A Comparative Analysis of Resettlement Programs in Canada and the UK: Impacts and Challenges

Settlement and resettlement, terms that are often used interchangeably, are key concepts in the process of migrant’s integration into a new society. Individuals may voluntarily migrate out of their country of origin to a foreign land for economic reasons. However, other immigrants may be forced (involuntary) to relocate from their home country to a foreign country due to armed conflicts and other factors. These two categories of migrants are different from internally displaced people. This capstone is focused on describing and evaluating programs and services to resettle immigrants, particularly forced migrants. Understanding and evaluating these programs is important because there cannot be meaningful integration without an effective settlement. The resettlement programs and services in Canada are compared with those in the UK to draw lessons that will lead to policy improvement in future action plans on identified challenges to enhance the positive impacts of the migrants on the Canadian social-economic environments. As discovered during the capstone project, both countries are found to adopt similar approaches towards resettling refugees in that they collaborate with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) to identify eligible entrants by following the laid down vulnerability criteria. Moreover, they collaborate and involve many stakeholders including the local communities to promote quality integration experience. Also, there is the existence of government-led national schemes as well as the presence of integration and settling services. In contrast, however, their priorities and additional eligibility criteria differ while the structures and modalities of private sponsorship and community-led schemes are not the same. Canada appears to have an open-door policy to immigration with many immigration routes/programs. However, as signatories to the UNHCR Convention and Protocol, and to demonstrate favourable position to play host to migrants and a greater commitment and determination to resettle refugees and asylum seekers, Canada and the UK have put in place varieties of resettlement schemes. More importantly, in Canada refugees and asylum seekers are catered for through Refugee, Protected Person and Humanitarian Admission Programs, namely: Government-Assisted Refugee Resettlement (GAR), Blended Visa Office-Referred (BVOR) and Privately Sponsored Refugees (PSR). Also, the UK’s resettlement programmes for the refuges include Vulnerable Persons Resettlement Schemes (VPRS), Vulnerable Children’s Resettlement Schemes (VCRS), Gateway, and Mandate schemes. Many settlement services are offered to migrants in Canada to promote and quicken effective integration. These include the establishment of the Resettlement Assistance Program (RAP) which provide individual income support and makes contributions to Service Provider Organization (SPOs). Moreover, the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) enters into blended initiatives with Sponsorship Agreement Holder, Group of Five or Community Sponsor to jointly provide sponsorship for some PSR. Working with relevant stakeholders, the Canadian Government provides other direct and indirect services to facilitate the settlement of migrants. These include the provision of information and orientation sessions, needs assessment and referrals, language training as well as training to develop necessary and essential life skills. Others cover employment-related services and connecting migrants with the broader community including public institutions and community organizations. Resettling these migrants provides benefits to Canada but the costs in terms of financial resources cannot be wished away. Apart from inadequate funding, there are other challenges, including: refugees and asylum seekers are not a homogenous group; refugee sponsorship processing time is long, there are methodical difficulties in researching the health needs of refugees and asylum seekers; language and problem of adaptation to new environment; as well as getting their skills, experience and qualification recognized and accepted for employment. Given the foregoing, it is recommended that the Canadian Government, among other things, should not only improve the budget allocation but also ensure judicious use of a committed resources which requires a slight increase in the GST; streamline the number of immigration routes and institute an active immigration and resettlement policy to keep migration adjustment costs under control. As practised in the UK, the Migration Impacts Fund can be introduced for communities that have experienced a large influx of migration. Whilst communication should be improved, there is a need to actively involve ethnocultural communities’ non-statutory organizations to facilitate settlement, social inclusion, integration and assimilation of resettled migrants within the shortest possible time.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.