How welcoming to refugees are we really?
CANADIANS ‘ NOT EXCEPTIONALLY TOLERANT’: STUDY
OTTAWA• Canadians may not be as tolerant of refugees and immigrants as they might think, a new study concludes.
The study, a project of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada ( MISC), also found that while attitudes among Canadians towards refugees and immigrants range largely from positive to benign, those views are not necessarily strongly held.
Study author Michael Donnelly, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, concludes that, as a result, there is potential for intolerant, anti- immigrant and antirefugee sentiment to increase.
For the study, Donnelly took recent international public opinion research about immigration and refugees and then designed a Canadian poll in order to compare Canadian attitudes against the country’s peers in the Western developed world.
The poll was conducted by the firm Ipsos, which surveyed 1,522 Canadians from Jan. 18-27, well before either Trump announced his controversial immigration and refugee restrictions or before the shooting at the Quebec mosque that killed six Muslim worshippers. Respondents were invited to complete the online survey in either French or English.
The survey found that Canadians have what Donnelly described as an “impressive” knowledge of Canada’s immigration and refugee system and that most are satisfied with Canada’s multiculturalist approach to immigration policy.
And yet, as Donnelly writes in the study, “Whatever is driving Canada’s exceptionally positive history of immigration and integration over the last half- century, it does not appear to be an exceptionally tolerant public.”
Indeed, Canada was neither most tolerant nor most intolerant but was around average compared to Europe and the U. S. on issues, for example, of how generous countries ought to be when considering a refugee application or whether immigrants from poor countries ought be accepted.
But any tolerance by Canadians to be more generous toward refugees and immigrants is “soft” in the sense that, as Donnelly argues, there are a great many who do not have strong opinions one way or the other.
For example, t he survey found what Donnelly described as “surprisingly weak” opposition to the idea of stopping all immigration to Canada.
While about 45 per cent of those surveyed would oppose any policy that would end all immigration, just under 20 per cent would support such a policy while nearly 35 per cent said they would neither oppose nor support such a policy.
“These results suggest that a serious anti- immigrant movement is not impossible,” Donnelly wrote.
Just over half of those sur- veyed agreed with the statement “too many immigrants don’t seem to feel connected to Canadian society,” while better than two of three Canadians believe immigrants should change their behaviour to be more like Canadians once they arrive here.
For Donnelly, those data points are warning signs.
“There are some good things going on in Canada and there are some potential problems,” Donnelly said in a telephone interview Monday. “There’s room there for growth of serious intolerance if people aren’t careful.”
The study, titled Canadian Exceptionalism: Are We Good Or Are We Lucky? — it shares a name with a twoday conference MISC is staging in Montreal this Thursday and Friday, which will further explore the theme — also touches on current political debates by trying to measure differences in attitudes on immigration and refugees between supporters of Canada’s three main political parties.
One of t he dominant themes of the Conservative leadership race has been immigration and refugee policy, a theme purposefully put at the heart of that race by MP and leadership hope- ful Kellie Leitch who favours new restrictions based on a still- to- be- explained “Canadian values” test.
Indeed, before he resigned as Leitch’s campaign manager, Nick Kouvalis, who runs a public opinion research firm, predicted that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s policies on refugee and immigration would lead to a Liberal defeat at the next general election in 2019.
That said, supporters of all three major parties — Liberals, Conservatives, and New Democrats — seemed to prefer the status quo when it comes to current immigration levels. But there were clear differences of opinion when it came to the size of Canada’s annual refugee program.
Survey respondents who identified themselves as Liberal supporters believe it a positive attribute for their party to advocate and support a small — 1,000 persons a year — to moderate — 25,000 persons a year — refugee program, but were not supportive of a large — 50,000-a-year — program.
Conservative respondents had negative views for all sizes of a refugee program. New Democrats, too, were negative on a moderate to large refugee agreement but see a small refugee program of between 1,000 and 10,000 a year as a positive attribute for that party to include in a campaign platform.