has been found to have committed numerous crimes against humanity.
HanVoice, founded in 2007, is a Toronto-based organization advocating for North Korean human rights. Originally founded by three law students invested in the North Korean cause, HanVoice has since grown into a nation-wide network of activists.
With over 300 members, HanVoice’s work has been focussed on resettling North Korean refugees in Canada and hosting international human rights training sessions for Canadian students. At McMaster University, HanVoice McMaster is one of HanVoice’s 15 chapters across the country.
“After watching a documentary [about North Korea, the founders] were looking around online for different causes to get involved and they found nothing in Canada so they decided they would start their own,” said Taylor Boss, Co-President of HanVoice McMaster.
HanVoice has been advocating for Canada to accept North Korean refugees for the past eight years, according to their website. This advocacy involved meeting with over 200 policymakers, testifying numerous times in the House of Commons and making multiple appearances on national news networks.
Finally, on Oct. 26, HanVoice announced a pilot program allowing Canadians to privately sponsor North Korean refugees.
The program will aim to bring five North Korean families from Thailand, where many North Korean refugees are currently situated, to Canada. The program will specifically target women, who are often victims of gender-based violence.
Emma Baliat, Co-President of HanVoice McMaster, highlighted that Canada will be the third country globally to accept North Korean refugees, after South Korea and the United States. The Canadian program is unique in that it allows Canadians to privately sponsor North Korean families.
Boss added that many Canadians take pride in the country’s willingness to accept refugees but that the North Korean cause has still been ignored and that, in some cases, North Koreans have been deported from Canada.
Baliat and Boss both highlighted that everyone can make a difference, including those in the McMaster community, even if the issue seems inaccessible.
“As we've seen in the McMaster community, a lot of people don't really know what the journey is, or they think that the North Korean refugee issue is something that's impossible to help with. [They think that] North Korea is so far off, [that] there are so many restrictions and there's no way it's a cause that we will be able to contribute to. And so I think that's what hinders people from actually looking to see how they can help,” said Baliat.
Boss added that this perception of North Korea is largely due to media portrayals, which often depict the country as being isolated, removed from the rest of the world and impossible to access or help.
“Every time that [the media portrays] it like that, it really doesn't help anyone because this is an issue that we can be involved with. These are real people and real lives who are managing to escape and they have stories that we want to help share,” said Boss.
HanVoice McMaster has been raising money to contribute to the resettlement of five families in Canada, with a fundraising goal of $2000.
Students at McMaster can help support the North Korean cause by donating to HanVoice McMaster or reach out to HanVoice on their website.
Hamilton is a city of stark inequalities. As the city’s economy booms, many Hamiltonians are swept to the sidelines as a result of a housing crisis and employment insecurity. Compared to other cities in Ontario, Hamilton also has a high proportion of working class people, disabled people and refugees, who are often the first to feel the brunt of these changes.
Health outcomes over the past decade have been bleak, and according to many disability justice and healthcare advocates, show no signs of changing unless bold steps are taken to support Hamilton’s marginalized populations.
In 2010, the Hamilton Spectator released Code Red, a project that mapped the connections between income and health across Hamilton to explore the social determinants of health. Using census and hospital data from 2006 and 2007, the report showed strong disparities in health outcomes between the Hamilton’s wealthiest and poorest neighbourhoods.
The Code Red project shows that social and economic inequalities lead to health inequalities. The lower city, which experiences disproportionately higher rates of poverty, also has significantly poorer health outcomes.
In February 2019, an updated Code Red project was released using data from 2016 and 2017. The updated Code Red project found that in general, health outcomes in Hamilton have declined and inequalities have grown.
Since the first Code Red project in 2010, the average lifespan in parts of the lower city has declined by 1.5 years. Furthermore, the gap in lifespan between Hamilton neighbourhoods has grown from 21 to 23 years.
These results come as no surprise to Sarah Jama, an organizer with the disability justice network of Ontario. According to Jama, given the lack of political change coupled with changes in the city of Hamilton, it was inevitable that poverty would worsen and inequalities would deepen.
Jama notes that health care and social services tend to be compacted into the downtown core, which has tended to have a higher concentration of people who rely on these services.
However, rising costs of living within the downtown core has meant that the people who access these services are being priced out. According to a report by the Hamilton Social Planning and Research Council, eviction rates have skyrocketed in the past decade. As a result, the people who rely on these services have to make compromises about whether to live in a place with supports available close by, or a place that is affordable.
“The more compromises you have to meet with regard to your ability to live freely and safely in the city the harder it is to survive,” said Jama.
Denise Brooks, the executive director for Hamilton Urban Core, works directly with people at the margins of Hamilton’s healthcare system. Brooks noted that the 2010 Code Red project was a wake up call for many.
“For me one of the biggest takeaways [from the first Code Red project] was even greater resolve that this really is a political issue and that it hasn't been looked at and is not being looked at as a crisis,” stated Brooks.
The 2010 Code Red project sparked projects including the Hamilton neighbourhood action strategy and pathways to education program. According to Brooks, while these initiatives were beneficial, more robust policy is needed to substantially address poverty.
“... [C]an we see any change in policy orientation? Did we see a reallocation of resources? Did we see a redistribution of priorities in any way? I would have to say no,” said Brooks.
The updated Code Red project calls for a restructuring of the traditional health care system to include social and economic programs that contribute to people’s overall health.
However, recent political changes have led many health advocates to worry that the coming years will see change for the worse. Matthew Ing, a member of the DJNO research committee, notes that provincial cuts to a slew social assistance programs threaten to further exacerbate the existing inequalities in Hamilton.
In November 2018, the provincial government announced reforms to Ontario Works and the Ontario Disability Support Program that aimed to streamline social assistance and incentivize people to return to work. Among many changes, this includes aligning the definition of disability to align with the more narrow definition used the federal government.
According to Jama, narrowing the eligibility requirements for disability support makes it likely that people will slip through the cracks. They will put the responsibility on the municipality to provide services, meaning that care is likely to differ between providers.
“The onus is going to be on individual service providers on all these people to really decide who really fits this idea of being disabled enough to be on the service versus it being like sort of supervised by the province,” stated Jama.
Additionally, in February 2019 the provincial government announced plans to streamline and centralize the health care process. Under the proposed model, Ontario Health teams led by a central provincial agency will replace the existing 14 local health integration networks across the province.
Brooks noted that this has not been the first time that the province sought out to reform healthcare. Having worked in community health for years, Brooks remarks that the changes that are made to healthcare frequently exclude people on the margins.
“It's always the people who are the most marginalized, the most vulnerable, the socially isolated and historically excluded that remain on those margins all the time regardless of the change that go through,” said Brooks.
Currently, patient and family advisory committees work to inform the work of LHINs. The government has not announced whether PFACs will be retained under the new model, but Ing worries that a centralized model would leave patients and families out of the decision making process.
However, Ing recognizes that the current system is far from perfect, noting that disabled communities were not adequately represented on PFACs. According to Ing, this speaks to the much larger problem of political erasure of people with disabilities.
“Disability justice means that we must organize across movements, and we must be led by the people who are most impacted,” writes Ing.
The DJNO was created in order to mobilize disabled communities and demand a holistic approach to healthcare reform. According to Jama, this includes seeing race, income, and disability as fundamentally interconnected.
However as social assistance measures are cut at the provincial level, the future for disability justice is murky. The results of the updated Code Red project paint a sobering picture of the state of health inequality in Hamilton. Given the direction that healthcare reform is taking on the provincial level, health and poverty advocates worry about the future of healthcare equality in Hamilton.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Kian Yousefi Kousha
As newcomers learn to make Hamilton their new home, Centre[3] for Print and Media Arts has been dedicated to providing free arts programming as part of the [Nu]Links community arts project by [Nu]Links Coordinator, Hitoko Okada, and funded by the Ontario Trillium Foundation. Many of the workshops have explored narratives around migration and settlement through diverse mediums.
These newcomers arrived to Hamilton with suitcases filled with valuable experiences waiting to be told. However, there aren’t many spaces dedicated to newcomers having a platform to express their point of view and most importantly, share their stories. After all, the art of storytelling is cathartic and can ultimately ease the adaptation of newcomers to their new home.
“The purpose of the project was to use the arts as a way for newcomers and refugees to access space in the Hamilton arts community and to decrease isolation. [I] directed programming to explore and facilitate collective and personal narratives instead of settlement integration into dominant white Canadian culture, which is often the approach around settlement programs,” explained Okada.
[spacer height="20px"]Okada also directed the program towards facilitating professional opportunities for emerging artists and art educators to develop their social practice. In the same manner, the [Nu]Links program were an opportunity to help newcomer art educators break down barriers towards practicing their work in Hamilton.
For Razan Samara, an undergraduate student at McMaster University, providing this platform and creating space for newcomer youths to explore storytelling was a crucial goal while designing a photography and writing workshop series. With an immense support from Hitoko Okada, and local artist, Sahra Soudi, the workshops took place throughout September and October and will culminate with a community arts exhibition on November Art Crawl.
[spacer height="20px"]The workshop attendees received the opportunity to attend photography, writing and editing presentations, go on a photo walk through downtown Hamilton and have a portrait studio session with professional photography equipment and do-it-yourself props.
Joan Carias, who took part in the [Nu]Links workshop believes that her photography skills had improved with the help of the feedback provided during the workshop. She’s excited to accept photography requests and start taking pictures of events. Carias found out about the [Nu]Links workshop by rummaging through piles of pamphlets at the YMCA.
“Perhaps there are more opportunities out there for newcomers but [they’re] not well posted…I think that [programs] should give attention [to] these opportunities and increase [accessibility to] applicants,” explained Carias.
[spacer height="20px"]In fact, there is a need in Hamilton for more accessible arts programming. Similar programs to [Nu]Links will make opportunities and resources accessible for everyone to push their creativity to the next level. This will also provide them with an avenue to share their stories.
“Newcomer narratives are often told through the frameworks of social workers, case managers, healthcare professionals and other institutional lenses. This program gives the space, facilitation and support for their stories to be told from their own voices,” explained Okada.
Centre [3] will showcase the works of workshop attendees through a community arts exhibit at 173 James Street North from Nov. 9 to Nov. 30. The opening reception will take place at 7 p.m. on Friday Nov. 9 during Art Crawl. The exhibit is an opportunity for the [Nu]Links attendees to experience Art Crawl while sharing their own photography and written works with the Hamilton community.
“The [Nu]Links youth programs have been some of our most engaging programs. The experience has brought the youths together to build creative community and belonging. In this exhibition, the youths share their world view and life as they see it and tell it. It is contemporary coming of age narratives in our current polarizing climate,” said Okada.
Note: Razan Samara, Arts and Culture Editor for the Silhouette, was involved with this project.
[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
As the Canadian population continues to welcome Syrian refugees into the country, assistance from the Canadian community is needed to aid the Syrian immigrants adjust to their new homes and to live comfortably within their new borders. Having left their homes, families, and belongings behind, many refugees are in need of housing, furniture, food and clothing among other necessities.
Faizan Ashraf has established a new project in Hamilton to do just that. The 20 for 20 project provides many services to refugees, from English language training to information about the labour workforce and location-based orientation. Ashraf was inspired to create this initiative after noticing great efforts made in other parts of Canada to help in the resettlement of refugees. Ashraf began searching for the different ways that he could get involved in the mobilization of resources to make a difference for refugees and modeled 20 for 20 after similar initiatives at Ryerson and Lifeline Syria in Toronto.
The 20 for 20 project will work with sponsors from the community. These local sponsors include both individuals and small businesses, who will financially support refugee families throughout their first year in Canada, while 20 for 20 volunteers will take the lead on helping refugee families settle into their new daily lives.
The 20 for 20 project provides many services to refugees, from English language training to information about the labour workforce and loacation-based orientation.
Despite the title, Ashraf assured that the project is not limited to 20 families. “Twenty families was the initial goal that IWC had established just before we formed our partnership. We decided to continue with the same goal allowing for the flexibility of growth in the future based on our progress. From an operational perspective, working towards bringing 20 refugee families through the community sponsorship model is ideal. It challenges us without straining our resources or putting undue pressure on the volunteer pool,” he explained.
The project has already helped several families. According to Hayley Welham, the spokesperson for the initiative, all the families identified by the IWC are currently benefitting from the project. “The Immigrants Working Centre has secured a group of five sponsors for several refugee families. Once their resettlement applications have been completed, they will be submitted to Citizenship and Immigration Canada for approval,” she said.
Local businesses have been urged to get involved in the project by donating money to help support the families’ financial needs or by choosing to sponsor a family instead. The Hamilton public can also volunteer with the initiatives. Volunteers can help teach English as a second language at a registered agency to the refugees, join a group with five other sponsors and help support a family themselves, and donate clothing and household items to the Salvation Army to be given out to the families. More information about this project and how others can contribute is available on the 20 for 20 project’s website.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
[adrotate banner="16"]
[feather_share show="twitter, google_plus, facebook, reddit, tumblr" hide="pinterest, linkedin, mail"]
As the refugee crisis continues, with thousands of people fleeing crisis in the Middle East. Canada has been proactive in taking steps to accept Syrian refugees despite citizens’ concerns over security after the horrific Paris attacks orchestrated by ISIS. While it is in Canadian spirit to be accepting and receive these refugees with open arms, there is also the appropriate way of doing so. Trudeau has faced criticism regarding his original plan to bring in 25,000 Syrians by the end of this year, with 51 percent of Canadians disapproving of his plan to settle Syrians across Canada. Since the backlash, Trudeau has backtracked but not necessarily in the most diligent manner. The new refugee settlement plan consists of accepting 25,000 Syrians by the end of February 2016, but the most controversial and illogical aspect of the new plan is the rejection of unaccompanied or single straight adult men.
In an interview with CBC, Trudeau claims that Canada will not be accepting single adult men right away because he claims that the most vulnerable should be given priority. While he says this decision is not final, his statement raises the question of whether vulnerability is really the reason for this decision? If it is, then are these young, single men not more vulnerable to recruitment by ISIS? If one of Canada’s goals is to put an end to ISIS’ terror, then openly discriminating against single Syrian men is not the best way of showing support. In fact, this decision could have serious implications in terms of who ISIS chooses to target during their enrolment process, because the men who feel excluded by a country that claims to be all-embracing may be more inclined to find a home with the terror group. This is not as far-fetched an idea as it may seem, considering the propaganda ISIS uses to draw men and women in. They are made to feel wanted and accepted. This new adjustment to Trudeau’s plan is short-sighted and illogical because it can be argued that single men are just as vulnerable as single women. Perhaps their vulnerabilities manifest differently, but they exist nonetheless.
Another explanation could be that Trudeau’s exclusion of single men is for security reasons. There is a great concern among many Canadians that a mass movement of Syrian refugees into the country could allow terrorists to slip under the radar. Yet, while it may be more common to see male ISIS members in online propaganda videos and on the ground initiating attacks, it is wrong to assume that single men are the most high-risk. Even though the Canadian government has not directly said that this is the reason for excluding single Syrian males, it surely sends a questionable message. Not only is it wrong to discriminate against single men, while men who have families are welcome, it is naïve to think that these men are the only ones capable of working for ISIS undercover and spreading terror in Canada. In fact, one of the suicide bombers in the Paris attacks was 26-year-old female Hasna Aitboulahcen, who also opened fire on police when they approached her flat, with a Kalashnikov assault rifle.
Experts have said that the risk of a terrorist getting into Canada during refugee settlement is slim, but even if it is a concern it should not manifest itself as discrimination against one gender over the other. The reality is that yes, there are risks associated with accepting a large number of refugees in a short period of time. However, a better way of responding to Canadians’ criticisms is to extend the timeline of Syrian integration into Canada. They can still be protected abroad during the process, but there is value in ensuring the settlement of refugees is done in a safe, controlled manner without leaving one group in the dust with no firm promise of acceptance in the near future.
[thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
By: Nimesha Wickramasuriya
The 2011 Syrian civil war has resulted in more than ten million individuals in need of humanitarian assistance. Many have fled to neighboring European countries but some have been denied access. For example, last week Croatia was overwhelmed with the number of refugees entering their country and sent thousands of individuals to the Hungarian border without the assurance that they will be granted safe access. In light of these recent events, I would like to take a look at the Canadian history in refugee assistance and what we can do to alleviate the Syrian refugee crisis.
Canada has a long history of involvement with refugee assistance, even before the country became independent of British rule. In 1776, 3,000 African-American individuals escaping slavery were granted safe passage into Canada. In fact many Canadian citizens can trace their origins in Canada back to humble refugee beginnings, which contributes to the Canadian population’s multicultural blend.
Unfortunately, Canada also has a history of hostility; in 1939, 907 Jews fleeing Nazi persecution boarded a ship called St. Louis and headed to Cuba hoping to escape Germany. The Cuban government, as well as the United States, and other Latin American countries refused to grant them access. As a last resort, they started their journey towards North America hoping Canada would take them in. After a month long voyage at sea, they reached our border only to be refused entrance again as Prime Minister Mackenzie King felt that this was “not a Canadian problem.” They were forced to return back to Germany where all of them were placed in concentration camps, and where 254 of them faced excruciatingly horrible deaths.
This occurred over 75 years ago, and the outcome of St. Louis still haunts our collective consciousness, yet this event did not hinder the hostility of Canadians in the future towards accepting refugees. In 2010, after the end of the Sri Lankan civil war, a boat occupying 490 refugee escapees reached British Columbian coastal waters after a three month long voyage. They did not receive a warm welcome; they were faced with armed border guards and RCMP officers, as if escaping the war-torn country was not enough. Their boat was thoroughly inspected by officials for human trafficking, drugs and “terrorist-like activities” and even after the full inspection they were detained in the boat for several months until Canada made a decision. Meanwhile, the health of the refugees declined greatly without medical assistance, resulting in one death and several others severe cases of illness.
I hope history does not repeat itself with the Middle Eastern refugee crisis. Fortunately, some European countries have been providing assistance: Germany has granted access to 50,000 refugees per year, while the UK has pledged to take in 20,000 refugees directly from Syrian refugee camps by 2020 and France has consented to 24,000 individuals.
But with over 10 million individuals displaced from their homes, this is not enough. Canada and the Harper government has agreed to take in an additional 10,000 refugees from Syria and Iraq over the next four years but has also elusively stated that there may be “processing delays.” This is a pitifully low number considering that Ontario being larger than Germany, the UK and France combined.
After the St. Louis and the Sri Lankan-Tamil boat, one would think the barriers that we put up would be broken down, so what is keeping our country from accepting more? At the moment the government and media seem to be one-sided, only focusing on the negative aspects of accepting refugees.
This type of coverage can result in racism and damaging stereotypes. I believe accepting more refugees might actually help Canada by contributing to a more diverse population and better unifying Canada with the Middle East. We ought to learn from our past mistakes, disregard our prejudices, and allow more refugees into our country.
Nolan Matthews / Senior Andy Editor
Last month, Canada’s Immigration Minister Jason Kenney released a list of 27 “safe” countries that drastically reduces the rights of people who hope to leave those countries as refugees. It’s absolutely ridiculous. Kenney claims the list was created to resolve the perceived problem that Canada is letting in too many refugees that would otherwise, in his mind, somehow overrun our country.
Usually when a refugee claimant arrives in Canada they have 60 days to get settled and put together their case, which is heard by a judge who determines whether or not the claimant has sufficient reason to be accepted as a refugee. A claimant from one of the 27 designated country has their first hearing 45 days after they arrive - a timeline that doesn’t seem close to being realistic. That’s 45 days to find a lawyer, a place to live and a way to pay for it all. The Canadian Bar Association recommends having four months to prepare for a refugee hearing.
Kenney defends the shorter timelines by saying that they will make the refugee application process more efficient, but we’re asking people to talk about the worst things that have happened to them. It can take a lot of time to tell a good friend about something terrible, let alone a judge sitting at the end of a table. And a faster process will send refugees more quickly back into the dangerous situations they came from.
Of course, that’s only true if they came from a dangerous situation in the first place. A popular term with Jason Kenney is “bogus,” meaning he sees many refugee claimants as not really being in danger and simply trying to take advantage of Canada’s social services. Kenney’s impression of “bogus” refugees is largely based on flawed statistics spewed by Rick Dykstra, Kenney’s parliamentary secretary. In a parliamentary meeting, Dykstra claimed that in 2010 “Canada received 2,300 [refugee] claims from Hungary, which is 23 times more than any other country.” Hungary is one of the countries on Kenney’s safe list.
“The fact that most gets to the core of why further refugee reform is needed is that virtually every one of these claims was abandoned, withdrawn, or rejected,” said Dykstra. “Refugee claimants themselves are choosing not to see their claims to completion, meaning they are not in genuine need of Canada’s protection. In other words, their claims are bogus.”
So much of what Dykstra said is wrong. The Canadian Council for refugees, which got its data from an access to information request from the Immigration and Refugee Board, states that in 2010 there were 1,973 claims from Hungary, not 2,300. Of those claims, 1,089 were abandoned.
Unless you consider about 55 per cent to be “virtually every” claim, Dykstra and Kenney are not only deluded but plain wrong.
I also wonder if Kenney and Dykstra ever considered why a refugee claimant might decide to abandon their claim - other than the reason being they’re scam artists. Perhaps claimants are finding Canada not nearly as welcoming as we like to think we are.
Perhaps the most disturbing consequence of being from a “safe” country is that refugee claimants will only have access to health care if they have a condition that threatens public health. I’ve spoken to a refugee settlement worker who told me about a woman who had been severely burned all over her body by her husband and wasn’t able to access health care because her condition wasn’t a public health concern. It’s completely ridiculous.
As a country, we’re moving towards a very negative view of people seeking protection and closing our doors to people we should be helping. We are obligated to do so much more.
Matt Martorana & Karthicka Suthanandan
McMaster Debating Society
Q: Is the Balanced Refugee Reform Act going to be too damaging to future immigration?
Matt: Immigration Minister John Kennedy recently introduced Bill C-31, which will reform Canada’s refugee policy. A refugee is a person living outside their country of origin or habitual residence because they have suffered persecution on account of race, religion or political opinion. According to Kennedy, Canada’s immigration office is flooded with “bogus” refugee claims, where many people who seek refugee status are not in “serious danger.” To solve this problem, Kennedy intends to label certain countries as “safe countries” and thus make it more difficult for individuals from these countries to obtain refugee status.
Kari: The changes incurred by the Balanced Refugee Reform Act are to the benefit of those claimants with founded claims because it ensures them faster and more inclusive support. These reforms are simply that – reforms to a system that remains fundamentally the same, simply working faster and more efficiently. Currently, the number of unfounded claims unnecessarily slows down the system. The matter of people abusing the system at the risk of others in serious need is no small matter. For individuals in need, this is a hindrance to the new life they wish to begin, while for those abusing it, buying time is all they want. The proposed bill has the ability to cut wait times for hearings with the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada from 19 months to 60 days, removing failed claimants within a year as opposed to several. With these changes, the Canadian Government is even now able to increase the annual refugee target resettlement from 2,500 to 14,500.
Matt: The Balanced Refugee Reform Act puts too much authority into the hands of the Immigration Office, and specifically into the hands of the Immigration Minister, allowing them to be the judge, jury and executioner of determining who will qualify as a refugee. Rather than allowing the people whose job it is to help refugee claimants decide which countries are safe, politicians become the ones in charge of the decision. This is a serious problem, because determining which country is “safe” becomes a political question.
Kari: The system is still the same and will take into account the same humanitarian beliefs, though it uses authority to create structure and protect itself from corruption. Assuming that unfounded claimants cannot be distinguished from those with legitimate claims simplifies and underestimates the hearing process. The new bill comes out of a strong understanding of the system. The fact of the matter is that there are people who abuse the system and it is done so in correlation to certain areas, making the new policy’s regulations about safe zones necessary. For instance, claims from Hungary nearly doubled between 2010 and 2011, even though the rate of acceptance is only about two per cent. Consequently, these high rates of rejected claims contribute to the worsening backlog that is slowing the system to a halt.
Matt: The focus on the “bogus refugee claims” is nothing more than a political tactic that Kennedy wants to use to ensure that this bill passes. I do not deny that there are individuals who are abusing the system, but we have seen this tactic used by the Harper government before. Either you are on board to resolve the problem of bogus refugees or you are not. Suddenly, not supporting this bill means not solving the problem. While we should solve the bogus refugee problem, Bill C-31 has serious flaws, such as authorizing to strip refugees of their status and deport them years later if the government figures that the refugee no longer faces a risk of persecution. People who have already been approved as refugees might be deported even after years of living in Canada. This bill will also give the government the authority to detain any non-citizen as an irregular citizen for up to a year without any judicial review.
Kari: The current system negatively affects the claimants themselves, as well as Canadian taxpayers, with failed claims costing $50,000 of social service expenses. The reformed system cuts costs to $29,000, will allows for savings toward other areas. The Canadian government also announced increasing Resettlement Assistance Program funding to $54 million. They aim to promote more successful integration into society for refugees, because contrary to this idea that the government will begin arbitrarily deporting refugees, the humanitarian value of helping these individuals is still inherent to our practices.
Matt: I acknowledge that Bill C-31 may not only be faster for our immigration system and cheaper, but we should be careful if we are valuing human lives in terms of dollars and cents. For instance, think about what this bill would mean for European refugees. Any country in Europe would be considered a “safe” nation. Only five per cent of Europeans who apply for refugee status ever attain it, yet it is apparently fair to turn that five per cent away because the majority of Europeans may have made “bogus” claims? My point is, there are still families who legitimately require refugee status, even if their country is labeled as safe, and we would be wise not to overlook them. Yes, our current refugee policy needs reform, but replacing it with a more imperfect, corruptible system, which Bill C-31 supports, is not a better idea.
Kari: Someone has to make the tough decisions, and there is really no evidence to say that the immigration minister will use political influence to make poor decisions. It is an exaggeration to assume this bill will create some overly formatted system that does not make exceptions or recognize individuals in need on an unconventional basis. Even this proposed small five per cent can and will be heard. If anything, the example of only a small minority of EU applicants qualifying is exactly the problem. There is no reason to promote an old sloppy system that is to no one’s benefit. Instead, we need to continue to be progressive and adapt our system to the changes that affect us.
