DANIEL HIEBERT UBC AND METROPOLIS BRITISH COLUMBIA Focusing a Swedish lens on Canadian integration policy

Subtitle… What could Canada’s immigration system look like with a social democratic government?  E.g., Olivia Chow as Minister of CIC…  … taking inspiration from an advanced welfare state like Sweden

Themes Background: major policy choices required of governments Canadian choices Swedish choices Swedish challenges What could this tell us?

21 st century policy questions (1) Managing the demographic transformation toward low fertility… options  Ignore the problem (e.g., Italy)  Raise productivity, extend working age (e.g., Japan)  Raise net migration (e.g., Canada)  Raise fertility (e.g., Sweden)

21 st century policy questions (2) Maximizing the benefits of immigration … options  Select ‘designer’ immigrants  Ethical concerns (e.g., IOM, GCIM)  International competition  Difficulty of predicting success  People come in families, not just as individuals  Humanitarian obligations  Enhance systems of integration  Cost  Political concerns

Canada’s choices Demographic transformation  Immigration (no success in raising fertility or productivity) Maximizing benefits of immigration  Historic focus on selection  Skilled Worker class  Business classes  Objective: self-sufficient immigrants who make an economic contribution to Canada, quickly

Canada: Selection side 1980s: heightened emphasis on economic immigrants 1990s: devolution to Quebec and other provinces 2000s: growing reliance on PNPs and creation of the CEC  Increasing significance of ‘stepwise’ immigration

Canada: Settlement side 1970s: introduction of modern settlement model with limited language education and orientation services (delivered by NGOs) 1990s: gender equity in language programs  Devolution to provinces (selectively) 2000s: increase in settlement funding  Transferred to provinces in QC, BC, MB  Administered by CIC elsewhere

Canada: Settlement side In an effort to provide equal services to all newcomers, the level of services is not high  All newcomers can access language and orientation services, but  No free additional education  No housing support  Limited employment preparation services  Few enhanced services for refugees  In fact, government sponsored refugees must repay transportation costs

Sweden’s choices Demographic transformation  Strong pro-fertility/family policies  Fertility ‘bounce’  Near-replacement fertility level and therefore less demographic pressure  Employers still identify short-term labour needs for both skilled and less-skilled workers

Sweden’s choices Perspective on immigration  Historically linked to social democratic values  Self-image … not an immigration society  Commitment to international solidarity with global south (e.g., parliamentary committee on circular migration and development, 2010)  Strong welfare state (though reforms are occurring)  Immigration policy  Driven by asylum and family reunification  Complication of Shengen Accord

Sweden’s choices Recent past (since 2006 coalition government led by Moderate Party): Centre-right  New perspectives on immigration  Three major policy directions  Enhanced attraction of skilled immigrants  Enhanced admission of lower-skilled  Enhanced settlement/integration programs for refugees

Sweden: Selection side Skilled worker recruitment  Shengen system: mainly labour migration  Stepwise system driven by employers (like CEC)  Permanent residence granted after 5 years of temporary work visas  Currently: rapid increase of TFWs with expected rise in permanent status in near future  Minister: “We must make it easier for people who want to come to Sweden to work here.”

Sweden: Selection side Lower-skilled worker recruitment  Driven by employers (similar to Canada’s TFW program)  Emphasis on ‘circularity’ and development impacts in global south  Not expected to lead to permanent residence (like Canada)

Sweden: Settlement side Economic immigrants: no programs given stepwise nature of admission (exception is free language training) Humanitarian  Major restructuring in 2010  Previous system  Integration services and housing delivered by municipal governments, funds provided by national state  Criticism of welfare dependence and labour market avoidance (politically contested!)

Sweden: settlement side Humanitarian immigrants  New system  ‘Recentralization’ to national state  Administered by Ministry of Employment (sub-ministry for integration)  Each adult individual granted access to an Introduction Guide responsible for assessing their skills and developing a personal plan to acquire housing, language, health, employment Guides are from the private sector and fees paid by state provided they succeed; clients have choice of guides with publicly-listed success rates and client satisfaction scores

Sweden: settlement side Humanitarian immigrants  New system  New array of subsidies To post-secondary institutions for credentialization To municipal gov’ts for refugees who learn Swedish within one year To newcomers to move to jobs To employers to hire refugees  Note: refugee integration includes housing, employment preparation and NO TRANSPORTATION LOANS for state- sponsored refugees

Sweden: settlement side Family immigrants  If members of refugee families, access to Introduction Guides and eligible for subsidies  If not, only eligible for language training

Swedish challenges Shengen system reduces regulatory capacity Anti-immigrant/refugee political party (Sweden Democrats): highly vocal Reluctant society of immigration  Systemic openness does not necessarily lead to welcoming social atmosphere  Relatively high levels of minority residential concentration  Cautious approach to reforms of the labour immigration system

Are there lessons from Sweden for Canada? Interesting statistic  Migration Policy Environment Index (MIPEX)  EU initiative to quantify the policy environment for newcomers … policies, not outcomes  Canada is included as a benchmark for European comparisons  Top possible score = 100  Sweden ranked 1 st with 83; Canada 3 rd with 72 Canada suffers due to problems with credentialization and the lack of inclusion of immigrants in the political system

Are there lessons from Sweden for Canada? General point: immigration systems reflect larger socio-political dynamics  What is possible in one society may not be in another Unseen aspect of policy formation  Transparency and accessibility of Swedish data Canadian policies supporting families (by all political parties) are insignificant Swedish integration system administered by the state and incorporates private sector  Limited role for NGOs in anti-racism advocacy  Ironic given historical social democratic values

Are there lessons from Sweden for Canada? Devolution of responsibility to municipalities was reversed in Sweden  Attempt to rebuild a coherent policy system with universal goal of economic integration Swedish financial commitment to refugee integration is ~5x higher (percapita) that Canada’s  Despite the fact that relative numbers are much higher But it is much lower for economic immigrants  Is it worth thinking about differentiated programs?

Are there lessons from Sweden for Canada? In Canada selection policy has changed with devolution  Though the traditional ‘mainstays’ of the Canadian system—the Skilled Worker and Business Classes—have seen little change And, despite devolution, integration policy has not changed very much  Though additional resources are available, and there have been many experiments in programming, goals are consistent In Sweden, there have been rapid and fundamental shifts in selection and integration policy  More adaptive system  Is Canada’s system too complex to adapt? Who would decide how?