-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canada deported hundreds to war-torn countries: government data (Reuters)
- Thread starter Croatoan
- Start date
Interframe
Member
I don't think its that the Canadian doesn't want to take these people in, its just they don't have the resources to process so many refugee claims.
So many?
Charles Brandon
Member
Millions? There are only 36 million people there to start with.
TrumanBurbank
Member
You can't just accept every person, countries will collapse. There has to be a legal process of immigration. There are people waiting to get accepted for legal immigration.
entremet
Member
Millions? No way.
Impeccable
Member
Realities of a functioning immigration system.
Oppo
Member
my understanding is that it is about a quarter million per year, on immigration. not sure about refugees.
edit - quick google, 47k refugees admitted in 2016, which is the highest level in many decades
Interframe
Member
Well i mean it says right there in the OP that they're taking in refugees in record numbers not seen in over a decade.
Zombie James
Banned
jimmypython
Member
Canadian career bureaucrats and gov employees are so much worse than their US counterparts when it comes to efficiency. Thanks to Harper, who refused to hire professionals with reasonable career prospect, they are inexperienced and lazy (because there is no reason to be motivated).
Harper government also went with "we are going to cut the backlog by cancelling their cases" route for immigration, instead of solving the real problems.
Charles Brandon
Member
Tell that to Italy and Spain
Pandora012
Member
I think most are Haitian, as their temporary status (due to the earthquake) in the US is ending in a couple months. They think that if they go to Canada, they won't have to return to Haiti.
It's unfortunate since Canada's own program ended in 2016, and they are most likely going to be deported anyway.
Skellig Gra
Member
Millions! I don't think any country is taking in millions. Not that it diminishes the good work Canada has done.
Edit: saw your update
Charles Brandon
Member
Leader of the free world lmao
NYR
Member
Millions?
This is not about immigrants, it's about refugees. Are you honestly proposing a limit for how many refugees can come to flee a war-torn country? "Sorry, can't handle more than 50k. Hope u don't die, though xoxo".
50k is the highest level in decades? lmao, poor Canada. :'(
Oppo
Member
every single country on earth has such limits.
As a matter of fact, that's not true.
Charles Brandon
Member
Aye but you don't see Italy booting people back across the water, do you?
The dominant Canadian sentiment right now is that there are, in fact, too many people trying to immigrate here, refugees or not. We take in more than our fair share and it's absurd to think that a country like Canada doesn't need to somewhat cap how many people come to our country, refugee or not. I guess you live in a magical world where infrastructure, social programs and jobs magically create themselves to help these poor souls, with no negative effect on the people who actually live here.
Canada takes in approximately 250k people per year. For a country with 36M, that's pretty reasonable.
There's a procedure called pre-removal risk assesment. If you're at risk of persecution, you're not sent back.
Either these people decided not to file a request, or it was rejected because the area they would return to is deemed safe. That would be the case for Kurdistan, as example.
Either these people decided not to file a request, or it was rejected because the area they would return to is deemed safe. That would be the case for Kurdistan, as example.
Italy deported 5k people last year.
gutter_trash
Banned
not all claimants get accepted.
hundreds is not many out of 10s of thousands
it's not wet foot, dry land policy. not everyone can get accepted.
hundreds is not many out of 10s of thousands
it's not wet foot, dry land policy. not everyone can get accepted.
We'll see about that. Turkey has over 8 million refugees right now from different countries (3,5 million of them alone are from Syria) and it's in a middle of severe economic crisis. The government wants to take even more, especially muslims from Burma. It's pretty much impossible for a poor country like Turkey survive such burden and the country is dying a little more each day financially thanks to poor decisions of Erdogan.
Charles Brandon
Member
Did it deport them back to Iraq?
gutter_trash
Banned
most illegals to Italy are not form Iraq but from Africa, mostly economic migrants, not war refugees.
Blue Submarine No. 6
Member
* citation needed
Honestly, as a long-serving Canadian public servant, this kind of bullshit really pisses me off. It is flat-out crap.
A country can't keep taking in an unlimited amount of people.
Charles Brandon
Member
I know that. But the point that was made was that Canada can't deal with all these immigrants and no country could and therefore it has to send some back, even to war torn countries, like Iraq. Italy is also dealing with a similar influx of migrants, many of which are economic migrants, as is the case with Canada, but also Afghans, Syrians and Iraqis. Does Italy send these refugees back?
The rebuttal is essentially that it does not matter how many migrants you have, if someone from a war torn country arrives, they need to be given shelter.
The other argument, that they were being sent back to non-dangerous areas, like Kurdistan, is a better one.
I'm on a temporary contract that technically makes me a government employee and I've already been astounded by how so many people can do so much with so little. The average rank and file government employee should have at least a 50% increase in resources available or people hired in order to reach the kind of efficiency they are capable of.
Lebanon? I know they got at least a million from Syria.
Charles Brandon
Member
I was thinking of Turkey but maybe Lebanon as well
Blue Submarine No. 6
Member
Given a choice between him, Trump and Theresa May I know who I'd pick...
re: the OP, we're talking about fewer than 250 people here - out of about one million refugees and immigrants - and this headline means nothing without breaking down the demographics and giving us specifics of how many were deported where and when... and why... As is clearly stated in the article, ”Everyone ordered removed from Canada is entitled to due process before the law, and all removal orders are subject to various levels of appeal." Our courts hear appeals on these issues every week, and our judges tend very strongly to err on the side of caution in these matters, so I'm not overly concerned. Ultimately, we no more accept refugee or immigration claimants with criminal or terrorist ties than any other country...
They are deporting 1 in several hundred (if not thousand) refugees. Getting rid of a couple hundred people is statistical noise as far as the economy is concerned. People are getting sent back for various reasons, including criminal activity. If it was a matter of having no more room for refugees, Canada wouldn't continue to accept refugees (which they do).
Charles Brandon
Member
Aye, no argument with that.
ClosingADoor
Member
They don't just look at country, but also where you are from in that country. Some areas in Iraq and Afghanistan are deemed safer for return then others. Every country does this.
Muffin1611
Banned
No, and it doesn't matter that it's just "hundreds".
You don't deport people into countries that are deemed too dangerous for civilians.
Source that Canada appropriately did that in this case?
ClosingADoor
Member
Source that they didn't? It's not in the Reuters article, but I am assuming they have guidelines and laws for this.
Not everyone claiming refugee status, even from war torn nations, get accepted as refugees. If someone is in a position where they would not be in danger - ie, a majority ethnicity in a country where minorities are killed, they would not necessarily be taken in (it depends on other factors as well) - where a minority from that country would most likely be taken in.
I don't think these deportations have anything to do with exceeding quotas, but everything to do with not meeting the criteria of a refugee.
I don't think these deportations have anything to do with exceeding quotas, but everything to do with not meeting the criteria of a refugee.
Blue Submarine No. 6
Member
You guys have no idea the work involved in deporting someone from Canada... Hell, it took us 10 years of court cases and appeals to authorize the extradition of two Indian citizens (landed immigrants) who have an outstanding warrant for their arrest in India for murder (apparent "honour killing"), and that case is not atypical. Even under Harper and the Conservative government (that famously refused to protect Omar Khadr), we weren't just deporting people willy nilly... These are likely people with significant ties to governments with known human rights abuses, terrorist organizations, or serious criminal records. They aren't shipping families with small children back to Syria.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
The Reuters summary here offers too little information to draw many conclusions, if any. I am surprised they would Access to Information the data and not make available the full response.
Muffin1611
Banned
Sure they have, but they don't really mirror reality. That it's possible to deport people into "safe areas" of Afghanistan is a fantasy.
Here's a good report about the situation for deportees in Afghanistan: https://www.proasyl.de/wp-content/u...Afghanistan_Broschuere_englisch_web_Mai17.pdf