Ottawa commits to resettling 4,700 Sudanese refugees, reopens family pathway following outcry
After it was declared the worst humanitarian crisis in the world by the African Union, Federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller says Canada is committing to resettle 4,700 refugees fleeing the ongoing civil war in Sudan.
Ottawa is also reopening applications on Feb. 25 for the permanent residence pathway program it created for close family members of Sudanese Canadians, adding 1,750 applications to the 3,250 it has already received for a total of 5,000.
The ministry estimates the applications will lead to roughly 10,000 people resettling in Canada via their family anchors here.
When that program opened in February 2024, Sudanese Quebecers were excluded because Quebec opted not to participate in the program.
This time, 500 applications are being reserved for Quebecers until April 17, but applicants must resettle their Sudanese family members outside the province.
The program has also been criticized for its relatively small scope, the processing times attached to applications — some applicants have been told they wouldn't be able to bring family members until 2027 or 2028 — and the high financial burden associated with it.
Applicants must prove they are high earners or that they have $9,900 set aside per person they are applying for, in addition to processing fees of $635 per adult and $175 per child.
South Sudan People's Defense Forces (SSPDF)'s senior officials visit Sudanese nationals seeking safety at the army headquarters after a night of violence in Juba, South Sudan, on Jan. 17, 2025. (AP Photo/Florence Miettaux)
Mayada Ageeb, who is from the West Island of Montreal, plans to apply for her aunt, four cousins, an uncle, his wife and two children, as well as her grandmother.
Ageeb said she and other community members were hugely relieved by the news that Quebecers would now be able to apply. They had grown anxious after being given three separate dates by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) for the program to reopen with a workaround for Sudanese Quebecers, but those dates had come and gone without any word — until now.
"It's good news, a lot of excitement," Ageeb said Thursday afternoon. She said she and her family will regroup to make sure their documents are in order.
Earlier this month, two of her cousins, 14 and 16, were badly beaten at a militia checkpoint after soldiers searched their phones and discovered documents they had prepared in the hopes of applying to come to Canada.
"It's a persistent thought that they might not be able to make it before we can actually get this process completed and and bring them here," she said.
Of the 4,700 refugees Canada says it will resettle by the end of 2026, Miller's office said 4,000 would receive government assistance, while 700 would arrive through private sponsorship.
The ministry says that from April 23, 2023 to Dec. 31, 2024, it resettled 1,360 Sudanese refugees in Canada. Of the more than 7,000 family members of Sudanese Canadians who applied for the permanent residence pathway program, 291 people had landed in Canada as of Feb. 2.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
EDITORIAL: Jobless numbers spell trouble
The need to grow the Canadian economy in the face of tough economic times was underscored by the release of the latest unemployment numbers by Statistics Canada on Friday. The unemployment rate in May rose to 7.0%. That's the highest it has been since September 2016, excluding the 2020 and 2021 pandemic years, and a 12.9% increase from 6.2% a year ago in May. The Canadian economy generated a net increase of just 8,800 jobs in May, far short of the roughly 30,000 per month needed to keep pace with population growth. A total of 1.6 million Canadians were unemployed in May, an increase of 191,000, or 13.8%, compared to May 2024. A smaller share of people who were unemployed in April found jobs in May (22.6%), compared to a year ago (24.0%), and spent an average of 21.8 weeks searching for work, compared to 18.4 weeks in May 2024. Unemployment in Ontario (7.9%); Alberta (7.4%); Newfoundland and Labrador (9.7%); Prince Edward Island (8.2%); and Nunavut (9.0%) were all above the national average, as was the case in a number of cities, including Windsor (10.8%); Oshawa (9.1%); Toronto (8.8%); Calgary (7.8%); and Edmonton (7.3%). Canada recorded its largest merchandise trade deficit of $7.1 billion in April, the first full month of the tariff war with U.S. President Donald Trump, compared to $2.3 billion in March. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development last week projected meagre 1% economic growth for Canada this year and 1.1% in 2026, noting Trump's global tariff war is expected to hit the economies of Canada, Mexico, China and the U.S. hardest. Prime Minister Mark Carney proposed measures to bolster the economy on Friday, including eliminating federal barriers to interprovincial trade, increasing labour mobility and shortening the process for approving major infrastructure projects. Those are worthy long-term goals, since internal impediments to trade cost our economy $200 billion annually, raise consumer prices up to 14.5% and reduce economic growth as measured by gross domestic product up to 8% annually. But they are also long-term solutions, underscoring the importance of Carney's government producing a budget as soon as possible to reveal the Liberals' specific plans to boost the economy. For better or worse, Carney decided to delay releasing the budget until fall.
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
LEDREW: Tyranny over, Liberals once again free to disagree with prime minister
Debate and differences of opinion are permitted once again in the Liberal Party – the children are no longer in charge. Canada is no longer run by a cockwomble. What a difference a mature prime minister makes! A prime minister who does not pick the weakest for cabinet so that his PMO will be totally in charge. A prime minister who can obviously change his mind, all the way from 'net-zero' to thinking of utilizing resources. A prime minister who will not impoverish Canadians and embarrass Canada by telling other heads of state that there is 'no business case' for exporting LNG to needy nations with lots of cash to pay us. Refreshingly, we now have a natural resources minister – Tim Hodgson – who has travelled to the once-separating Alberta to support new oil and gas infrastructure to trade in overseas markets and supply energy to Eastern Canada! How novel – jobs and riches for Canadians. LILLEY: Mark Carney offers words – Pierre Poilievre's words – but we need action GOLDSTEIN: Carney can't fix Canada's underperforming economy on his own LILLEY: Trudeau lowered bar so much, Carney gets credit for being an adult Under the regime of the last ten years, ideas that may be contrary to the dogma of the PMO could not even be broached. The late Bill Graham, an experienced and tested and worldly intellect, and former Liberal leader, was once told in no uncertain terms by some kid in the PMO that his advice on a complex issue was not necessary because 'we have this, thank you very much.' This closure of the mind was aided and abetted by appointees in the PMO who did not have the wherewithal to think through even the simplest situations. Remember the SNC-Lavalin scandal? I seriously doubt that any lawyers in the new PMO will be contacting prosecutors in any Crown office in Canada in an attempt to change a decision on criminal charges. Senior and thoughtful Liberal senators were removed from the Liberal caucus – their views not needed. Only members of parliament were allowed in caucus – people who either had their positions because of the PM or wanted a promotion that only the PM could offer, gutless supplicants who would never offer up an opinion differing from the official PMO stand. The Liberal Party itself was reduced to an insignificant triviality, its supporters cowed into silence, because if you dared offer a differing viewpoint then you were considered disloyal, and banished – or at least branded as no longer a Liberal. I had turned down government appointments, and was not seeking invitations to state dinners in Ottawa, so over the last decade I could be critical of many Trudeau positions that now, after he has been dumped, many others suddenly seem to understand were idiotic. And for that difference of opinion with the Trudeau government, lifelong friends, many of whom had partaken of my hospitality over the years, who had enjoyed the perks of power from being in favour in Ottawa (gotta love those government jets), would actually turn their heads at the sight of me – or not invite me to events that I had helped create decades ago. Several dowagers of the party tried to rip strips off me. Friends tell me that the big shots of Ottawa and Montreal hate me with a passion for daring to challenge the Trudeau government. I was 'no longer a Liberal.' The truth is that I am a Liberal – I believe in well-managed government, fiscally prudent, socially progressive, encouraging of debate, with an eye on providing the freedom and impetus to build a better Canada. I believe in the rule of law – not the fiat of unnamed, well-paid, political helpers. Much to the detriment of my finances, I have volunteered tens and tens of thousands of hours of tough slugging in the service of the Liberal Party. Now that things are returning to some degree of normalcy, I would gladly do so again, and encourage others to do so – politics is a noble calling. Canada, and the debate, needs you.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Christine Van Geyn: Do police have the right to peer at you in your car with a drone?
Can police use a drone with a zoom lens to peer into the interior of vehicles stopped at red lights? Can police enter a home's private driveway and look in the windows of vehicles? Can the government track the cellphone location data of millions of Canadians to track their movements? And can a private foreign company scour the internet collecting photos of Canadians for use in facial recognition technology that is sold to police? These questions are not hypotheticals; they are real live issues in Canadian law. We are living in the mass surveillance era. But many Canadians do not have a thorough understanding of how far surveillance goes, or what the limits on it are, or whether our legal protections are adequate. The police in Kingston, Ont., are ticketing drivers at red lights for merely touching or holding their cellphones based on evidence collected by a drone. The Supreme Court recently heard a case about police entering a private driveway and not just looking in a truck window, but opening the door and collecting evidence — all without a warrant. The Alberta Court of Kings Bench just considered a case involving the facial recognition technology of Clearview AI. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Canadian government was tracking the cellphone location data of 33 million Canadians. After the Trudeau government invoked the Emergencies Act, the government ordered the freezing of bank accounts of a police-compiled 'blacklist' of demonstrators, which was distributed by the government to a variety of financial institutions and even lobby groups. What these cases are demonstrating is that we have entered the era of mass surveillance, and Canada's legal protections are inadequate. First, Canada's privacy legislation is outdated. Privacy Commissioner Philippe Dufresne has said we are at a 'pivotal time' for privacy rights in Canada. Former Ontario Privacy Commissioner Dr. Ann Cavoukian has also called for updates to Canadian privacy laws, 'so they apply to all data, including anonymized data.' Much has changed since the current federal privacy legislation was drafted in the early 2000s, but efforts to modernize this law died when Parliament was prorogued. Second, when it comes to state intrusions, the concept of privacy may be inadequate. Section 8 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and seizures, and the Supreme Court has interpreted this right to mean the protection of a person's 'reasonable expectations of privacy' against state intrusions. The notion of 'reasonable expectations of privacy' has become a mantra in Section 8 jurisprudence. But some academics have said that in the era of mass surveillance, this guiding principle is an inadequate gatekeeper. In a lecture for the Canadian Constitution Foundation's new free course on privacy rights, Osgoode Hall Law professor François Tanguay-Renaud proposes a thought experiment that reveals the inadequacy of 'privacy' as an organizing principle. What if the police were recording people on the street, with drones following people and recording their movements as they went about their day, zooming in on their cellphones and recording their conversations? In such a scenario, where people are in plain view, privacy is an inadequate concept to limit what we all see intuitively as oppressive state conduct. At one time, this hypothetical might have been considered far-fetched. Today it is eerily similar to the Kingston police drone scenario. In Kingston, police are using a drone to take aerial images peering into cars and zooming in on cellphones. Those drivers do have reasonable expectations of privacy inside their cars, but what would limit this police conduct if they surveilled citizens on sidewalks or parks, where they were in plain view without those privacy expectations? A principled line must be drawn between things done in plain sight that police can view and constant surveillance using enhanced technology. It may not be possible to draw that line on the basis of the existence or not of 'reasonable expectations of privacy.' There are other values that could serve as guiding or informing principles for Section 8. There is nothing in the text of Section 8 that mandates the gatekeeper of the right be 'reasonable expectations of privacy' rather than another interest, like dignity, liberty, security, anonymity, public confidence in the administration of justice, and many more. Indeed, American jurisprudence has been moving away from the concept of 'reasonable expectations of privacy' as the sole guiding principle for their 4th Amendment. To meet the challenges of the surveillance era, it is well past time for Parliament and the provincial legislatures to update privacy laws. But as recent police conduct shows, it's time for our Section 8 jurisprudence to be revisited as well, to meet the emerging challenges of the surveillance state. National Post Christine Van Geyn is the litigation director for the Canadian Constitutional Foundation. Canadians who want to learn more about their privacy rights in Canada can sign up for the Canadian Constitution Foundation's free course at Opinion: In 2020 the world shut down, and Canadians lost their privacy rights Facial recognition tool used by RCMP deemed illegal mass surveillance of unwitting Canadians
