Kamal Al-Solaylee said in his interview on CBC Radio that stories in the media were far more concerned with making Canadians feel good about their generosity towards Syrian migrants than about the problems the newcomers are facing now and will do to perhaps an even greater extent in the future. He's right. Long before the Syrians began to arrive ,there was a major shortage of long-term affordable housing in every city to which they have now been sent, and there is almost no housing available for the typically large families of government sponsored refugees. Some migrants are already using food banks, ESL classes have long waiting lists, and many Canadians who are fluent in English and/or French are scrambling for whatever jobs they can find. With its blatant and ill-planned vote-buying ploy, the Liberal government has created an expensive shambles. Even for well-educated immigrants fluent in either official language, this is not an easy country to try to settle in. Moving to Canada isn't about smiles, balloons, teddy bears and a tsunami of selfies - it's about the often harsh reality of surviving in a foreign country.

Well I know that's not true for this city.

Seriously? You think Canada taking refugees is a vote winner for the Canadian "charity begins at home" populace?

You haven't forgotten we're talking about refugees fleeing war, rape, destruction of their homes and lives and death have you? Faced with the choice of trying to survive in a first world country over potentially watching my children die, I know which one I'd choose. What a stupid ignorant way to finish off the rest of the tripe your post was.

That's right, it's all relative. When my mother's family came in 1930 there was a global economic depression, a drought that meant nobody could grow a crop worth anything for the next ten years, and they had no money and spoke no English. Compared to being shot (the men and boys in our family, being ethnic Prussians and not especially cooperative with the communists, who remained were either shot by the Red Army or chased all over Russia for the next 20 years, and the women and children who remained were interred in Kazakhstan for the duration when WW2 started), they came out ok. Poverty is something you can get through with resolve, being shot isn't.

Tirytory. Your language is insulting and unacceptable on this board. I have referred your comment to a moderator.

Your post was entirely reasonable. 25K refugees was sufficient to appeal to the portion of voters required to help win the Canadian election.

What of the part about Canada being a difficult country in which to settle (not all smiles, selfies and teddy bears) after fleeing a war zone and the associated atrocities?

That sounds more spoof than reasonable.

Have you now? Well that is your perogative.

TT's post was not insulting in the least. She merely pointed out your ignorance of the refugee situation. It really is a pathetic opinion which totally neglects the desperation of those fleeing war in Syria. That's not insulting you, it's denigrating the simplistic ideas that you have formed.

If Canada was accepting 800,000 refugees, as Germany has done, there might be some rationale for questioning the impact on public services and society, but the the 25,000 that Canada will accept is insignificant. It's approximately 1 person per 1000 of population. Do you really find that so onerous? Imagine a school or company of 1000 people, and you add one more, is that going to tear things apart? And then consider that the "refugee" likely has skills, abilities, and potential, and will be contributing to the country in a short space of time.

In our little town I see reported numbers sometimes for people and sometimes for families, so it's unclear how many, but the lowest number suggests at least one for every 500 of the city.

Those settling them have reported some issues - the lack of advance notice and an apparent surprise that few speak French or English (so they've recruited an army of volunteer translators from the universities) - but society hasn't collapsed so far.

The refugees had made their way from Syria to camps or other accommodation in safe areas outside of the warzone. Obviously the camps are far from ideal. It then seems that it took a good deal of persuasion on the part of Canadian authorities to find the 25k interested in moving from the safe areas to Canada. This would seem to suggest that the refugees considered that moving to Canada from the camps in the safe areas was of questionable benefit to them. Perhaps they were cognisant of the difficulties of moving to and settling in Canada. Reality is perhaps not what the cheerleaders and toque knitters wish to hear though.

25k is low enough that the burden on the state shouldn't be unduly significant but is sufficient to showcase sunny days so is a sensible pragmatic political approach. 10k would also have achieved that.

I think it is always reasonable and necessary to question the impact of the 25K Syrian refugees on public services and society (soon to be 50k?) not only because these numbers don't include the normal refugee flows but also because Canada is already running a growing fiscal deficit leaving public services already in a position where Canada can't provide necessary basic services for many millions of Canadians. With a rising unemployment rate Canada isn't actually short of workers meaning many new arrivals will be reliant on public assistance (which is insufficient to live on in most of Canada) for many years and even if they get work it may be at the expense of other Canadians.

The system isn't going to collapse because of an extra 50k refugees but it will cause problems.

Absolutely, and the benefits have yet to be proven. There is a chance that these people will differ from every other group of refugees that has come to Canada and not prove to be beneficial to our society and our national identity. Hopefully things will work out ok.

You, Leith and jimf should get a room.

You're all being tedious bores.

Erm......no, you haven't - we've had no reported post from you?

But I would like to ask everybody to refrain from personal attacks, as per Site Rule 1. I appreciate that this is an emotive subject, but please do discuss and argue without resorting to name calling or insults.

Ta muchly.