Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for this invitation to speak to this committee.
The Canadian Sponsorship Agreement Holders Association is a group of about 100 sponsorship agreement holders, or SAHs, as we call ourselves, who facilitate the application process and settlement of most of the privately sponsored refugees who arrive in Canada. For the most part, SAHs respond to people who come to our doors. That makes our work slightly different from what the government is doing. Typically, our selection process involves working with someone in our community who is worried about friends or relatives who are refugees. So we're not looking at the global needs structure, but at what's in front of us.
Though the refugee resettlement pie is much bigger this year, and we're very thankful for that, and it's bigger than it's been in a long time, many SAHs worry about that slice being carved off and parts of it being lost to us. This is a worry because of the restrictive caps on new sponsorship applications for SAHs that have been part of our environment since 2012. As you know, the caps were brought in to deal with the long wait times and backlogs of applications, which were indeed a problem. Because African visa offices were the most oversubscribed places, these caps have impacted African sponsorships particularly hard, as they deal with many old cases there.
Between 2012 and 2015, by my rough estimate, about 2,000 Africans were sponsored to come to Canada. By comparison, last year alone SAHs were able to submit almost 10,000 Syrian and Iraqi sponsorships—and that doesn't include what was done in Quebec, as I don't have those numbers—because they were prioritized and there was no cap on those two populations in 2015.
Prioritizing one group necessarily has an impact on the whole Canadian resettlement system and can cause problems elsewhere. While no one wants to get into the morbid science of comparing one refugee's plight with another's, there are many who wonder why someone who has been waiting for more than five years may need to continue to wait while others appear to be zipping through the process because they're prioritized.
There are certainly compelling reasons why some refugees need to be resettled on an urgent basis. Canada already has a system for that—the urgent protection program that's been talked about. However, as a rule, SAHs want to see applications processed in the order that they came into the system to see equal access to sponsorships from around the world. That's why I think it's important to focus on building a robust refugee resettlement system that can handle the ongoing demands and at the same time respond to the urgent protection situations that come up. That's something that will take careful building and planning to put resources where they're needed and to realize the efficiencies.
In terms of resettling internally displaced people, Canada, of course, had a unique program to deal with this a number of years ago called the source country class, which has been talked about already. While many were resettled to Canada over the years through this program, there were a number of problems with it, which have been highlighted. It was limited to a few countries that were available, the embassies designated were often difficult or even dangerous to access, and many people who applied did not qualify, so the rejection rates were high.
I worked for the Mennonite Central Committee, and we, as MCC, were somewhat involved in source country sponsorship in Colombia because we have had a program working with IDPs for many years in that country. Generally, our programs were focused on helping IDPs to find new life within Colombia because, most of the time, moving the IDPs away from the threat they were facing eliminated the threat: the threat did not follow them. If, however, they continued to get death threats, we tried to walk with them in the process and apply for resettlement in some cases.
For a number of reasons we never did very much of that. Our first option was always local integration because that's what worked the best. We knew that it wasn't easy to resettle and for most displaced people that's not what they want. They don't want to go to a place like Canada. They want to stay closer to where they are. Also, we knew that if this were a key focus for us, it would be dangerous for our staff and the people and churches who were involved in this. We were also beginning to see more fraud as people began to see this as a way to get to Canada. So there were problems with that. If Canada embarks on a program like that, I think it would be important for us to think about how to deal with this selection process in a way that's safe and effective and fair. That's not going to be a simple thing to figure out.
Finally, I think it's important to keep in mind that resettlement is but one tool in our tool box in responding to forced displacement. I note that the report from the UN that this committee referred to does not mention resettlement in its recommendations. The focus instead is on trauma healing and rebuilding of the communities.
The Mennonite Central Committee has worked in the Middle East for decades, including in Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and in Syria itself. Our partners of all faiths on the ground are not really talking to us about resettlement. When we asked them what was best to do, the response was along the line of help us to reach out to our neighbours who are in need. That involves development work, and more importantly involves working at relationship-building in this community.
In Iraq, for example, our partners work with Yazidis and Christians and other groups on trauma healing, which extends across religious boundaries. In Syria, thanks to grants from the Office of Religious Freedom, we have seen Christians and Muslims working together on relief and development projects, and even standing up for each other in the face of violence. These are small steps, but can be the seeds of peace in a place of conflict—conflict that is often imported into the region.
I know there are many forgotten groups around the world and this committee has been hearing from them. To hear the plight of those people is a very important thing. However, it can be difficult to decide whom to help when we cannot help everyone. Many of us who are SAHs struggle with this on a daily basis, and it's the hardest thing we do on a regular basis, deciding where we can help and where we can't. We as SAHs handle this in a number of ways and we do what we can.
Stepping back for a minute from the SAH world, it's important to have a global discussion on how best to use the limited number of spaces for resettlement available each year from various states, and to use them well. As you think about recommendations it will be important for you to think not just of the people who come to you with these compelling stories, as important as they are, but also how that resettlement can work together with other efforts to work with victims of forced displacement.
Thank you very much.