Nicole Wyatt (QMUL) investigates how the highly successful model of private sponsored refugee resettlement used in Canada can be adapted in the European context. Many countries have already designed or implemented similar resettlement strategies, but have not had the success rates in terms of number of refugees resettled, integration levels, and popular sentiment towards refugees, as the Canadian example. With some ideas drawn from the Canadian Privately Sponsored Refugees Programme, European Union Member States can have as much success as Canada.
The Syrian civil war, which began in 2011, has led to one of the largest migration crises in modern history. A massive influx of refugees began to enter the European Union (EU)’s border in 2015 in search for safety as their homes were being torn apart by the violence. The EU’s southern border states, began to receive high levels of refugees as they were geographically proximate to several war-torn countries. Greek Council for Refugees finds that Greece received over 16,000 Syrian asylum claims and almost 59,000 asylum claims overall in 2017. The goal of many refugees was to permanently settle in the interior EU countries. This caused a reaction by some European governments and civil societies, which were anti-immigrant in nature. Many EU Member States did not have the resources to sufficiently settle these refugees. Other developed countries began to admit refugees into their borders, including Canada, the United States and Australia.
In Canada, there are three paths to permanent settlement for refugees: private sponsorship, government assistance and a blended visa programme. The private sponsored refugees (PSR) programme has been very successful. In the midst of the wars in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos in the late 1970s, Canada established Operation Lifeline. In the first two years of the programme, Canada resettled 35,000 refugees from Southeast Asia under the PSR programme. Operation Lifeline continued to have successes in Canada. In 2015, Lifeline Syria was initiated by the Canadian government to focus attention and resources on Syrian refugees. The Government of Canada has resettled 601,436 refugees, with almost half of the refugees being PSRs between 1980 and 2015. In 2018 alone, Canada welcomed 18,000 PSRs.
The PSR programme in Canada consists of three types of sponsorships. Sponsors can either be a Sponsorship Agreement Holder (SAH) (i.e. incorporated organisations that have agreed to sponsor multiple individuals per year and have signed an agreement with the federal government), Community Sponsor or Group of Five (i.e. a group of five or more Canadian citizens or permanent residents). The sponsors provide all necessities to the refugees for one year, whereby afterwards, they will be eligible for federal government resources and services. For a refugee to qualify for this programme, they must be classified as a refugee by the UNHCR or private sponsorship group. This programme has been very successful for refugees and Canadians alike. The PSR programme is less costly than the government assisted refugee (GAR) programme for Canadians and promotes higher levels of integration and employability. For example, 52.8 percent of adult PSRs are currently employed in Canada whereas only 9.7 percent of Syrian GARs are in the same situation. In essence, the programme is a private-public partnership as the government provides education and health services, while the sponsor provides income and settlement support.
While there are stark differences between the Canadian and EU contexts, the goals of integration of refugees is the same amongst both governing bodies. There are many implementation barriers in the EU, which would make an unmodified version of the Canadian model difficult to succeed. Firstly, the EU is a supranational institution with distinct immigration laws in each country. The Canadian model would need to be adjusted to fit the precedent of laws and customs of each EU Member State.
Secondly, the public opinion of refugees and immigrants in some EU Member States is more negative compared to in Canadian society. There are various anti-immigrant marches and protests held throughout Europe, largely in response to the admittance of high levels of refugees into the EU and the terrorist attacks, such as the Paris attacks of 2015, that foreigners were held responsible for. Furthermore, the Generation Identitaire in France mobilised efforts to try to stop boats of refugees from entering the shores of Europe from the Mediterranean Sea. While there are examples of anti-immigrant sentiment in Canada, the general population is generally accepting and supportive of newcomers to the country. Prime Minister Trudeau won in a landslide victory in 2016 for many reasons, including one of his campaign promises of settling 25,000 Syrian refugees in the country.
Finally, there are major geographically differences between Canada and the EU. Canada shares a border with the United States, where it holds a safe third-nation agreement (i.e. an agreement between two bordering countries in which an asylum seeker must make their claim in the first country they enter because each Party deems each other as safe for asylum claimants to stay), and three oceans. The EU Member States are in close proximity to many war-torn states in which refugees are fleeing. Canada has the ability to choose which migrants it wants to admit, whereas European countries cannot do the same due to their strategic location. Countries, like Greece for instance, receive high volumes of refugees migrating from the Middle East through Turkey. According to the Dublin Regulation (2013), the Greek government would be responsible for processing their asylum or refugee requests before they can move to another European country of choice.
The EU has adopted an Action Plan on the Integration of Third-Country Nationals (2016). This plan can be modified to include some of the mechanisms of the Canadian PSR programme to better improve the integration levels. This plan includes actions on crucial areas to integration, such as education, employment and training, and access to basic services. What this plan lacks are accountability and support of a sponsor, which could be alleviated with the implementation of a private sponsorship model. The EU can implement a PSR framework, which is structured similarly to the Canadian example. The EU can promote the private sponsorship of UNHRC-classified refugees in Europe to reduce the costs that EU Member States incur for hosting refugees. The sponsors, and a network of organisations designed to support refugees, can provide accountability to ensure that refugees are adequately cared for during their first year living in Europe. The EU can act as a moderator between the Member States in providing resources and information through sponsorship networks. Hanne Beirne & Susan Fratzke suggest that the EU can also help fund some of the start-up costs associated with these sponsorship programmes. After a year of sponsorship, the PSR refugees should have the knowledge, skills, resources and confidence to live in Europe with less direct support from Europeans, therefore, becoming successfully integrated into the multicultural society of Europe.
Nicole Wyatt is an MSc candidate in International Public Policy at Queen Mary University of London, UK. She holds a BA in Political Science and History from McGill University, Quebec, Canada. Her research interests include migration policy, foreign policy, and security studies.