By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Canadian government will end its funding for federally-funded hotel housing for asylum seekers by September 30, 2025, a measure that has cost approximately $1.1 billion since 2020. This decision impacts the 485 asylum seekers currently housed in Ontario and Quebec hotels. While the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) will assist in finding alternative housing, advocates and experts express concerns about the limited availability of affordable housing and municipal shelter capacity, especially in cities. Additionally, the government has recently cancelled plans to revamp the asylum system and proposed border laws will likely create new challenges. Community organizations, many of whom are already stretched thin, fear the end of funding will lead to increased homelessness for asylum seekers.
Read the original article here
The hotel owners that lobbied the government for this must be feeling a bit stung right now. It’s got to be a tough pill to swallow when you’ve built a business model around a particular source of revenue, and that rug gets pulled out from under you. It’s not hard to imagine some of these hotels, having relied on this for so long, might have gotten a little rusty on the whole “hospitality” thing. Now, they’re facing the prospect of actually having to, you know, run a hotel again.
Anyway, the narrative isn’t quite as simple as just stopping funding altogether. The reality is a bit more nuanced. The funding is still there, just repurposed. The government’s redirecting resources towards building longer-term housing options and, crucially, giving more money to the provinces and municipalities to do the same. So, it seems to be a shift, a move in a slightly different direction, if you will. Now, some are vocal about the need to detain asylum seekers who arrive from countries considered safe and send them back. There’s also the argument that, given the years-long wait times for processing these claims, the government should be more proactive in deporting claims deemed obviously fraudulent, saving time and money. The worry, of course, is about adding a big influx of people to an already strained housing market. We’re already dealing with our own challenges, and the idea of becoming a destination for international welfare assistance is something some find concerning. This decision, by the way, shouldn’t be considered in a vacuum, it does have impacts.
Does it mean we will all be hosting visiting relatives? Perhaps not, but it does seem clear that simply ending the hotel program is going to shift the problem and likely increase pressure on social services. Cancelling the hotel funding, about 200 million CAD annually, is going to make it much harder for asylum seekers to find housing and work and will likely lead to increased homelessness and a greater burden on social services. This could potentially cost the government more in the long run, while simultaneously impacting the quality of life for the very people seeking asylum.
The question of the “temporary shelters” that hotels became during the pandemic is also raised. The key is to understand that longer-term housing has been built, so while the hotel funding is being scaled back, other options are being pursued. The goal is to help asylum seekers transition, with options like voluntary relocation to other provinces and the use of reception centres being considered. It appears, as some are mentioning, that those who don’t accept these options might find themselves on their own. So, there is an effort to provide alternatives, even if this shift means changing where the money goes.
The volume of asylum claims is indeed down compared to last year. The need for visa reform to stop people from entering the country with the intention of claiming asylum is also a strong point. The crux of the argument is that the existing system can be manipulated and visa reform is a way to slow down the number of people coming into the country. Some suggestions include sending potential claimants back to their countries and having them apply from there.
Another crucial angle is the potential use of AI to deal with backlogs, staff shortages, and language barriers. This technology could potentially help speed up the verification of claims and identify fraudulent ones, allowing resources to be focused on the more complex cases. The current system faces challenges like the fact that there’s a hiring freeze at the Immigration and Refugee Board for non-French speaking adjudicators, while there is a massive backlog of hearings. This is what must be tackled. The idea that certain claims are “obviously fraudulent” is a recurring point, and there’s a feeling that time spent on these cases could be better utilized.
The issue of asylum is important. The main point being made is that it’s essential to understand the reasons people seek asylum, the risks they face, and the rights they have under the Charter. If someone is in danger in their home country, they should not be returned.
We all know that the Canadian government has a finite amount of money and can only take in so many new residents. The point being made is that there’s an important discussion to be had on how we balance our need to be compassionate with the realities of a limited budget and capacity. It’s clear that addressing the housing and affordability crisis is also essential.