Forcibly moving asylum seekers who have placed their hopes in Quebec can be done with humanity, believes François Legault.
Published at 12:57 a.m.
Updated at 6:00 a.m.
I reread twice the interview that the Prime Minister gave to my colleague Tommy Chouinard at the end of his mission in Paris with the impression of being confused.
Alas, no. Even after the almost unanimous outcry caused by his insane suggestion to forcibly relocate half of Quebec’s asylum seekers to other provinces, the Prime Minister persists and signs.
“I think it can be done humanely,” said François Legault1.
If we want to talk about humanity in the treatment of asylum seekers, we should perhaps start by remembering that we are talking here about human beings seeking protection and not about goods that can be shipped to Saskatoon or in Winnipeg as we see fit.
We are talking about men, women and children who have most often been forced to leave their homes, fleeing war or persecution.
A populist discourse which is on the rise in the West tends to demonize them. Again on Monday, Donald Trump spoke of an “invasion” of migrants who import “bad genes” into the United States2. At home, influential commentators who seem to have the ear of the Prime Minister are instead importing from France the specter of migratory “submersion” – an expression dear to the French extreme right which, in a less grotesque way, but just as erroneous as Trump , also suggests that Western societies would be taken by storm by a horde of foreigners coming to take advantage of their largesse and swallow up their civilization. While criticizing François Legault’s messy method, some believe that the Prime Minister nevertheless has the merit of showing that the right to asylum is leading Western societies straight towards self-destruction (sic).
If it is true that the world knows about the 12e year in a row a record number of forced displacements which brings its share of challenges to host societies, including ours, it is cruelly lacking in perspective to make people believe that the West is invaded by asylum seekers. The fact is that 75% of the world’s forcibly uprooted people are hosted in low- and middle-income countries. The majority try to survive in neighboring countries.
And no Western country is in the top 5 places which, per capita, host the greatest number of refugees or people seeking protection.
On the island of Aruba, at the top of the list of the most important places of reception (in relation to their national population), according to a recent report from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, it is one in five people who was uprooted against her will. At the top of this list of displaced people, we also find Lebanon, due to the large number of Syrian and Palestinian refugees living there. Before recent Israeli airstrikes that forced large numbers of people to flee Lebanon to Syria, one in six people there were forcibly displaced3.
It is also misleading to suggest that the majority of asylum seekers in Canada are “false” refugees or simple “tourists” who come here by choice in order to benefit from the generosity of the State. In 2023, nearly three out of four applicants heard by the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) were able to demonstrate that they met the definition of a refugee within the meaning of the United Nations Convention or a person to protect (see box below).
Like you and me, these people would have preferred to stay at home. Refugee status is a scar they did not choose. No one’s goal in life is to have to mourn the loss of their country and everything they loved and start again from scratch in a foreign country.
Despite everything, the majority of them end up rising to the challenge and showing that they are a good bet for the host society. Over time, they contribute significantly to the economy, bringing in more in taxes paid than they receive in benefits and social services4.
I therefore come back to the declarations of François Legault, according to whom there would be a “humane” way of chasing towards other provinces people who, in the vast majority, have already been chased from their country of origin, fleeing the war or persecution.
We agree that, to best accommodate people seeking asylum in Canada, whose numbers are increasing in a context of public services and housing crisis, it would be in our best interest for each province to do his part. But to achieve this in a humane way, there should ideally be better distribution upon the arrival of these people. If these people are well established in Quebec, have landed a job and established links in their host community, forcibly moving them a second time to a territory that François Legault until recently considered foreign is simply inhuman.
1. Read “Moving by force can be done “humanely”, says Legault”
2. Read “Trump accuses migrants of importing “bad genes” into the country”
3. Check statistics from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
4. Check out the study Refugees: a good bet for Canada?
Who can get asylum in Canada?
Asylum may be granted in Canada if it is established that the applicant meets the definition of refugee within the meaning of the United Nations Convention or if he or she is a person in need of protection.
Convention refugees are people who have a well-founded fear of persecution because of the color of their skin, their religion, their nationality, their political opinions or their membership in a social group (this which includes sexual orientation, gender identity or being a woman).
Persons in need of protection must demonstrate that, if they returned to their country of nationality, they would be exposed to a risk of torture, a threat to their life or the risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.
Source: Immigration and Refugee Board
