Lily mentioned one of Rob Ford’s comments re. not wanting to take in any new refugees or immigrants because Toronto can’t afford to take care of the people who are already here. I know that sounds like a racist, ignorant comment. However, the fact is that Canada is known internationally as perhaps the number one place to come illegally because we are far too compassionate to EVERYONE. That is not acceptable to our citizens, to the people who come here PROPERLY, and to the TRUE refugees.
Before we start feeling sorry for the newest round of supposed refugees, at least four of whom are pregnant, we have to look at the facts:
1) The UN has declared that Sri Lankans do not face widespread discrimination, hence they don’t meet the conditions for refugee status a priori. Some INDIVIDUALS may, but not the people as a whole.
2) People who come here ILLEGALLY should NOT receive ANYTHING from us unless there are some extenuating circumstances.
3) Hundreds of thousands of rejected refugees and immigrants are wandering around Canada because of our system.
4) How many people have helped out a homeless or mentally ill person here? How many have helped out a Native/Aboriginal family in distress here? How many have helped out children who are victims of monstrous parents here?
I’m not a non-compassionate person. I do feel terrible for refugees and anyone else who has to endure hardships. But there’s only so much any one person can do, and I believe in watering one’s own garden before one begins to harvest elsewhere. So although Ford’s statement was made in the same bombastic manner as always, contained incorrect/exaggerated facts, and was said poorly so that people could focus on the bad points rather than those that have merit or make sense, I understand his sentiment.
Other countries have re-location policies: “You want to come here? You have to live in this or that place that WE decide.” What’s wrong with that? Even CANADIAN DOCTORS have similar programs, whereby they receive incentives to move to under-services places. But because Canada/Ontario is too weak, we would never think of doing that. What is the end result? Our city, which is already bankrupt and crumbling in all aspects, will be flooded with even more people who take out far more than they give, at least for now.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I know that so many immigrants and refugees are skilled, hardworking people. It’s a travesty that our system drives many of them into jobs that don’t allow them to use their intelligence, ambition, skills or experience. I think we need more language and training programs to accommodate them. But we shouldn’t pretend that ALL newcomers are the same. If you cannot show that you have the POTENTIAL to contribute to your new society, why should we go broke accommodating you? We have to be more discretionary in our selection process so that we do not destroy a system that is already over-burdened. Because when that happens, as it already is, you don’t do ANYONE any favours.
And to be clear, I’ve written about this before: I am disgusted at people who come to Canada and bitch about everything, mock us for being too “simple” in giving them so much, get our “free” education, health care and other social services and then go elsewhere so that other countries benefit from OUR investment, live elsewhere so that another country gets to tax them, defy our laws and not spend enough time in Canada (no one ever checks), then bring in all of their family members–including many elderly people–to leech off even more of our “free” health care and social services. Oh, and let us not forget that these are the very same people who spit in our face and go back to their country to spend most of their time/money–except for their periodic returns to get “free” health care–but as soon as something fucked up happens in their misbegotten country, they scream at Canada, demanding that we spend millions of dollars to bring them here, since they are now “Canadians.”
Does this sound like a xenophobic rant? Sure it does. But I’m not xenophobic. Like most Canadians, my parents were immigrants. The most important people in my life are not Canadian-born. I appreciate the value that immigrants bring to Canada. Many immigrants are harder working than people who were born in Canada.
But none of this changes the fact that Canada, Ontario, and Toronto are all on the verge of disaster. Every expert agrees that our health care system is broken and is failing those who pay for it. Our immigration system is a scandal plagued joke. Our taxes are higher than ever and keep increasing, while our services are decreasing. This is true at all levels of government.
So before we freely let in more people to mess up our system further, let’s try to fix what we have and take care of the citizens, immigrants, refugees, etc. that are currently living here. Let’s not pretend that the emperor’s clothes look smashing. Let’s get politicians and policy makers with the guts and brains to make the right choices for everyone. And when someone is not very articulate but does speak the truth (or at least a somewhat skewed version of it), let’s not ignore his entire message just because he does not know how to communicate well. Of course, if that person truly is a racist or some other bigot, then I do not support him. But I will not dismiss someone simply because they are not politically correct enough.
Although most of this rant is not directly related to Rob Ford, it WAS started by reference to him. So I have to reiterate that I am NOT a fan of the man as a person. I do disagree with a number of his opinions. And he may very well be a bigot, rather than just someone who can’t articulate himself well. Again, if he IS a bigot, I will not support him. But if he’s merely politically incorrect, I will not let that detract from the message underneath, if it’s a message I support.
I read your blog earlier but I didn’t have time to leave a well thought-out comment. Now, it’s late and my head is a little fuzzy… but I’m gonna try to add my two cents anyway because I know I won’t have time to do so tomorrow. One thing is funny though because although I did not pick up on it when I read this particular blog earlier, the first thing I notice now is that is you start making your argument from the stance that we cannot possibly care for more people, while I would tend to think we should allow refugees in and then evaluate whether or not we can keep them here. From the start, you are questioning whether or not they are truly refugees when you say:”Before we start feeling sorry for the newest round of supposed refugees, at least four of whom are pregnant, we have to look at the facts”(the key word here is “supposed”). I disagree… when I hear of a boat of refugees arriving in Canada, my first thought will be that they are people in need, in desperate need of help and I would want our government to have something in place to attend to them. Even if there are a few bad apples in the lot who will try to take advantage of our system, the reality is that many are truly helpless. At that point, it is not really a question of whether or not we can take them in. Canada ratified the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, thus we owe it to them (the refugees) to evaluate their case.
About your point #1, I don’t know if “the UN has declared that Sri Lankans do not face widespread discrimination”, but I know for sure that refugee cases are taken individually. So when a boat full of people claiming asylum touch ground in Canada, all will more likely be detained until their case gets heard (on an individual basis and it is usually expediated).
About points 2, 3 and 4, I agree with you entirely… but I don’t think it’s fair to blame these refugees in need of help because our system is not working as efficiently as it should.
I agree that there is only so much we can do to help them and we cannot possibly take everyone in. But I still think that as a developed country, we HAVE to help those in need. Yes, it should start at home with Native communities, people in your neighbourhood, etc… but at the same time when a boat full of desperate people come in, we should deal with it. The UN praised Canada for the way they handled the situation. (in the recent case of a boat coming from Sri Lanka which is I believe the one you are referring to) .. and I’m glad for that.
You say:”I do feel terrible for refugees and anyone else who has to endure hardships. But there’s only so much any one person can do, and I believe in watering one’s own garden before one begins to harvest elsewhere.” Well I would argue that it’s not that simple. As a developed country, we take so many things for granted… we can work hard and have all the perks that go with it (having a pool in your backyard or escaping to a cottage for the weekend, etc…). We have electricity, water up the yang-yang and we cannot appreciate the beauty of it. Billions on dollars are spent in the Western World on needless things such as Hollywood movies… you get my drift. Yet, when we look at other parts of the world, we completely dismiss how far behind they are. What do you think it is that people in the Western World believe that they are above that? I do care when I hear of a boat full of refugees arriving in Canada. I also care about many of my friends who have families in Sri Lanka, especially when I know that they are hard working. I also care about the way our government officials deal wth the issue, and that’s why I get offended when Rob Ford (whom I already despise, in case you haven’t noticed) dismiss completely the issue of refugees arriving in Canada. By the way, if you look at statistics, refugees are the least of all immigrants (and Canadian citizens actually) to actually abuse the system (i.e. claiming benefits of any kind).
If you want to compare with other countries, Canada actually does very poorly. For one, it does no publish clear statistics, making it very difficult to evaluate their position. When you compaRE TO aUSTRALIA OR THE uk
Suddenly, I hit the wrong key so I’ll keep going from here…. When you compare to Australia or the UK, Canada is way behind on research on the issue.
If refugees come to our door, we need to evaluate their case individually. That’s the way it is done. The system is not perfect but it can be perfected and refined. There is a lot more I could add, but I need to go to bed now. Ihope I made some of my points clear. In short, I was offended by Ford’s comment because as a city official, he should show a lot more sensitivity. If anything, he should abide by the Convention our country (His country) ratified…. What can I say? Could it be just another way for him to show he’s a bully??
I fully agree with Lily and everything she talks about in her reply. It is all conservative propaganda that ‘We can’t take care of ‘new refugees or immigrants’ because Toronto can’t take care of people who are already here.’ Ford in my opinion is a pompous bully who has a single point agenda for his mayoral bid- Cut services (he would call it ‘waste’). Cut taxes. He does not have the aptitude to grasp the complexities of a mayor’s position in our Toronto. I know City Hall has not done a good job under Mr. Miller but still going for Ford from here is like throwing our city to wolves. It reminds me of similar circumstances at Queens Park when Mr. Harris came to power and brought his ‘Common Sense’ revolution with him. It left the common man, be it teachers or nurses or single mothers or people on social assistance, trying to understand what had hit them. I hope and pray that intelligent voters of Toronto (which do not include refugees and immigrants, by the way) will vote to keep Mr. Ford at the bay.
Okay, quick(ish) responses to Lily and Rajneesh (thank you both for your comments), to elaborate on a point I only mentioned but did not discuss because it’s a different topic:
1) Yes, the UN did declare that the Tamils were no longer at risk of widespread mistreatment since the end of their civil war. Thus, we can’t assume that they are all refugees, unlike in the past when virtually all people in a similar situation were truly fleeing for their lives.
2) Based on 1), we can infer that a number of the recent Sri Lankan arrivals are, in essence, que jumpers, whereas those who’ve applied to come here the “proper” way will have their positions bumped down or delayed because of them, if they get accepted. I don’t have a problem with that for true refugees because they are in dire situations. But if someone claims to be a refugee and is not, it’s not always so easy to determine.
3) The immigration/refugee system is broken and a joke, and scumbags know that. So they exploit people desperate to start a new life. The captain and his crew of this recent ship are being considered human smugglers, which readers of this blog know is one of my most hated kinds of evil fucks. I know what happens to people who rely on such monsters. The tens of thousands of dollars they pay is usually only the beginning of their nightmare. Afterward, they and their families are indebted to the gang for many many years, if not the rest of their lives. And no, it’s not a rumour that the women and children are often sent to work as sex slaves in prostitution, massage parlours, strip joints, etc. And yes, the gangs do come here (or are already here) and make sure the people pay one way or another.
4) Canada’s policies make 3) possible. We think we’re being compassionate–which we are–but we don’t want to talk about the other part of this process, once the refugees are sent to live in Canada (or sent back home). But at least we can force the captain of this ship and his crew to tell us who THEIR gang bosses are. Oh, no we can’t. Why not? No one knows who they are. They hid themselves among the passengers and no one is willing to disclose who they are. I don’t begrudge the passengers that, since they have no idea of knowing whether they can trust the Canadian officials, thus they think they and their families could be killed for pointing out the captain and crew.
But don’t get me wrong. I think it’s horrible that 400 people suffered for months to get here. Most of them likely spent their and their family’s and/or friends’ life savings to do this. And for what? One toilet on the boat. Virtually all of the trip locked below. Inadequate food/water. Trust me, I have compassion for them. And I know that they are a small proportion of the people who will contribute to draining our health care system and other social systems. But they ARE part of the problem and do not contribute anything (at this point). And each person added to the broken system is taking away from others who need that system as well.
I think it’s great to help others out globally. However, in reality, it boils down to helping/protecting one’s own “kin” first. That’s how it’s been since the beginning of time, literally, for not only our pre-civilization ancestors but for all other species. We’re hard-wired that way.
So yes, whenever there’s a major disaster, I increase my contributions to Doctors Without Borders and Unicef. And I know that the crazy amount of tax I pay (which is higher than most families’ salaries–which, on the one hand pisses me off because I know that much of that money is squandered by the government, but on the other hand reminds me of how fortunate I am) helps people both in Canada and across the world through Canada’s international aid, and I figure it’s the price we pay for living in an advantaged country.
However, I am also driven by self-interest, like all other species, so I first want to make sure my family is fine. Then I look at the people I work with. Then my city. Then my province. Then my country. Then internationally. That’s just how my thinking goes and that is how most people think. It’s not “wrong,” it’s how we’re programmed genetically, it appears. I’m not going to pretend otherwise. I am very compassionate toward the people I work with and the people I see around me and I help them a lot. I know there are people whose compassion is greater than mine for the people around them and there are people whose compassion extends beyond their immediate surroundings far, far, far greater than mine. I have the utmost respect for such people and wish more people were like them; then the world would be a much better place. I am not one of those people–I don’t help people far away beyond sending annual contributions and periodic emergency relief money.
As for Rob Ford and lowering taxes, I haven’t really heard him go that route. Readers of my blog know that I consider Mike Harris to be the second worst politician in all of Canada, for what he did to our province (Yes, somehow McGuinty topped him!). If I got the inkling that Ford would cause that kind of mayhem, I obviously wouldn’t support him. But he doesn’t have that kind of power. I basically want to see him bring a new “culture” to Toronto/GTA politics. I want to see him incite the voters into demanding that the people we vote for and PAY for do their jobs and SERVE us.
I’ve done the mental/psychological calculations (don’t ask how…it’s a “special” process) and can’t see how Ford can do more harm than good as mayor. Yes, he will mess up in certain areas and look like a fool in others. But so did Mayor Lastman and so did Miller. Miller was the biggest bully out there. Except he was the slimeball kind of bully who got others to do his bullying through sheer force of numbers. He would smile at you while having his minions go to your home and rough up the gerbils, and take all your furniture while they’re at it (after peeing in the ice cube tray). Don’t ever forget that. Have you ever seen how he and his cabal acted during council meetings? They shut down everybody who they didn’t agree with; Miller did it more articulately, while others acted like little children (Paula Fletcher anyone?).
Ford will cause true change through the PEOPLE. He is going to make us demand more ACCOUNTABILITY. Miller promised the same thing. Miller lied. But Miller had a gang to help him lie. Ford does not. Even if most of these idiots are thrown out, the new councillors will not be able to form such a strong front the way that Miller’s tired old crew did. So a lot of dirty laundry will be forced out into the open. It may end up embarrassing Ford himself. And as soon as he tries to hide anything, he will be done for. So either he gets the boot early (recall, recall, recall!) or he tows the line because he knows he has to. Miller made so many promises but knew he didn’t have to live up to them because he had enough cronies on council to let him get away with the shit he and they pulled.
When the shit storm has subsided, Toronto politics will have finally experienced a major change. A change that David Miller promised in 2003 and failed to deliver.
I won’t question the ’special process’ but I still feel Ford is not up to the job. The guy is a bad liar, has been caught lying so many times and has simply refused to own his gaffes. When it comes to paying taxes and relating with people on boat jumping the queue, to enter Canada, all I have to say is that there is no queue of refugees to enter into this country. Refugees by definition are running from some sort of persecution from their home countries and do not have the luxury of time to wait for five to ten years to legally immigrate.
I think your anger is misdirected that these refugees are going to eat the tax dollars and are going to be a burden on the public purse. While in comparison when Mr. Stockwell Day and his fellow conservatives are trying to sell us the idea that crime rate is on rise in Canada (unreported crime in their language) and to deal with this issue, we need to spend more than nine Billion- yes with a big B- taxpayers dollars to erect super jails.
I think awarding Lockheed Martin a contract worth eighteen Billion dollars for fighter jets in an unsolicited tender is a BIG waste of our tax dollars. Whatever these poor and miserable souls of Sri Lankan boat people will cost is never going to be in any where near this. I think we directly play into the hands of those conservative spin-masters when all we care about is those 460 tortured souls who arrive on our shores, looking for refuge. Remember the rhetoric, there are going to be more boats, people are watching, and so on. Sadly this is not the first time this fear mongering has been fanned and I am sure it will not be the last time. In refusing Sikhs of Kama Gata Maru, refusing Jews in 1939 in Halifax, too many times similar scenarios have played out and every time people like you and me have lost focus from the bigger picture.
In Hindi we say ‘Vasudhav Kutumkub’ meaning the whole world is one family and I hope we can be more compassionate about our family members.
I am going to take an opposite position about these immigrants who’ve come to Canada just recenetly. How many countries rejected them first, due to “undue process?” and if there’s anything Canada is known for it’s paperwork paperwork and following processes.
YET
Here comes boatloads of people (and don’t forget the pregnant ones… who supposedly paid quite a sum of money to leave their home countries… more money, actually, than had they paid attention to “due process.”
Again, can our “polite” government ask WHO the people (gang bosses) behind this shipload of que jumpers are? NOPE!
Do I agree there are compassionate grounds that can have people come to Canada, bar th paperwork? Yes. Do i think this is one such incident? NO!!!!!!!!!! Why? Compassion starts AT HOME!!!!
To my perspective and why? As a former City of Toronto employee, social services… I see it as an abuse of resources. I don’t mean to stereotype, but even a few refugess with the attitude of “but I’m in Canada now I have THE RIGHT to… (enter rights that from originating countries DON’T EXIST) when in fact they’ve jumped the queu. Add to that? It was only a year or so ago that families (many) who were contributing citizens, finding employment, contributing and benefiting society here in Canada FOR YEARS were abruptly sent back to their originating coutries, why? the wrong paperwork by sleazy so-called immigrant advisors…
Where do we draw the line? Yes we are living in a “global environment,” yes, we should let people come to Canada, but when there are more questions than answers about who we’ve invited… what are we setting ourselves up for?
To clarify, I am not saying all social service recipients fit this description. At the same time HOW MANY DOING THAT ARE TOO MANY? What about the people LIVING HERE that require assistance and get way less than they deserve?
Just some observations, Lily nice to “type/ talk” with you again!
I’m going to try to take everyone’s points in turn, starting with RR’s first response to Rajneesh’s comments and mine (@ 6:14 am). When the UN states that Tamils are “no longer at risk of widespread mistreatment since the end of their civil war”, I don’t think it means that countries should dismiss the possibility completely. Thus we should not assume anything. There is a process to assess a refugee claim when someone shows up at our door, and any person who claims asylum should have his/her claim assessed on an individual basis. To me, that should be a given. Whether their claim will be approved or not, will be based on its own merits. About your points 2 and 3, again I don’t think we should infer anything. I do make a difference between would- be immigrants and refugees., and I don’t see any refugees as queue jumpers. Yes, smugglers are profiting from their desperate situation, but it does not take away from their need to be helped. The government should crack down on smugglers for sure, but that’s an entirely separate issue and I don’t think we should resolve the problem at the expense of the refugees, by denying them support. About your point 4, again I don’t agree with you. You say:” … and I know that they are a small proportion of the people who will contribute to draining our health care system and other social systems. But they ARE part of the problem and do not contribute anything (at this point). And each person added to the broken system is taking away from others who need that system as well…” I would argue that it is not so simple. I understand that we cannot help everyone and that there is so much we can do. But I cannot dismiss the fact that our country, like many others, pledged to help refugees in need . How much should we contribute has been a big debate over the last 20 years because of the growing numbers of asylum claimants. Nevertheless, we have the duty to do something. I’m talking about the responsibility of governments to get involved here. Everything is done on a global scale nowadays, so I don’t think it’s fair to dismiss the plight of refugees, just because we cannot afford to take more in. Governments should work together to find a solution, not just dismiss the problem. It’s too easy to say we contribute somehow, so we can wash our hands off the problem. Governments go out of their way and often beyond their means to compete against each other for power, yet when it comes to helping people in desperate needs around the globe, it becomes the least priority while it should be at the top of the list.
I have to leave it at that for now, and will get back to it later.
FunkeMe, nice to chat with you again too… Good to see familiar names on the site still, but I’m off to work, so I will respond to your comments and Rajneesh’s later.
Thank you for the contributions, and “welcome back” FunkyMe–great to see your thoughts again. I’ll just post a few comments quickly:
1) @Rajneesh: I agree with you completely that far more damage is done to our country by much bigger scandals, which is why I’ve written about them many times. I similarly despise welfare cheats but know that all of them combined don’t rip off the system as badly as just ONE CORPORATE WELFARE CHEAT; yet, we go after the little people and do nothing or very little about the huge criminals.
Having said all that, I can still be upset at other things, including promoting an approach to coming here that will only breed more problems than it solves. In normal situations, I agree that refugees don’t have time to do the usual process and thus they should be dealt with in a special manner, as they are. And I have no problem with their receiving free health care etc. I’ve never begrudged true refugees any of that, whether they are fleeing a war-torn country or are afraid that their sexual orientation will lead to death or something else horrible back in their home country or whether they come from a barbaric family that will do nasty things to them because such practices are allowed against, e.g., women, in that country (I could go on but you get the point).
My point is that, when we encourage refugees to come THIS way, en masse, we are only guaranteeing that this type of criminal activity will get worse. And our sparse immigration/refugee resources are going to be thinned out even more trying to figure these cases out. And the officials assigned to these 400+ people are officials that cannot deal with other cases that came before them.
On a gut level, I–like apparently 63% of the population (regardless of their political stripes)–have don’t like being seen as “patsies,” which is exactly how we are seen internationally and by the people who come here to abuse our system. Did you know that, for years, known warlords from Africa (I believe it was Somalia and Ethiopia but there were likely other countries too) were living here and their entire families were receiving welfare and other social services and sending the money back to their home countries to support the evil of their warlord husbands/fathers? We knew about this but did nothing. I don’t even know if anything has been done about it yet, years later. Probably not, otherwise we would have heard about it.
What proportion of refugees and immigrants are ungrateful scumbags who abuse our system because they know how easy it is to do so, as I described in a previous post? I don’t know. But the fact that there are many such scumbags is what makes a growing number of Canadians react as we have to this recent boatload. I could be wrong, but if 500 such refugees came individually or in families, rather than in this manner, I think the reaction would be different. We would see them as individual cases and say we’ll wait for the system to determine whether their claims are valid.
On the other hand, back in the days of the Vietnamese boat people, who were truly fleeing murder in their home country because EVERYONE was a potential target, many people were not very welcoming for racist reasons. But I think that was a certain segment of the US/Canadian (and other countries) population, whereas today, even non-racists are opposed to this boatload because of the reasons I’ve mentioned. It just FEELS bad for those very reasons. Again, AT PRESENT, we cannot say AUTOMATICALLY/A PRIORI that all of the people on that boat are true refugees. Some are likely just queue jumpers. If we find out that ALL of them are TRUE refugees (or virtually all of them), I’ll take back everything I’ve said about them. But for now, there is a possibility that many of these people are NOT true refugees and are simply trying to come to Canada via an inappropriate means.
2) @Lily: Much of my response to you is in the preceding points. The most important point in my eyes is whether the people on that boat are TRUE REFUGEES. Since we don’t know yet, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see. But the fact still remains that TORONTO can’t afford to take in so many people who will only drain the system, not contribute to it. That’s a fact. I’m not talking about 400+ people but far greater numbers. Our city cannot even handle our current population! Why can’t new arrivals be placed in other cities? Why can’t FEDERAL resources go into paying for housing, education, training etc in places other than Toronto and Vancouver, where we pick up much of the bill LOCALLY (municipally) as well as provincially? Once someone is better settled or has family/friends who will bear the brunt of caring for them at first, let them come to wherever they want. But until that time, we have to acknowledge that THIS city (Toronto) is falling apart at the seams and we need to take care of the mess we are currently in.
As I said before (and this is also @Rajneesh), Rob Ford mishandled his statement and made exaggerated claims, as he is wont to do. But the sentiment underlying his poorly stated concerns is valid. If Ford were ONLY focusing on refugees (or new immigrants…I’m not quite sure if he truly meant to say we should keep out IMMIGRANTS?!), I’d call him a racist. But his point was on par with everything else he’s said: TORONTO IS BROKE AND BROKEN. WE NEED TO FIX IT NOW. AND WE NEED COUNCILORS WITH THE WILL TO MAKE CHANGES, RATHER THAN MERELY LINE THEIR OWN POCKETS. Ford may not have all the tools to fix our city but he certainly has the motivation to do so and is the first politician in years that has encouraged people of ALL political stripes to care about this problem.
And look at how this sentiment is spreading provincially as well. I’m not one for naive optimism but I truly believe that Ford the SYMBOL is going to motivate a lot of people to FINALLY shed their cloaks of political apathy, at least for the time being–I hope for longer.
3) @FunkyMe: Thank you for the “insider’s perspective.” You of all people have seen first-hand the kind of attitude I’ve talked about, which on a gut level makes one cringe or get very angry and disgusted. It’s not just one or two cases but widespread fraud. And it’s not just the applicants but the “lawyers” and “consultants” and bureaucrats and politicians who engage in this fraud and abuse both directly and due to apathy or incompetence.
I mentioned yesterday that it was nice to see familiar names such as FunkeMe still commenting on this site. I should have added that it is equally nice to see new people such as Rajneesh… and Rajneesh, I completely agree with your comment as well. It’s true that we don’t seem to learn from History. People in mass seem to care about what a particular event looks like rather than focusing on the big picture. Unfortunately, we live in a time when many of us are struggling to make it through, so maybe it is natural to look at refugees suspiciously when they arrive by shiploads.
FunkeMe, I’m afraid I’m gonna disagree with you almost all the way. First of all, refugees may be a particular type of immigrants, but the process to deal with them is very specific. I have read that Australia turned them away before they sailed to our shores, but I do not take that as a baseline that we should follow. Most developed countries have ratified the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and in doing so have pledged to help refugees who would come to their door. The pledge is not legally binding, although signatory countries must make a report every 5 years to the UN. But a good way to see which country is keeping up with its pledge is to look at how they handle such incidents and what kind of policies they implement within their own laws to deal with refugees. As a Canadian, I WANT my country to help these people, because despite of all the hardships we face, we are still very fortunate and I really don’t understand why we feel entitled to all the perks we have while others on the other side of the world don’t even have running water. It is basically the luck of being born in the right hemisphere. When 500 people arrive at our door, I WANT my government to help those who truly need help. The screening process for just being able to apply for refugee status is gruelling, and that is to ensure that those who don’t qualify will be weeded out. The system is far from being perfect but I actually think it has potential and can be improved.
I’m not sure what you mean by “due process”. From what I know, a refugee who arrives at our door automatically follows due process. If it’s an individual, he or she will have to present himself/herself to a CIC office where an officer will determine whether or not that person is ELIGIBLE only to forward a claim to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB). A deportation order will be issued on that same day and stayed until a decision is made, meaning that if the decision is negative, the deportation order becomes effective right away. If it’s a shipload, every person on board will be detained until their claim is processed individually. That is the process, period.
When you say:”can our “polite” government ask WHO the people (gang bosses) behind this shipload of que jumpers are? NOPE!… I would argue that they actually try to get as much information as they can including where they got their fake passport (as most have), how much they paid for it, etc… This statement you make is very troubling to me. First of all, you are referring to refugees as queue jumpers when in fact, at that point, there is no possible way you can determine that. You are basically making an assumption…
About the “polite” government,trust me, Immigration officers are everything but polite when they interview refugee claimants (and I know, I sat on a few interviews). They are actually extremely tough and the process is gruelling. But that’s not even the point…. the smugglers take advantage of these people who are very desperate to get to safety. Please don’t automatically dismiss their desperation because in many cases, it is real.
Compassion starts at home, I agree with you. But that doesn’t take away the fact that we should assess any refugee claimant who comes to our door.
You mentioned “compassionate grounds that can have people come to Canada”. There is actually a very particular process when someone makes a claim on “humanitarian and compassionate grounds”. It is often put forth by people who are in the country and cannot return to their homeland to make the claim as they should, or for someone who has been denied. The paperwork remains, but it puts a different spin on the application… and anyone can apply under those grounds.
About your personal experience, I do think that you are stereotyping. First of all, I have worked with immigrants and refugees on various settings, and I have NEVER, EVER seen any who had any sense of entitlement. And as I said before, statistics show that in fact refugees are the least of all immigrants to use our system in terms of claiming benefits. You will have to provide very clear and specific examples to convince me otherwise.
About the “so-called immigrant advisers”, I believe most of them are crooks. Unfortunately, there is nothing in place to keep them on their toes… but it doesn’t change the fact that someone claiming refugee status may truly need help.
Where do we draw the line? That’s a good question. I don’t mind the line being drawn somewhere” as long as it is not before we give them a chance to plead their case.
RR, I will have to respond to your comments later… mother’s duty calling right now!!
Lily, now I’m going to take the time to refute what you’re saying (with the best of intentions) and offer a better counterview that i’ve seen.
You state: “I have read that Australia turned them away before they sailed to our shores, but I do not take that as a baseline that we should follow. Most developed countries have ratified the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, and in doing so have pledged to help refugees who would come to their door. The pledge is not legally binding, although signatory countries must make a report every 5 years to the UN. But a good way to see which country is keeping up with its pledge is to look at how they handle such incidents and what kind of policies they implement within their own laws to deal with refugees. As a Canadian, I WANT my country to help these people, because despite of all the hardships we face, we are still very fortunate and I really don’t understand why we feel entitled to all the perks we have while others on the other side of the world don’t even have running water”
They may not have running water, but supposedly all these “downtrodden refugges spent $40,000/per to make the trip. That is more than I currently make in a year. Also, Australia was not the Only country to reject them …
I am not speking from a podium of entitlement. I am speaking as a Canadian who would like to continue to enjoy the perks of being in a “have” rather than “have not” hemisphere… when questionable people are running operations to bring people to anywhere but where they are from… It should be investigated and I absolutely agree with RR that it is a form of queue jumping that should be stoppedl. Immediately. The ultimate price is that it is going to be at our own peril. I honestly and truly believe it.
I will not falter from my original statement that these refugees are “queue” jumpers: operational definition: they are travelling on a boat, no pre-paperwork done, nothing mentioned about due process/ legal work and again,even if the gov’t asks “hard questions” the people they are talking to are questionable at best.
Again, after over 8 years of working at the City of Toronto’s social services, i have seen how “effectively enforced” deportation orders are. rather ARE NOT.
I too believe in compassion. But I tihnk such compassion should not be at our own expense. We are ultimately going to be paying the price… and taking the chance of finding out how “steep” that price is going to be is not something I want to find out. I did balance my strong argument with the fact that yes, there is always a circumstance that arises that does deserve our immeidaitae compasssion and “f” the process and time it takes. This is not one of them.
Those that don’t qualify MAY be weeded out, and then our legal aid system will just keep “appealing until said individuals “disappear.” Even if a such small minority then, whilst in the midst of their disappearing act, then hurt/kill other Canadians, etc.. (those examples have been stated on this site before.)
Re:”About your personal experience, I do think that you are stereotyping. First of all, I have worked with immigrants and refugees on various settings, and I have NEVER, EVER seen any who had any sense of entitlement. And as I said before, statistics show that in fact refugees are the least of all immigrants to use our system in terms of claiming benefits. You will have to provide very clear and specific examples to convince me otherwise.”
I will not metion groups, yet your statement that you have 100% (never ever) seen any refugee with a sense of entitlement means you have nto read all of RR’s comments or articles. I would also need statistics (peer reviewed) that prove refugees are the least of all immigrants to use our system in terms of claiming benefits.
My specific and well-known example is: the infamous Special Diet Form. What originally cost, on average approximately 10-20 million per year has balloned to hundreds of millions of dollars, on the city’s dime. Who’s paying for it? Taxpayers. Who else is giong to be paying for it? The next REAL people who need it, refugee or no. Because unlike any other benefit, say rent, hydro, etc.. an applicant has to prove that they are spending the funds on said benefit. For Special diet: NOPE. That means that a family of 10 (and believe me there are a lot) gets an additional tax-free $2,500 per month for at least a year IN ADDITION to their welfare funds. Unfortunately, this has become the norm and not the exception. This is why it cannot me maintained. This is why in future, those with cancer, aids, diabetes and a host of other health reltaed issues are going to suffer for years to come. Yes… that may make me sound jaded. Especially, when comparitively, there was client X, Canadian,had been having a heart attack (major) for three days, actually lived and was too embarassed to come to the office to obtain a drug card.
The social network system is one all Canadians pay into, so that should they find themselves in dire straights there technically should be help available to them. In a Global economy… this changes everything. I am not, NOT stating “ship everyone back to where they came from…”
However I am stating that when something, like this situation comes up, that we as Canadians, and especially our government “steps up to the plate” and sends people back, with the proper documentation and understanding of what it takes to become a Canadian citizen to send a clear message that we too, like the US, like Australia, Like britain will send you elsewhere…
Again, from my experience I did see people who came to Canada on supposedly humantiarian grounds who a) had left the country and were still collecting cheques or b) were collecting cheques and sending them to their homelands.
Look at the famous Khader family, they came to canada “for the free healthcare…” and made no bones about it. Boasted really. Our country took them in. I know there are biases… but isnt that the whole point of this website? To share them, take a microscope, and think harder, from diferring perspectives.
I think that coming to canada has taken on a new and not positive (for Canadians) “spin.” WHen my grandparents, from both sides of my family came here they took any job they could get, worked hard, and never took a handout. Nowadays welfare has become an intergenerational problem that needs to be fixed.
I will say this to you Lilly, I will agree to disagree.
FunkeMe, I can agree to disagree as well. However, for the sake of the argument, let me take your points one by one:
When you say:”…They may not have running water, but supposedly all these “downtrodden refugges spent $40,000/per to make the trip. That is more than I currently make in a year. Also, Australia was not the Only country to reject them …” well, I don’t know where they got that money, if indeed that’s how much each person paid. You are using the term “supposedly” which indicates the possibility that it may not be true. Yet, you are drawing conclusions. I would rather wait a little to find out more about each person’s circumstances… And the fact that Australia was not the only country to reject them, does not alter my view on the problem. I actually think that the more countries would turn them away, the more devastating the situation would be.
When I talked about entitlement, it was in no way directed at you personally. I was referring to the western mentality in general. It would be nice to stay in a “have” hemisphere for sure, but it is becoming increasingly debilitating (for me anyway) to indulge in so many perks that others cannot get… and by perks I mean, the basics of life. As I said in a previous comment, we do everything globally now, but we tend to close our eyes to the misery surrounding us (both within and outside our borders).
You said:”when questionable people are running operations to bring people to anywhere but where they are from… It should be investigated and I absolutely agree with RR that it is a form of queue jumping that should be stoppedl. Immediately. The ultimate price is that it is going to be at our own peril. I honestly and truly believe it.”… Ummm, I’m not sure what you mean. if questionable people are the smugglers who pry on desperate refugee claimants, then I agree they should be stopped. But I don’t believe that applies to the people on the ship.
I will still disagree with your “operational definition” of queue jumping, for the same reasons I stated before. I’m not sure how to explain it any better, other than there is no pre-paperwork to be done, unless you are claiming refugee status from outside Canada. Those who make it here often have a fake passport as their only identity document.
I’m not sure what you mean by “even if the gov’t asks “hard questions” the people they are talking to are questionable at best”.
When you state:”… i have seen how “effectively enforced” deportation orders are. rather ARE NOT…” I agree with you. And that is one area of the system that definitely needs an overall.
When you talk about the limits of compassion, I will agree with you up to a point. I’m not sure what you need to have compassion for a particular case, but I know that five hundred people squished on to a ship for months in search of refuge, does it for me.
Also, if a refugee claimant is denied, he or she will not get to appeal endlessly. They can apply for judicial review once. After that, they can also apply on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and/or for their case to be reviewed by the Pre Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) Unit. That’s the end of the line. Each step of the way, they have to submit new evidence to their file to make their case.
You asked:”I would also need statistics (peer reviewed) that prove refugees are the least of all immigrants to use our system in terms of claiming benefits.” … Sure, I’ll try to find those studies again.
About your the “infamous Special Diet Form” example, how does it apply directly to refugees? I’ve heard and read about it but I’m guessing it’s not exclusively immigrants or refugees who are abusing the system. But that’s just a guess.
You say:”The social network system is one all Canadians pay into, so that should they find themselves in dire straights there technically should be help available to them.” … Yes they do , and so do the refugees once they get a work permit and also contribute to that very same system.
You say:” Again, from my experience I did see people who came to Canada on supposedly humantiarian grounds who a) had left the country and were still collecting cheques or b) were collecting cheques and sending them to their homelands.”… I never meant to suggest that all refugee claimants are legitimate, only that they should be given a chance to plead their case once they make their claim. I agree with you that we need to crack down on those who do abuse the system.
About your final comment, I would argue that newcomers still today take any job they can get (often the low paying ones that native Canadians do not want), they also work extremely hard (most work at least two different jobs) and I don’t necessarily think they take hand-out. They often rely on their own community for support. Again, I don’t believe that welfare cheats are specifically the immigrants or refugees.
1. Great that we can agree to disagree, next point…
2. You say “I would rather wait a little to find out more about each person’s circumstances… And the fact that Australia was not the only country to reject them, does not alter my view on the problem. I actually think that the more countries would turn them away, the more devastating the situation would be.” Your view is being skewed by taking a very personal view. This is a larger political issue between countries, and how people should, properly, through the “rght channels” be able to come to another country to live.
3. Didn’t take anything you said about “entitlement” personally, we’ve debated before, you’ve never made it personal. (You are a very thorough writer/debater which I appreciate.) I agree about “western entitlement”! We are in an age, that despite everything, sticks their heads in the sand re: history, and thinks we can control mother nature (hello BP Oil), and just live off of capitalism. WRONG! I do agree, the “perks of just having shelter” are becomng what’s considered a “have” society… while we take the tax for businesses?
4.I also agree that “we do everything globally now, but we tend to close our eyes to the misery surrounding us (both within and outside our borders).
5. I DON’T agree with letting these people (they are people) jump the queue. ABSOLUTELY NOT. They should have some form of proper government (even from their own) documentation.
6. What I mean when I stated “The ultiimate price is that it is going to be at our own peril. I honestly and truly believe it.”… is that we are going to be paying for refugees who come through questionable services, at the expense of having what’s started as a social services network, it can only hold and help so many… with a global view… who are we then to chose to help? Yes it’s sad, yes it’s also brutal… and again, not saying “go back to where u come from” BUT: ultimately some hard decisions, which are already starting to show the cracks in the system, have to be made… Canada cannot afford more. Like you said, i am in ageement about the plight of aboriginals, and many other minorities in our own country who aren’t receiveing the help they need. Do we turn our backs on them to help these people instead?
7. The people on the ship, until proven otherwise should be sent straight to prison (if need be) to show who they really are and what is really going on.
8. There is paperwork to be done for coming to Canada.. lots of people have been waiting a long time to get here, and, lets not forget thse who did come here, contributed and “were still sent back” because of questionable immgration “consultants.” THAT is heart breaking.
9. By questionable people the government is asking “hard questions” to are those who run the ships…
10. When I stated that: ”… i have seen how “effectively enforced” deportation orders are. rather ARE NOT…” I agree with you. And that is one area of the system that definitely needs an over(h)all. We agree again.
11. Yes there is compassion for 500 people “squished onto a ship” but these 500 people CHOSE TO BE on that ship. They actually PAID to be on that ship.
12. The appeal process you outline… takes time… a lt of it… during which time they can receive social assistance or disappear. If they can’t be found… they can then be “taken in” by people far worse that those they encountered and ran these refugee ships… here’s compassion. Let them know to go through proper channels is the best and safest thing they can do for themselves and their families. RR already stated that “The UN has declared that Sri Lankans do not face widespread discrimination, hence they don’t meet the conditions for refugee status a priori. Some INDIVIDUALS may, but not the people as a whole.”
13. Re: the “infamous Special Diet Form” example, how does it apply directly to refugees? I’ve heard and read about it but I’m guessing it’s not exclusively immigrants or refugees who are abusing the system. But that’s just a guess. I’m not saying ONLY refugees abus this form, but let’s add 400+ more to this… we can;t even afford who has it now.
14. You say:”The social network system is one all Canadians pay into, so that should they find themselves in dire straights there technically should be help available to them.” … Yes they do , and so do the refugees once they get a work permit and also contribute to that very same system. THAT IS IN AN EXTREMELY IDEAL WORLD. That is when I also state about an ongoing inter-generational problem welfare is facing: learned helplessness at it’s best. The parents go on welfare, then their “adult dependants” become welfare recipients. I don’t have specific stats for that… but it needs to be taken care of, SOON rather than later. Do we then allow these refugees to ALSO be in a position to possibly be, pardon the pun, “in the same boat?” We simply can’t, STRESS CAN’T afford it.
15. You me and RR agree on not suggesting that “all refugee claimants are legitimate, only that they should be given a chance to plead their case once they make their claim. I agree with you that we need to crack down on those who do abuse the system.”
16. Again, agree to disagree… “I would argue that newcomers still today take any job they can get (often the low paying ones that native Canadians do not want), they also work extremely hard (most work at least two different jobs) and I don’t necessarily think they take hand-out. They often rely on their own community for support.” Many come here and say, I didn’t come here to drive a taxi cab, and as for their communities helping them, they can be a bigger problem. Their communities call social services, and then call them racist for not helping ENOUGH. This from lots of experience.
17.We agree.. Again, I don’t believe that welfare cheats are specifically the immigrants or refugees.
Again, all I can say is when does Canada stop being known as an “international patsy” and take a firm stand before we all go broke in the process of help…?
I think we are going to agree to disagree for ever on this…
About your point # 2, I have given a very personal view so far and that’s because it is an issue very close to me. Over the years, I have met many refugees who have touched me. Some made it here, some were sent away…When I came as an immigrant some 20+ years ago. I followed “due process” because I was lucky to have that option. I was never running for my life. Meeting many others who were not so lucky changed my outlook on life, just like working alongside refugees in many occasions did. I choose not to focus exclusively on my own needs and comfort, even if I understand that there is so much we can do to help others. I also understand that the issue IS political, and that is why I expect my government to step in and take action when refugees come here (individually or by shiploads). I do expect them to adhere to the pledge they made, and to work with the UN and other countries to find solutions to the growing numbers of refugees without giving up on people in need, just because the numbers are overwhelming.
When it comes to refugees, it is very difficult to define the “right channels”. You seem to completely dismiss the fact that they are running for their life and don’t have the option of gathering their belongings. Not every country offers identity papers to its citizens, and many refugees cannot even tell precisely their date of birth, because their country does not keep records of that. Governments are very well aware of that, and this is why they will not penalized refugees claimant for having fake IDs.
That brings me to your point # 5 … not every country offers its citizen proper documentation. I’m not sure how it is in Sri Lanka, but I will definitely check that out tonight with some of my co-workers. Stay tuned…
About your point #6, I will refer again to the fact that we pledged our help when we ratified the UN Convention relating to the Status of Refugees. The plight of Aboriginals or other minorities is just as important…. I agree on that
About your point # 7, they ARE being detained in a prison.
About # 8, you are comparing a refugee claimant with a would-be immigrant. These are two separate protocols to follow.
About # 11… is it choosing to be on that ship? or is it paying to be on that ship? In each case, it ’s blurry. If it’s a choice, I could argue that there is not much of a choice. Maybe just an opportunity to escape danger. Is it’s pay, again I could argue that we don’t know how they got that money. What price did they have to endure to get that amount of cash? Some often sell their children to survive… or who knows what else they could do. I’m not saying all probably did all that, but in doubt, it is one possible answer…
About # 12, Immigration consultants and many lawyers are crooks, and their actions are just as bad as the smugglers’. I agree with you, but I don’t agree with your definition of “proper channels”, thus all I can say is that they should be prosecuted when exposed. Right now, unfortunately the government ignores their actions and that’s a shame.
When you say:” The UN has declared that Sri Lankans do not face widespread discrimination, hence they don’t meet the conditions for refugee status a priori. Some INDIVIDUALS may, but not the people as a whole.”… that does not mean that the UN is dismissing potential cases. Rather, it recommends looking at each case on its own merits, which is also what I believe in.
About your point # 13, you seem to assume all 400 would try to apply for this. That’s an assumption.
About your point 14, refugees may receive initial financial help from the government (a one-time thing) . They may “take” a little on arrival, but over time they are doing much better than anyone else to become self-sufficient and not abuse the welfare system as so many “real” Canadians do. Studies have been conducted on that (still trying to relocate them… stay tuned for that too).
About learned helplessness … again, refugees tend to be the ones among all immigrants to WANT and STRIVE for self-sufficiency. I hope you’ll get to appreciate their resilience eventually, because their life story is oftentimes an amazing example for overcoming hardships.
About your point # 16, I am sure they did not plan to drive a cab here, but the reality is that many do because they have no alternative to make a living. As for their communities calling social services, I won’t excuse poor behaviour, but I also won’t fault them to trying to get answers to their problems. Anyone is entitled to it, be it a white person with no accent or any immigrant. I agree with you that the level of courtesy expected in making those enquiries should be the same for all, including immigrants.
Below is a link that gives interesting facts on refugees. Not the statistics I promised you, but relevant to this issue as well (you may have to copy the link in your address bar to make it work).
http://noii-van.resist.ca/?p=2167
Lily, lets remain on the agree-to-disagree wavelength. I cannot imagine your personal story (eceryone has one) and also that that story is then transferred to everyone; as for stating:” You seem to completely dismiss the fact that they are running for their life and don’t have the option of gathering their belongings” by saying so you have ignored many of my statements above thatDO STATE that THERE ARE refugees who need IMMEDIATE help, you also overlook th fact that I was also quoting RR.
My opinion, broken even further as it has been remains unchanged. Don’t over look the fact that I too have been touched by this story in a pesonal way by my own family members.
My compassion does not run out for those running for their lives. However, it’s a balance and right now we need much more stringent resources to ensure that the truly needy get help. In this example, I do nt think that is the case.
I appreciate your point of view, and empathize with it.. but again, instead of playing a debate of point counterpoint. I will respect your viewpoint and i do hope that you respect mine. Each have valid points, and not much middle ground.
After all that FunkeMe, I just realized you completely missed all my points. Maybe I missed yours too, but regardless I will always respect your opinion. Obviously, we take it from a different stance, and I don’t expect everyone to agree with me.
I took your points one at a time in each one of my responses to make sure that I would not ignore any of your statements, and I thought I had expressed my viewpoint very clearly.
It’s okay to disagree FunkeMe. I will leave it at that for this time and I look forward to future posts to chat with you. Maybe we’ll agree next time.
As for RR, no matter how “wise” he/she may be, I don’t always agree with his/her viewpoints… such as in this case (from what he/she has said so far).
And I think that’s okay too!!
agreed! until the next round….
(ps i dont always agree with RR either… who would have thought we’d agree on our next post?)
Ps – i thought i was clearer too? what’s up with that?
Thank you very much for your divergent comments on this topic, Lily and FunkyMe.. I stayed out of this discussion because you two seemed to be handling both sides of the debate on your own. But I did read every comment thoroughly and enjoyed the discussion. So thank you two again.
sorry to join the discussion so late, I’m sure you have moved on to other topics now, but for one of my classes we were required to read this article http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/articles/art_lifeboat_ethics_case_against_helping_poor.html and I think that it very much relates to this issue.