Trudeau's Committment to Syrian Refugees - 25,000 by Year End

Smallc · December 27, 2015

Tell that to Europe...lol. 'Syrians' seem just fine with leaving their dear homes in that region. Are our 'Syrians' different?

Going to Canada is much different than going to Europe. You're so far from home at that point, there's probably no chance of paying your own way back at over $1000 a pop.

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

Going to Canada is much different than going to Europe. You're so far from home at that point, there's probably no chance of paying your own way back at over $1000 a pop.

Awwww...it's so cold...and farrrrrr away. Nobody ever wants to come to Canada.

You're grasping straws.

Smallc · December 27, 2015

Awwww...it's so cold...and farrrrrr away. Nobody ever wants to come to Canada.

You're grasping straws.

I'm not grasping at anything. I just understand human nature.

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

Here's why: Canada doesn't give as generously as the UK, Sweden, Germany and a few other choice destinations. Offer what the UK offers and watch those numbers GROW.

Smallc · December 27, 2015

I'm sorry, are you arguing for offering more?

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

I'm sorry, are you arguing for offering more?

I'm telling you in these words I'm typing that if Canada offered the same benefit package as the UK there would be much more than a few thousand 'Syrians' willing to come to Canada.

Keepitsimple · December 27, 2015

Again - back to the original ridiculous promise of 25,000 government-sponsored refugees. Under the previous government,the focus was on privately-sponsored refugees from Iraq - and well over 20,000 have been settled in Canada since the ISIS debacle began. Hardly a peep from the media. Why privately-sponsored? Because they have a much better chance of quickly integrating in society with the help of people and organizations that are committed to successful outcomes. Government-sponsored refugees run through a mish-mash of Federal, Provincial and Municipal support systems that lack the "roots" and consistency that private sponsors can provide.

The initial 10,000 refugees that are currently "in process" are almost exclusively privately sponsored and a large number of those were already in the works when the new government took over. So really - we haven't even started to "test" the systems that have to be in place to accommodate the government sponsored refugees.

Canadians have an abundance of good will - so it's a difficult issue to overtly criticize this government's futile attempts.....but there will be a price to pay when the facts are in and the bills are totalled up.

Edited December 27, 2015 by Keepitsimple

waldo · December 27, 2015

I'm telling you in these words I'm typing that if Canada offered the same benefit package as the UK there would be much more than a few thousand 'Syrians' willing to come to Canada.

since you keep repeating it: Canada versus the UK benefits? How do they differ?

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

since you keep repeating it: Canada versus the UK benefits? How do they differ?

You tell me...all the "migrants" want in to places like the UK. They'll risk their lives to get through that Chunnel. Must be the food.

WestCoastRunner · December 27, 2015

You tell me...all the "migrants" want in to places like the UK. They'll risk their lives to get through that Chunnel. Must be the food.

That's quite some benefit package.

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

That's quite some benefit package.

You're free to deny migrants are lining-up to get into the UK. The residents of Calais and surrounding villages would say otherwise.

Smallc · December 27, 2015

You tell me

You're the one that claimed it.

WestCoastRunner · December 27, 2015

You're free to deny migrants are lining-up to get into the UK. The residents of Calais and surrounding villages would say otherwise.

Why would I deny that?

waldo · December 27, 2015

The initial 10,000 refugees that are currently "in process" are almost exclusively privately sponsored and a large number of those were already in the works when the new government took over.

so you keep repeating... how many is a "large number"... as you say, "already in the works"?

.

Under the previous government,the focus was on privately-sponsored refugees from Iraq - and well over 20,000 have been settled in Canada since the ISIS debacle began. Hardly a peep from the media.

the waldo calls bullshyte! Here's a media peep: since 2009... not "well over" 20,000... with a like focus on government versus private sponsorship. Since 2009 - wow... that's huuuge Simple. :lol:

As of July 6th, 2015: the Harper Conservative government had resettled: 21,956 Iraqi refugees – 10,287 government assisted and 11,669 privately sponsored.

The 20,000 figure is the total number of Iraqi refugees resettled in Canada since 2009

as for this continued nattering about Syrian refugees not wanting to come to Canada... that's all based on one lame NP article! Seems the UNHCR sent out some 44000 text messages to potential candidates to "gauge interest"... turns out 28000 numbers actually worked... didn't "bounce back"! From that about 3000 text replies were received... interviews proceeded and some 1800 agreed to relocate to Canada. Blind text messages, with no follow-up...

given some 4 million refugees, does anyone here seriously believe 25K... 50K refugees won't be "found"? :lol:

.

waldo · December 27, 2015

You tell me...all the "migrants" want in to places like the UK. They'll risk their lives to get through that Chunnel. Must be the food.

oh my! You repeated claims that Canadian benefits to refugees are no match for the UK (and a few other countries you mentioned). When you're simply asked to clarify that difference... your reply is, "you tell me"! Oh my!

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

Oh my. You're the expert. Why are some countries the preferred destination for 'Syrians'?

waldo · December 27, 2015

Oh my. You're the expert. Why are some countries the preferred destination for 'Syrians'?

no - apparently, given your repeated statements... you positioned yourself as, as you say, "the expert". Apparently, a simple request asking you to speak to the difference in benefit packages you so emphasized, repeatedly emphasized... well, that apparently busted your expertise! Go figure! And now, you're in mega deflection mode - perfect!

DogOnPorch · December 27, 2015

I already speculated it was the English food.

waldo · December 27, 2015

I already speculated it was the English food.

I already said you're in mega deflection mode... from failing to support your repeated claim.

WestCoastRunner · December 27, 2015

I'm telling you in these words I'm typing that if Canada offered the same benefit package as the UK there would be much more than a few thousand 'Syrians' willing to come to Canada.

So in other words, you have no clue as to the benefit packages being offered.

Shady · December 27, 2015

Considering the number of plans that the previous government was forced to modify (and the government before that, and before that) I don't think it's a valid criticism.

Nonsense. It's completely a valid criticism. That number of refugees, in that short of period of time, with significant security concerns was idiocy. Promises made for pure symbolism and so-called compassion without recognizing logic and reason. Just a chance to prove that he's different than Harper. Hopefully that need will wane over time.

Smallc · December 27, 2015

Most people will see it as a good thing that he's trying to be different than Harper.

waldo · December 28, 2015

... with significant security concerns was idiocy.

of course, when I pointed out, several times, that both the RCMP and CSIS indicated security screening would not be compromised... even to the end of the December time line... the Phobes of Islam here typically replied to suggest something along the lines of (I paraphrase), "what else would you expect civil servants to say in response to government policy directives"! :lol:

WestCoastRunner · December 28, 2015

of course, when I pointed out, several times, that both the RCMP and CSIS indicated security screening would not be compromised... even to the end of the December time line... the Phobes of Islam here typically replied to suggest something along the lines of (I paraphrase), "what else would you expect civil servants to say in response to government policy directives"!

And yet they whine because of the slow down in admittance to this country. Can't win for losing.

December 28, 2015

of course, when I pointed out, several times, that both the RCMP and CSIS indicated security screening would not be compromised... even to the end of the December time line... the Phobes of Islam here typically replied to suggest something along the lines of (I paraphrase), "what else would you expect civil servants to say in response to government policy directives"!

Actually, forgetting for a moment the whole phobes thing, what else would you expect civil servants to say in response to government policy directives?

I mean really? Do you expect them to tell the truth about the actual chances of effective screening?