Its hard to tell if this is isolated incidents cherry picked to incite controversy or part of a general trend of migrant/local unrest. I would too be upset if my government decided to house a bunch of migrants near my home. I feel like there should be more options for the local residents to opt-out. If you dont want refugees in your area you should be able to pay other areas to take them. Much the same way how certain areas invite prison construction in because it creates jobs and brings in money and everyone else kind of pays into a pool so they dont have to deal with those problems in their area.
It always baffles me when people follow the logic of well why aren't the refugees just grateful and happy they're somewhere safe ? I have to wonder how well those people understand human emotions and therefore the human experience. Their lives, after being turned upside down, are now on hold. We can prattle on all we want about how evolved we are as a species but when it comes down to it we are animals. People, just like animal, often act out when they're stressed and in a situation where they hold little control. Realizing that it's clear there are multiple solutions to the problem. Creating a makeshift ghetto isn't one of them and neither is ignoring the problem and hoping it goes away. If we want people to become integrated into our community then we have to start by putting them in it, not just in some camp.
Its easy to sell the humanitarian duty as to provide basic food and shelter for those running away from war but I think most people thing their duty ends there. Once you expand it to "Integrating" everyone that wants a better life its both a hard sell and a practical impossibility. Then you kind of expand into an idea of a border-less world and at the very least that would result in an averaging of standard of living for everyone. That's hardly ideal for people like you and I who live way above the global average.If we want people to become integrated into our community then we have to start by putting them in it, not just in some camp.
Thing is though, people can feel however they want about it but that doesn't change that it works. If you've got somebody complaining about refugee camps but also complaining about a solution since it's not what they want either you've got yourself somebody who doesn't want an answer. You've got somebody who just wants the problem to disappear. People desperate to survive don't just disappear nicely. People use statements like well then we'll just have open borders because we'll let anybody in who wants a better life because they want to make the solution sound like it won't work. Except the integrating solution for refugees was never about just anybody looking for a better life. We have guidelines for that stuff. The solution to these problems will never be simple or painless for everybody. Just how life is ya know. Something Canada does well which other countries are looking to adopt is private sponsorship of refugees.
The Canada approach is good but its not really a solution to the whole problem. On the large scale the big problem is that the impact is not evenly distributed. So some countries, areas etc get hit with a disproportionate burden compared to others. That really makes local residents upset but local laws make it impossible for them to get control of their own destiny.The solution to these problems will never be simple or painless for everybody. Just how life is ya know. Something Canada does well which other countries are looking to adopt is private sponsorship of refugees.
Canada having any refugee program at all helps that problem. Stable countries close by will always get the worst influx in crisis because people are fleeing. That's why countries farther out should take refugees in, because it spreads out the cost among more countries. With a mix of government sponsored and private sponsored you can boost the number of families being moved to any given country.