Three Solutions for Canada’s Mounting Refugee Crisis

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted, “To those fleeing persecution, terror & war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength[.] #WelcomeToCanada” in January. Compare this to President Donald Trump, who tweeted, “I will end illegal immigration and protect our borders! We need to MAKE AMERICA SAFE & GREAT AGAIN! #Trump2016” just a year before. Canada currently has an immigration policy that is much more permissive of refugees, which has led to a mammoth influx of asylum seekers and illegal immigrants, with around 10,000 coming across the border in July alone. While Canada welcomes these refugees with open arms, strain is showing—there is currently a backlog of over 40,000 refugees awaiting hearing, with some having arrived before 2012. In Quebec, the province with the most displaced people, the refugee acceptance rate has fallen as low as 50 percent over the last year. There, the city of Montreal has set up 1,500 beds to be filled with displaced immigrants, half of whom could be turned away.

Canada has its heart in the right place, and I propose three policy solutions for this problem of immigration.

First, the process that grants hearings to refugees should be less rigorous. These types of reforms have been played with in the past, such as when Parliament drafted and passed legislation that removed the requirement for lengthy hearings for refugees from seven Middle Eastern countries, including Yemen and Burundi, in response to humanitarian crises there. This legislation could be extended to the bulk of refugees with great success, as it removes the need for the longest part of the vetting process.

However, while the legislation didn’t have any noticeable drawbacks then, some would argue that expanding immigration policies to allow a much greater number of refugees might allow entrance to some with dubious refugee status or a prior criminal record. For instance, in response to an increasing number of Somali criminal deportations from the United States, a small number of criminals from Somalia have been claiming refugee status and coming across the border under false identities. But these examples are the exception rather than the norm, and the reward of productive new members of society would outweigh the risk of a few criminals.

Next, Trudeau should put his money where his mouth is and increase funding for the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), with the only real downside being the cost. Because such a large scale migration from the U.S. is completely unprecedented, Canada’s system is unprepared for the number of immigrants coming across the border. The Board currently only has enough manpower to hold a maximum of 24,000 hearings per year, not nearly enough for the thousands that cross the border monthly. Furthermore, the costs would be offset by the economic benefits: getting immigrants and refugees employed and paying taxes as permanent residents as quickly as possible. It’s irresponsible for Trudeau to welcome such a large amount of immigrants into a country that isn’t ready to handle them. He needs to make sure that Canada is able to accept them as quickly as possible.

The last option for Canada might be counterintuitive, but it may in fact alleviate a lot of the strain on the system: limiting the flow of refugees until the backlog has been resolved. Canada can actually take it more slowly than many think. Over 90 percent of deportations are done in states that don't border Canada. Thus, it's possible for Canada to temporarily limit or cease refugee action across the border until the situation becomes more manageable. Of course, there would be exceptions, such as a response to the recent threats from the Trump administration against Haitian refugees living in America, 8,500 of which crossed the Canadian border in August. Limiting the flow of immigrants and letting specific, threatened groups through buys time for the system to fix the mounting backlog and stop the type of bureaucratic limbo that 40,000 people are living in today. However, this is a temporary fix on its own, because when the backlog is eliminated Canada will have two choices: go back to their previous policy and let it mount up again, or stick to the less permissive one, a secondhand version of America’s much harsher policy towards illegal immigrants.

The third solution cannot stand alone. Instead, it’s designed to create a blank slate for the implementation of one or both of the other two solutions and prioritize the vetting of those who have waited for years to be recognized as members of society. The current backlog is the most pressing issue right now and the people it’s made of deserve to be put through the system first, but if refugees are to be limited until the backlog is gone, Canada needs to adopt either or both of the other solutions to streamline the immigration progress. Canada must first stabilize the system by fixing the backlog, but after that, Trudeau must either do away with a portion of the vetting process or give more money to the struggling IRB if he wants to realize his vision of a truly welcoming Canada.