1

It is the spring of 2017. You are an administrator for federal department of Citizenship, Refugees
and Immigration Canada. The minister has just learned that eight ships of destitute refugees are
heading to Canada on both the Atlantic and Pacific coasts from war-torn parts of the globe.
Since the announcement of the news, public opinion has become polarized in Canada. Some
groups and organizations (including many business associations) are calling for Canada to
embrace the refugees as has been the case in the past. At the same time, some groups and
organizations (and many individuals according to public opinion polls) are calling for the
minister to take a strong stand against the refugees and to tighten immigration policies,
especially as unemployment rates are increasing in Canada, and as the US refuses to allow
refugees from some countries to enter.

The minister is heading into a Cabinet meeting where he will be expected to outline how he
plans to proceed. You have been asked to prepare a one page briefing note outlining three policy
options, indicating the pros and cons of each along with a recommendation as to which option to
propose to Cabinet. The minister is particularly concerned about any budgetary (money and
other resources) implications of the options.

Issue: There are polarized viewpoints among Canadians regarding immigration policies and
whether they should be stricter or permissive of entering refugees.

Background: Eight ships of destitute refugees from war-torn countries around the world are on
route to settle in Canada. Public opinions are divided between continuing to embrace refugees
and Canadas humanitarian tradition, and tightening policies regarding the rate of employment
and the strict policies implemented by our US neighbours.

Option 1: Implement a restriction on the total number of refugees allowed into the country based
on projections concerning economic and job market prosperity, the rate of unemployment and
level of need.

Pros:
1. Reduces the strain on the system regarding training, education, healthcare, housing, and other
public sectors.
2. Resources that would otherwise be used for surplus refugees can be focused toward issues that
are important to Canadians.

Cons:
1. Limits the number of professionals who could be an asset to skilled labour and the economy.
2. Level of need is difficult to assess and classify, the criteria may turn away those in great need.

Option 2: Allow in refugees who pass an extensive series of background checks based on
criteria such as criminal history and education level, those who do not pass will not be accepted.
 2

Pros:
1. Safety of Canadians is paramount with consideration to the rationality behind the tightening of
US policies.
2. Background checks could allow recruitment for skilled workers and professionals which could
help to build the economy.

Cons:
1. Background checks could be expensive and require lots of resources including interim holding
areas.
2. Thorough background checks may be difficult to conduct, especially for those without
identification.

Option 3: Focus only on letting in families with children age 19 and under, and those in need of
medical treatment.

Pros:
1. The number of people potentially entering the already contentious job market is lessened.
2. The most vulnerable people are taken in and children and parents are not separated.
Cons:
1. A lot of resources are required, for children particularly, considering the parent(s) cannot
immediately provide for them on their own.
2. Those requiring medical treatment to will be costly for taxpayers and put a strain on healthcare
resources.

Recommendation: Option one limits the number of refugees entering the country and honours
humanitarian tradition whilst ensuring that the needs of Canadians do not extensively suffer from
the diversion of resources.
3