WATCH: Canada’s Investment in Newcomer Integration

In May 2018, Senator Ratna Omidvar was a keynote speaker at the National Conversation on Immigration conference in London, United Kingdom. In her remarks, the Senator reflected on the “National Conversation”  as the largest consultation of its kind in the country, along with some lessons the UK can glean from Canada about its multiculturalism, diversity and inclusion policies. You can read an excerpt from her remarks below along with a video featuring a brief interview.

“The National Conversation’s Interim Report made a very interesting finding that could be applied to other jurisdictions as well, including Canada: that every community visited had its own local experience with migrants, made up of a mix of positive and negative views. The perspectives of many people are defined greatly by community narratives – on media coverage, popular opinion and the experiences of friends and family.

If there is one significant takeaway from the work currently underway in this country and the ongoing efforts in my country, it is this: public trust in immigration systems are greatly determined by the ability of government to translate and communicate national interest into benefits that can be experienced and shared at the local level.

Put another way, should the national interest be perceived to not match the local interest, everyday people will quickly identify government mismanagement. They will see migration as a hindrance to their collective prosperity. And it is from this growing lack of trust in government where hate and economic exclusion fester. This was certainly a factor in your country’s decision to leave the European Union.

I have always maintained that whilst immigration is a global and national phenomena, integration is a uniquely local experience. People may leave one country for another, but it is the local experience that will be felt first hand.  I am talking not just of the newcomers. I believe that the conversation about integration and inclusion has to shift to include three players – first the newcomers, second all existing residents in the local community, and third local institutions. These are the groups that help or hinder integration.

There is a rich narrative of local best practices from the world that lends itself to this idea. Cities of Migration the world over are experimenting and succeeding with unique local expressions of innovation. For example, Copenhagen teaches cycling culture to newly arrived Muslim women. Barcelona equips local residents with facts to dispel fake news about migrants. And Toronto matches immigrant job seekers with mentors drawn from the same occupation.

Good ideas have long legs, and some of the best ideas have indeed originated from right here in London: The London Living Wage as just one example. And because local communities are far better placed than their national governments to nimbly borrow and adapt ideas, the London Living Wage has been embraced by prominent labour unions and activists across Europe and North America.

Conversely, your country has just borrowed an idea from my country that deserves your attention. That idea is to allow everyday citizens to privately sponsor refugees to come to their country.

In Canada, any individual can act as a de facto guarantors for refugee families during their first year of resettlement. Before these refugees arrive, these volunteers raise funds to provide them the necessities – food, shelter. And they develop resettlement plans to ensure these refugees have the support they need to belong and thrive in our country. This can include anything from English language training and enrollments in public schools to weekend museum trips.

As an individual who has privately sponsored refugees myself, I can attest that it is among one of the most rewarding experiences in my life.

Today, more than 250 communities across Canada are home to these refugees.  One in three Canadians either sponsored a refugee directly or know someone who has. This I think, is a modern nation building strategy, more about social cohesion and less about national infrastructure.”