福利姬自慰expert on how Canadian politicians are playing a dangerous game on migration
Canada has joined the club of states embroiled with But our challenges are not unique, and we have two decades of European misadventures with irregular migration to guide our response. Unfortunately, Canadian politicians are following a well-rehearsed script in which crisis responses to anti-refugee sentiment undermine liberal values, limit policy options and open us to blackmail by hostile neighbours.
I have spent several years studying Europe鈥檚 relationship with irregular migration, most recently on a six-week trip that included looking at the Italian government鈥檚 hardline policies.
Interior Minister Matteo Salvini came to power on , and has spent his short tenure , , and .
Salvini, also serving as deputy prime minister, blames migrants for longstanding Italian social problems like youth unemployment. In June, Tito Boeri, head of the Italian pension agency, clashed with Salvini on a very simple point that immigration was needed in light of an aging workforce. by stating that the tenured economist and that evidence-based arguments about demographics 鈥渋gnored the will鈥 of Italians.
This kind of populism has troubling parallels in Canada. Ontario Premier Doug Ford and on the issue. His stonewalling and scapegoating to foster a crisis in the lead-up to the 2019 federal election are well-worn tactics.
Fears trump facts
Anti-immigrant populism trades on two interrelated trends. First, facts matter far less than voters鈥 feelings; second, as Daniel Stockemer from the University of Ottawa puts it, . Ruling parties are caught in a bind since governments that want votes should be responsive to their citizens. But responding to anti-immigrant sentiments means policies with negative economic, social and security outcomes.
Ruling parties in Europe have tried to thread the needle by getting tough on irregular migration while maintaining open asylum systems. They must show voters that they鈥檙e doing something when their political challengers claim they have lost control of borders and undermined public safety. Statements by Michelle Rempel, the Conservative Party of Canada鈥檚 immigration critic, are thus wholly unoriginal.
Crises demand action
Crises demand extraordinary measures. Seventy-one per cent of respondents in the Angus Reid survey would devote resources to border security if they were in charge. Only 29 per cent said they would focus on assisting arrivals. Respondents were more aware of the asylum issue than any other in 2018. But as in Europe, Canadians鈥 strong opinions are based on feelings rather than facts.
The federal Liberals have reacted by shuffling the cabinet and . But Bill Blair has been named minister of border security and organized crime reduction. While this might seem like a savvy move, bundling migration with security narrows the range of options to reactive and counter-productive policies that exclude economic and social interventions. When your only tool is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Not to be outdone, the Conservatives to the entirety of the border, meaning asylum-seekers could be turned back anywhere.
Securitizing borders is expensive, rarely works for long and undermines refugee protection. It also results in more criminality. Prohibition in the face of high demand fosters black market supply. Illicit economies and more dangerous routes also .
What鈥檚 more, criminalizing migrants reduces policy options. Politicians in Europe are obsessed with 鈥渂reaking鈥 smuggling rings, with little interest in the supply/demand logics that drive them. Irregular migration becomes more spectacular, offering politicians fodder to escalate the response. This leads to right-wing parties framing migration as a civilizational threat, the starkest examples of which can be found in Austria, Hungary and Italy.
Maxime Bernier鈥檚 tweets about 鈥渆xtreme multiculturalism鈥 and the 鈥渃ult of diversity鈥 were cribbed from European populists. His break from the Conservative Party in favour of right-wing party was right on script.
That both to score points against Justin Trudeau is telling. So is the fact that based on apocryphal stories of citizenship tourists.
Canadians like to believe we are exceptionally tolerant. Environics pollster , partly because of our immigration history. But the current situation reveals a different story: Canada鈥檚 openness is more about exceptional geography.
In a 2017 study, Michael Donnelly from the University of Toronto found that , and argued our resistance to populism is because we鈥檝e been spared migration crises. That鈥檚 no longer true.
Fraying the social fabric
What can be done? The government inherited a broken refugee system from Stephen Harper鈥檚 Conservatives, but the Liberals , which cascade through the system and decrease people鈥檚 trust in its efficacy. Conservatives must ask whether scapegoating asylum-seekers for votes is worth the cost. It frays the social fabric, and will leave them holding the bag if they win the 2019 election.
Political discourse matters. The migrants and asylum-seekers I interviewed this summer told me time and again that Salvini ascension had changed the mood. People routinely approach them in the street to tell them that their time is up and they鈥檒l be expelled to Africa. . Recall that the Qu茅bec City mosque shooter . It can, and has, happened here.
All of this might sound like the moralizing of a university researcher (from Toronto, no less), so I will conclude with a national security rationale. Canada鈥檚 2019 federal election campaign will for hundreds of thousands of migrants in the United States. While some might choose to come here, the more troubling option is that Donald Trump could send them our way.
Beggar-thy-neighbour policies can be used to exacerbate migration crises, and Trump is nothing if not a zero-sum thinker. As Kelly Greenhill from Tufts University has shown, to coerce or deter their rivals. Turkey did it to Europe in 2016, securing an extra three billion Euros with a threat that
It would take a profound willed ignorance to assume Trump is beyond engineering a migration event to deflect public opinion at home, influence the Canadian elections or leverage trade concessions. Politicians from across the spectrum have a duty to ensure Canada is not exposed to that kind of blackmail, particularly not for gains at the ballot box. That means de-escalating the rhetoric and co-operating to ensure we have our house in order.
is associate director of the Global Migration Lab at the University of Toronto's Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy.
This article was originally published on . Read the .