Canada is hardly better than Norway on integration | Sylo Taraku
There are things we can learn from Canada, but even Canada is not an integration paradise. There are also tensions between secularism and Islam, writes Sylo Taraku in this post.
When I talk about integration at conferences around Norway, I am often asked: Who succeeds best with the integration of immigrants? Are there any success stories out there? Who can we learn from?
I must admit that it is difficult to answer this question. There are success stories of integrating certain groups, but no western country has a general recipe for success in integrating everyone.
However, one country that is often highlighted as ideal in the context of integration is Canada. They have a particularly good reputation as a common society, where they succeed particularly well with the integration of immigrants. But are they really better than Norway at integration?
In November 2019, I traveled to Ottawa, Canada, to attend a conference on the field of tension between secularism and religion. There is no doubt that they have a much more relaxed attitude to immigration-related issues than we have here in Western Europe. The exception was the French-speaking province of Quebec. When I also went there, I was made aware that they had an Islamic debate that is very reminiscent of Europe, or more specifically France. I come to this – first a little about Canada on a national level:
More common attitudes
Canada is the world’s most immigration-positive country. Not only because they receive many immigrants annually (around 300,000 annually), but also because they have very tolerant and common attitudes. A great international Gallup poll from 2019, which includes 145 countries, shows that Canadians have the most positive attitudes in the world towards immigrants. Typical questions in such surveys are whether one is positive or negative about having immigrants as neighbors, or that they marry into the family.
The country’s immigration history is an important explanation. Canada is a settler nation on equal footing with New Zealand, Australia and the United States. The fact that Canada scores high on tolerant attitudes towards immigrants – higher than Western Europeans – means that immigrants who settle there face a “welcoming society”.
Attracts highly qualified immigrants
Things may indicate that immigrants are doing better in Canada and in Europe, including Norway. But this is not necessarily because Canada has a better integration policy, but rather because they have one more selective immigration policy.
Like other western countries “overseas”, Canada also attracts highly skilled immigrants. Unlike countries in Europe, Canada has long used a points system to provide access to immigrants who can stand on their own two feet and who can make a positive contribution to the country’s economy. The points system is complex, but it is based on human capital and affiliation with Canada. Criteria range from age, level of education and language skills to Canadian work experience. It also helps to have a job offer in Canada or relatives there.
The proportion of employed immigrants is higher than in Norway
As an EEA country, we can not have a similar immigration regime as Canada. They have also had humanitarian migration in the form of asylum seekers and refugees, with around 20,000 annually. But in relation to the population size, Canada has had lower asylum migration than European countries such as Germany, Sweden and Norway. Although Canada is very attractive as a destination country, the geographical distance makes traveling there very difficult and expensive for asylum seekers from Afghanistan, the Middle East and Africa.
Even in the selection of quota refugees, Canada has far more emphasis on integration considerations. This results in a higher employment rate among refugees in Canada than in Norway. The authorities call the scheme for the reception of skilled refugees «win-win »solutions for both parties.
No major right-wing populist parties
I think that is wise. There are many refugees in the world who need help. When you bring some of them to prosperous countries such as Canada or Norway, it should be a goal that they should be integrated and not live in isolation in socially disadvantaged ghettos. I also like the fact that civil society plays a much more active role in settling and integrating refugees in Canada.
Personally, I would also like us in Norway to give voluntary organizations a greater role in the integration work.
In Canada, they also call for the “Refugee Sponsorship Program.” This scheme has helped many, not only to come to Canada, but to learn the language, find work and become integrated. Groups of at least five citizens take responsibility – also financially – for the success of a refugee in Canadian society. This reduces the burden on the taxpayer.
All indications are that refugees are doing better in Canada than in Western Europe, but here the composition of refugees must be taken into account. They also have more low-paid jobs than Norway, and a lower threshold for starting their own business.
The alignment between Islam and Western secular societies is a process that will take time. What is crucial is that the conflicts along the way are handled in a democratic way […]
In contrast to Norway, which has had public committees (the Brochmann committees) that have studied the consequences of immigration for the welfare state, there is little concern about this in Canada. They do not have a right-wing populist party at the federal level as is common in Europe, or any major immigration-critical media.
Quebec stands out
Diversity is not seen as a threat to Canadian identity, as they have long pursued a multiculturalist policy that emphasizes respect for cultural differences. Some of the largest non-European ethnic groups that have immigrated to Canada have been from Latin American countries, India, Hong Kong and Vietnam. They have largely integrated well into society at large, and there have been cultural tensions. This may have contributed to the overall positive attitude towards immigrants in Canada.
However, in the French-speaking province of Qubeec, nationalism is more prominent. I book The white shift Canadian political scientist Eric Kaufmann describes it differently in this way: “Where Quebec identity is territorial, historical, and cultural, today’s Anglo-defined Canadian identity is futuristic: a missionary nationalism centered around a left-wing modernist multiculturalist ideology.”
This difference is also manifested in the way Canadians relate to Islam’s presence in the public sphere. When I was in Quebec in 2019, they had an intense debate about the so-called “Bill 21” – the law that was passed in June the same year and which prohibits the use of religious symbols such as hijab, kippas and turbans among others and other public employees who are considered which are considered religious symbols. to have positions of authority. The law was met with protests from Muslims and others who believed that this was an expression of “Islamophobia” and racism.
Here, Quebec has worked much harder against Islamic symbols than the countries in Western Europe. The majority of the population has supported the law.
During the heated debate, Quebec’s head of government, Francois Legout, stated that society can not split in two, setting aside values; “Quebec must have a set of common values.” He said this with reference to Quebec’s secular traditions. While the rest of the country celebrates diversity and is very sensitive to issues related to multiculturalism, Quebec has raised the banner of secularism high in the face of Islam. Which creates a polarization reminiscent of Europe.
Conflict over Islam’s place in society
Islam’s place in society is one of the most burning issues in the debates on integration in Western countries. We have something to learn from Canada, but even Canada is not an integration paradise where there is full harmony in the immigration and integration debate.
There is no universal model for integration or coexistence between different cultures, but there are different experiences and traditions, and there are different political approaches to diversity.
The alignment between Islam and Western secular societies is a process that will take time. What is parallel is that the conflicts along the way are handled in a democratic way, without enmity and extremism, and that we avoid the development of society.
Our reader posts are expressions of opinion that express the writer’s attitude. See her for more information on how to submit and post to our debate pages.