Weighing the costs and values
When St. Matthew and the Prophet Muhammad spoke with favour on those who saw hungry, needy strangers and took them in, there was no mention of cost. These are different times. The echoes of his cabinet oath had barely faded this month when Immigration Minister John McCallum began facing demands to put a price tag on fulfilling Canada’s ambitious plan to welcome 25,000 Syrian refugees by year end.
McCallum said again Thursday he’ll soon deliver. But, as yet, there are too many variables for certainty.
All Canadians know is that the new Liberal government has promised $100 million this year and the same next year for processing and settling the war-weary newcomers. (A further $100 million was committed to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.)
Averaging out at about $4,000 a year per refugee, the only certainty is that the bill will be far higher than any amount yet floated.
About 4.2 million people are registered as refugees from the Syrian conflict. Most are in the neighbouring countries of Jordan, Lebanon and Turkey.
At present, Ottawa is dealing with health concerns, security checks, arranging transport.
Once in Canada, refugees will need food, housing, education and health care. They will require translators, language training, social assistance, employment counselling. Some will have survived persecution, trauma, violence and might require mentalhealth support.
As Amnesty International Canada has warned, without financial resources any commitments and good intentions “will all be an illusion.”
McCallum seems to be thinking in loftier and longer terms than mere dollars. He noted this week that Maryam Monsef, the new minister of democratic institutions, is a former Afghan refugee now serving in the federal cabinet.
What the Liberals have going for them, in addition to such precedents for generosity, is the widespread embarrassment in Canada at the country’s diminished role in refugee relief over recent years — a period of tighter rules, reduced funding, falling numbers of desperate people welcomed, and less involvement abroad.
Former prime minister Joe Clark lamented in his book, How We Lead: Canada in a Century of Change, that the country’s foreign policy had become “emphatic rhetoric at the podium and steady withdrawal from the field.”
From Immigration and Citizenship to Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development (as the departments were then known), Harper government cuts bore directly on portfolios dealing with refugees.
It was cuts to an interim refugee health program, in particular, a move intended to save $80 million over four years, that outraged providers and galvanized protests by medical advocacy and refugee groups. A Federal Court judge ultimately said the cuts put lives at risk and outraged Canadian “standards of decency.”
Gillian Barth, president of CARE Canada, welcomes the new attitude, but notes that the investment needed will go far beyond costs associated with settling and sustaining the refugees in Canada.
“Twenty-five thousand, while very generous, is a very small proportion of those who’ve been suffering,” she told the Star.
“We really need to ensure that humanitarian assistance in the region is not only maintained, but increased. The needs are beyond great at this point.”
Barth said there needs to be support for neighbouring countries carrying the lion’s share of the Syrian refugee load. And increased diplomatic and political efforts will be needed “to resolve the conflict, which will ultimately be needed to end the refugee crisis.”
For McCallum, shrewdly framing the issue as a matter of values rather than costs, there is a sense that people and organizations across Canada support a generous response to the Syrian crisis. “It speaks to the nature of the country.”