The idea behind the Marshall Plan could be applied to a world approach to resettlement of refugees.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 14, 2024.

OTTAWA—Donald Trump and Pierre Poilievre are cut from the same cloth.

Last week, the behaviour of both men made that clearer than ever.

While a Category 5 hurricane was bearing down on Florida and the Gulf Coast, Trump was doing everything in his power to blame the storm of the century on immigration.

While Canada and the world were mourning first anniversary of the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on innocent Israeli civilians, Poilievre used a memorial service to blame the catastrophe on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

According to Trump, immigrants—and by osmosis his opponent Kamala Harris—are responsible for all crimes, economic challenges, and inflationary woes in the United States.

He forgets that more than one of his wives is an immigrant herself who has contributed positively to American life.

Poilievre is not riding the anti-immigration wave at the moment. Like Trump, he is married to an immigrant, but unlike Trump, he cannot make hay over a political attack on refugees.

Canadians are still generally positive about the role immigrants play in building our economy, although that support has been waning in recent months.

Make no mistake, if Poilievre smells a change in the domestic political wind, he will follow his American counterpart into attack mode on immigration.

Quebec Premier François Legault has already opened the door to that possibility, as he has recently taken to blaming the federal government for refugees who have been coming across the American border on foot.

Legault knows the pur laine support that he depends on is not as positive toward immigration as it is in urban areas.

Herouxville, Que.,’s racist “code of conduct” for immigrants was not that long ago. The notion that immigrants could water down the vibrancy of the French language in Quebec appeals to voters in rural constituencies.

Quebec is one province where Poilievre has not made a breakthrough. If he needs to stoke fear of immigrants as an election wedge issue, he will not hesitate.

So how does the current Liberal government counter that possibility?

Taking a leadership role in designing solutions for the world refugee crisis would be a good place to start.

I attended a meeting last week where a former public servant approached me to suggest that Canada initiate a call for a world Marshall Plan for refugee resettlement.

The first Marshall Plan, launched by the Americans after the Second World War, sought to rebuild war-torn regions of Europe, and modernize industry by removing trade barriers and improving prosperity. Another goal was to prevent the spread of communism.

In a relatively short period of less than a decade, bombed-out infrastructure was remediated, and the Europeans were back in business.

Some credit the Marshall Plan with putting Germany in the position to become a dominant European industrial powerhouse.

But the idea behind the Marshall Plan could be applied to a world approach to resettlement of refugees.

The Canadian government could take the lead in the Americas, working with Caribbean and Latin American countries to develop an economic-funded resettlement plan that would not cannibalize borders, but rather would co-operate and share the challenge of resettling the millions of global citizens who have lost their homes to war, famine, economic collapse, or climate change.

By involving Latin American nations, the plan would develop a more rational collective approach to assist the influx of immigrants from failed states in that part of the world.

A refugee resettlement plan could be replicated in other parts of the globe with a similar work plan.

Obviously, participation by the United States would be key, and that cannot happen until the results of the November election are finalized.

If Trump wins, there will be no possibility of regional co-operation, especially with our Latin neighbours. He is busy blaming immigration for every problem facing his country.

But if Harris is victorious, there could be an appetite for co-operation, given her knowledge of Canada and her parents’ status as Indian and Caribbean immigrants.

Now is the time for the Trudeau government to take the lead in an area that Canada knows well.

Back in the last century, our country won the Nansen Medal, a United Nations recognition for outstanding service in the cause of refugees because of Canadian efforts to resettle Vietnamese immigrants.

We remain the only country in the world to have been so honoured. We were the first country to include private sponsorships in our resettlement strategy.

It is time to think big again. Head off an anti-immigrant tsunami with our own modern-day Marshall Plan.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Andrew Scheer is leaving, so he won’t have to answer in the next election to the claim that he considers Canadian workers lazy.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 11, 2020.

OTTAWA—Andrew Scheer is sounding more and more like Stephen Harper.

Who could forget former prime minister Harper’s claim that Atlantic Canadians were suffering from “a culture of defeat”?

Harper claimed his comments were misrepresented and what he was trying to say was that Atlantic Canadians were subject to Ottawa’s culture of defeat, “I’ve never ever suggested that the people of this region are responsible for the region’s have-not status.

“There is a policy culture of defeat at the federal level and that’s what we want to change,” he told a business group during a pre-election tour.

But Atlantic Canadians did not forget those comments, and for the last few elections, the party has been struggling to overcome that backlash.

During the Justin Trudeau sweep of 2015, Liberals managed to pick up all the seats in Atlantic Canada, including some that had never voted Liberal in the history of the country.

If the Conservatives have any hope of forming government, they need to attract voters in the region.

They also need to reach out to ordinary people. Andrew Scheer’s comment last week that the federal government’s programs were derailing provincial efforts to get people back to work will not help.

For most Canadians, federal benefits have been a lifeline in a worldwide crisis that has no precedent.

It is not as if Canadians quit their jobs of their own accord, and there certainly is no new job waiting for them to fill.

In most instances, when there is a reluctance to return to work, it is based on unsafe working conditions.

Canadian farmers have petitioned the government to approve temporary worker applications because the back-breaking work involved in planting and harvesting is not compensated commensurate to the workload.

A minimum wage farming job is attractive to a Mexican migrant who makes one-tenth of that in his home country. It is not attractive to a Canadian who can usually work at a much less physically demanding job for more money.

The same holds true for workers in meat factories. The person who died at the Cargill plant near High River, Alta., was a 67-year-old Vietnamese boat person. Her family came to Canada as refugees, and with little English, her work options were limited.

According to her husband, she enjoyed the work at Cargill, where she and more than 900 other employees contracted the COVID virus while on the assembly line.

More than half the plant employees were infected, forcing a plant closure which is choking off the country’s beef supply. That single factory is responsible for 40 per cent of Western Canada’s beef production.

Governments moved in quickly to investigate and secure the food supply, as even the Golden Arches were claiming they had to source their 100 per cent Canadian beef elsewhere.

Given the precarious situation of the Alberta economy, it is obvious that an indefinite shuttering would not work.

However, how would most Canadians react if they were asked to return to work within two weeks to a factory that had seen 949 employees infected with the COVID virus?

As a workplace, Cargill is a magnet for immigrant, unskilled labourers who don’t need to speak English or French to work on an assembly line.

It is also a place where union/management disputes and difficult working conditions make it a less than attractive proposition for many Canadian workers.

So, when Scheer says Canadians don’t want to go back to work because they are receiving federal government benefits that are too generous, he is simply feeding a stereotype that has no basis in fact and is politically untenable.

Scheer is leaving, so he won’t have to answer in the next election to the claim that he considers Canadian workers lazy.

That explanation will be left to his successor, whomever that might be. But the anti-worker stigma that he and his predecessor have inflicted on the party the party will be very hard to shake.

And when it comes to election time, workers make up a very important part of the population.

The so-called 905-belt soccer moms whose votes can swing an election are often working at low-paying jobs in the transportation industry, at the Toronto International Airport and in other low-paid hotel employment where fluency and literacy in English is not required.

They are also the ones who are employed as personal service workers, in the jobs that we all now recognize as life-saving and life-threatening.

These are the people who really need to work. And right now, they need help, not insults.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.