Uganda’s loss is Canada’s gain

Good reminder of a good program, one that has benefited both the refugees and Canada:

On Aug. 5, 1972, within two years of overthrowing the elected Ugandan government of Milton Obote, General Idi Amin Dada made the following decree: “All British Asians numbering about 80,000 will have to be repatriated to Britain—they must leave within 90 days. Non-citizens of other nationalities (other than Uganda) must also leave within three months.”

Although Amin’s decree supposedly targeted only British and other non-Ugandan South Asians, the reality was that it affected all South Asians; citizens as well as non-citizens. Random incidents of harassment, robbery, arbitrary imprisonment, and intimidation targeted the entire South Asian community—regardless of their status or citizenship. In effect, South Asians in Uganda—who were long-settled and included Hindus, Muslims, Sikh, and Christians—became stateless. While many of the Asians carried British passports, and therefore were the responsibility of Britain, others needed to find countries to accept them.

Canada responded. On Aug. 24, 1972, then-prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau announced Canada’s intervention and the expeditious dispatch of a Canadian mission to Kampala with the following statement: “For our part, we are prepared to offer an honourable place in Canadian life to those Uganda Asians who come to Canada under this program. Asian immigrants have already added to the cultural richness and variety of our country and, I am sure that those from Uganda will, by their abilities and industry, make an equally important contribution to Canadian society.”

A Canadian team was quickly assembled and sent to Kampala under the leadership of Roger St. Vincent, whose instructions stated: “Your Mission is to proceed to Kampala and by whatever means undertake to process without numerical limitations those Asians who meet the immigration selection criteria bearing in mind their particular plight and facilitate their departure for Canada. Your mission must be accomplished by November 8.”

From Sept. 6 to Nov. 7, 1972, Canadian officials worked non-stop to process, interview, carry out medical exams, arrange transport, and grant visas to more than 6,000 South Asians.

Those families who were unable to gain acceptance by any state were assisted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and transported from Uganda into refugee camps in Europe including Austria, Sweden, Italy, and Malta. Subsequently, more than 2,000 of these refugees were accepted by Canada.

On Aug. 24, 1972, then-prime minister Pierre Elliot Trudeau announced Canada’s intervention and dispatched a mission to Uganda that granted visas to more than 6,000 South Asians by the end of the year. 

In the end, between 1972 and 1974, Canada accepted more than 8,000 South Asian Ugandans, many of whom were Ismaili Muslims and Goans, as they were mostly Ugandan passport holders. Fearing what happened in Uganda, many South Asians from Kenya, Tanzania, and the Democratic Republic of Congo subsequently immigrated to Canada.

Beyond the obvious humanitarian relief it provided, Canada’s response in the Ugandan South Asian exodus holds important political and historical significance. Although Canada had responded to many refugee movements in the past, this was the first time that it responded to a large-scale non-European refugee crisis, and it came on the heels of the adoption of Canada’s Multiculturalism Policy in 1971.

The successful integration of the Ugandan South Asian community over the last 50 years has been a testament of this policy, which supports linguistic, ethno-cultural, and ethno-racial pluralism.

Today, the Ugandan South Asians, most who fled their homeland with virtually the clothes on their backs, are well represented in all walks of Canadian life due to their pursuit of education, tradition of self-reliance, business acumen, and strong work ethic. After five decades, the community’s social and cultural integration may be explained, in part, by an ongoing reference and dedication to the values of the country which gave it asylum and a permanent home.

In the corridors of Parliament, Senator Mobina Jaffer was the first South Asian woman appointed to the Upper House in 2001, and Liberal Arif Virani has served as Member of Parliament for Parkdale–High Park, Ont., since 2015 and is currently the parliamentary secretary to the minister of international trade. In Alberta, the Honourable Salma Lakhani was installed as Alberta’s 19th lieutenant governor in August 2020, and in the Canadian foreign service, Arif Lalani has served as Canada’s ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

In the world of news media, Omar Sachedina, whose parents fled Uganda, is a well-known national affairs correspondent and also serves as a fill-in anchor on CTV National News. After working on Parliament Hill for a number of years, Farah Mohamed went on to be a founder of G(irls)20, and previously served as the CEO of the Malala Fund.

One of the world’s largest transportation engineering software companies is co-founded and led by Milton Carrasco. Dax Dasilva, whose parents also fled Uganda, founded Lightspeed Commerce, which is one of Canada largest publicly traded technology companies in Canada.

In business-philanthropy, Pyarali and Gulshan Nanji and their children have exemplified giving back to Canada, including significant donations to many hospitals. Recently, to mark the 50th anniversary of the South Asian exodus from Uganda, the Nanji Family Foundation announced that it would be providing university scholarships to 50 young refugees across the world with a $1-million family donation to the United Nations High Commission for Refugees.

In opening its doors to the Ugandan Asians in 1972, Canada gained a community, which has since become renowned for both entrepreneurial enterprise and community service. The process of their settlement and integration has left an indelible mark upon the conscious of the community, including civic responsibility, pride in culture and community, ethically compassionate, and pursuing the public good. Uganda’s loss was Canada’s gain.

Michael Molloy was a member of the team that travelled to Kampala and arranged for 6,000 Ugandan Asians to come to Canada in 1972. He was subsequently involved in redesigning Canada’s refugee-resettlement system and was senior co-ordinator of the program that brought 60,000 Indochinese refugees to Canada in 1979-80. Salim Fakirani is a senior lawyer with the Department of Justice. Fakirani’s family fled Uganda when he was two years old. His family immigrated to Canada after spending almost a year in a refugee camp administered by the UNHCR in Italy.

Source: Uganda’s loss is Canada’s gain

Even after Paris – especially after Paris: Bringing refugees to Canada must be done well, not fast – Mike Molloy

Reasonable note of caution from a settlement and integration perspective:

The argument is about the rushed time frame. The enthusiasm of the Prime Minister, the ambitious goal he has set, the unprecedented creation of a large cabinet committee to co-ordinate the government’s response are a gust of fresh air after the stonewalling and obfuscation of the Harper regime.

The logistical and accommodation challenges are obvious. The argument championed by our front-line settlement workers, many of them former refugees, is that no matter how difficult it might be for refugees to spend their first months in crowded, improvised accommodation in Canada, anything will be better than their current circumstances. They will be safe. They will be welcome. They will be looked after by people who care. Their circumstances will improve from month to month. Strong arguments.

The counter argument is that our communities, our schools and our excellent settlement agencies will be able to do a better job from the start if the refugees arrive over the next few months rather than the next six weeks.

During the heady days of the Indochinese movement in 1979-80, when the challenge was to accept 60,000 people, a monthly average of 4,500 refugees arrived throughout the October-to-June peak period. On arrival at reception centres on military bases in Montreal and Edmonton, they had three to five days to clean up (deeply appreciated after months in squalid refugee camps), rest and eat.

They were welcomed, issued winter clothing and counselled about what would happen next. The underlying and time-tested philosophy was that they would quickly proceed to their new communities with dignity – clean, well equipped and rested. The faster we got them to their sponsors or new communities the better for them, and the sooner they would adapt to their new lives.

It worked. It has always worked. Keeping refugees in holding camps has never been the Canadian way.

Most importantly, as we allowed a little more time for processing overseas, the Indochinese refugees arrived with their medical and security clearances in hand. They had been screened, so when they left the Canadian reception centre they were Permanent Residents of Canada cleared for security and criminality, they were eligible to work, to study and for medical coverage, and they were on track for citizenship.

Memo to the Prime Minister: You are on the right track. Give yourself and the rest of us, including the refugees, a break. The media and the Opposition will fuss if they are not all here by Dec. 31 – but no one else will.

Do it as quickly as possible, but most importantly – do it well.

Source: Even after Paris – especially after Paris: Bringing refugees to Canada must be done well, not fast – The Globe and Mail

Eight steps to get more Syrian refugees into Canada: Adelman, Alboim, Molloy and Cappe

Best and most comprehensive advice I have seen so far from Howard Adelman, Naomi Alboim, Mike Molloy and Mel Cappe:

1. The government should authorize the admission of Syrian refugees under a special program without the need for individual determination by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) or another state. This has been done for other major refugee movements in the past. This one step would expedite the selection of refugees and reduce the paperwork burden for sponsor groups.

2. The actual number and time frame will have to be negotiated or determined by the government when elected in October, but the method for speeding up the process must be introduced as soon as possible. We believe that it is not unrealistic to call for 25,000 government-assisted and 25,000 privately sponsored Syrian refugees to be admitted each year for the next two years.

3. The vast majority of Syrian refugees should be resettled to Canada from four target countries: Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt . This will relieve the pressure on these countries of first asylum and will reduce the desperation that is compelling people to risk their lives to get to Europe.

4. First priority should be given to displaced Syrian families with children in the four target countries. These would include families with significant Canadian connections, which would include relatives of Canadian citizens or of permanent residents. The fundamental rule (applied during the Indochinese movement) would be that extended family groups that have fled or taken refuge together would be processed and travel to Canada together. Families would not be broken up.

5. In addition to those with significant Canadian connections, the new program should target (but would not be restricted to) cases referred by the UNHCR.

6. Canadian visa offices in the field should be reinforced significantly and instructed to accelerate the selection rate for refugees referred by the UNHCR or with Canadian connections so that they can be referred to both the large umbrella sponsor groups (sponsorship-agreement holders) and local sponsor groups (groups of five) in large numbers expeditiously.

7. An increased number of government-assisted refugees should be selected from the pool of refugees referred by the UNHCR or other reputable agencies and should be destined to communities with reinforced agencies providing immigrant and refugee services. Humanitarian considerations should be paramount and provision should be made for hardship cases and those most in need.

8. Early outreach to employers will be essential; the temporary foreign worker program for low-skilled workers should be severely curtailed, freeing up jobs for incoming refugees.

Now is the time for all political parties to demonstrate to Canadians that they can work together to address a crisis of enormous proportions and to reclaim our leadership role on the world stage that reflects our values as a caring and compassionate society. We have the experience and expertise. We did it before and we can do it again. All we need now is the political will.

Q&A: Mike Molloy, the man who delivered the ‘boat people’

Well worth reading in its underlining the importance of political leadership:

Q: The overwhelming reaction of Canadians—and the Clark government of the day—is now a celebrated part of our country’s history: welcoming 60,000 refugees. How did you pull off such a bold promise?

A: It has everything to do with leadership and direction. There was real leadership at the top and a real recognition that this was a historic challenge and we’d better rise to it. As a mid-level civil servant brought into the middle of it, the thing we never doubted was where the leadership wanted us to go. The clarity of the direction from the top, and the commitment of the people at the top, was amazingly empowering. It allowed us to innovate. It allowed us to figure out new ways of doing things. It allowed us never to break the law, but to stretch it as far as it could be reasonably stretched to deal with what we actually saw as opposed to what the policy-makers might have imagined we’d see.

That is missing here. Over the last four or five days, we have the same profound concern bubbling up from our society—perhaps in an even bigger way than back then—but we’re like a ship without a rudder this time. The engines are ready to go full speed, but in what direction?

Q: It may seem like an obvious question, but what triggered such staunch political will? What was the turning point?

A: The case for intervention was clear. Vietnam was the first real TV war. This was the first real TV refugee crisis. In 1979, we saw so many times a boat absolutely packed with people—with kids—and we would watch it going down before our eyes. We would watch people coming out of the surf, dragging kids behind them, maybe alive, maybe dead. These were immediate images coming into the homes of Canadians that caused this enormous springing up of concern. At that stage, the refugee sponsorship program had never been tried; it had just been invented. And yet Canadians grabbed it and ran with it. We didn’t have to thump the drum at all. We didn’t have to promote it. Canadians just grabbed it and ran, and I think there is a similar spirit today.

Source: Q&A: Mike Molloy, the man who delivered the ‘boat people’ – Macleans.ca