Monthly Archives: January 2015

But, Minister, If You Choose Immigrants So Carefully, Why Are We Spending $600-million Outside Quebec, on “Immigrant Settlement”?

Posted on by

But, Minister, If You Choose Immigrants So Carefully, Why Are We Spending $600-million Outside Quebec, on “Immigrant Settlement”?

 
A press release today (January 29, 2015) from the office of Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander enthuses:
  • “The government has significantly increased funding for newcomer settlement services in jurisdictions outside of Quebec, from less than $200 million in 2005-06 to almost $600 million in 2014-15.
  • More than 700 service provider organizations across Canada receive funds dedicated to helping newcomers adjust to life in Canada.
  • The government is committed to ensuring that newcomers integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy, and to their communities, as soon as possible.”
 
But, Minister, If You Choose Immigrants So Carefully, Why Are We Spending $600-million Outside Quebec, on "Immigrant Settlement"?</p>
<p>A press release today (January 29, 2015) from the office of Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander enthuses:<br />
"The government has significantly increased funding for newcomer settlement services in jurisdictions outside of Quebec, from less than $200 million in 2005-06 to almost $600 million in 2014-15.<br />
More than 700 service provider organizations across Canada receive funds dedicated to helping newcomers adjust to life in Canada.<br />
The government is committed to ensuring that newcomers integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy, and to their communities, as soon as possible."</p>
<p>So, excluding Quebec, the Dominion Government spends $600-million a year -- three times the sum when it took office --on "immigrant settlement ... ensuring that newcomers integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy and their communities." These programmes are a racket, often staffed by ethnic community power brokers. They deliver such programmes as ESL, job search help, and employment preparation.</p>
<p>Here's a question: "If immigrants were more carefully selected as to language, needed job skills, and cultural compatibility, could this $600 annual expenditure (In English Canada alone)  be avoided?"</p>
<p> Immigration not only costs unemployed Canadians jobs and job opportunities and suppresses wages, but. as Herb Grubel and Patrick Kelly have demonstrated in a study for the Fraser Institute [Immigration and the Canadian Welfare State, 2011] , the poorly selected immigrant cohort from 1986 to 2004, costs the Canadian taxpayers $25-billion annually! That figure  comes from calculating what these immigrants contribute to the pot in taxes at all levels and subtracting what they take from the tax pot in terms of services, medicare, welfare, public housing, etc.</p>
<p>Paul Fromm<br />
Director<br />
CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE

 
 
So, excluding Quebec, the Dominion Government spends $600-million a year — three times the sum when it took office –on “immigrant settlement … ensuring that newcomers integrate and contribute fully to the Canadian economy and their communities.” These programmes are a racket, often staffed by ethnic community power brokers. They deliver such programmes as ESL, job search help, and employment preparation.
 
Here’s a question: “If immigrants were more carefully selected as to language, needed job skills, and cultural compatibility, could this $600 annual expenditure (In English Canada alone)  be avoided?”
 
 Immigration not only costs unemployed Canadians jobs and job opportunities and suppresses wages, but. as Herb Grubel and Patrick Kelly have demonstrated in a study for the Fraser Institute [Immigration and the Canadian Welfare State, 2011] , the poorly selected immigrant cohort from 1986 to 2004, costs the Canadian taxpayers $25-billion annually! That figure  comes from calculating what these immigrants contribute to the pot in taxes at all levels and subtracting what they take from the tax pot in terms of services, medicare, welfare, public housing, etc.
Paul Fromm
Director
CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE

 

Out-of-Control Federal Judge Rules Failed Refugees Entitled to Full Medical Benefits

Posted on by

Out-of-Control Federal Judge Rules Failed Refugees Entitled to Full Medical Benefits

A Federal judge had decreed that failed “refugee” claimants are once again to have more benefits  than poor Canadians and that taxpayers must continue to PAY for people who chose to drop in and make a “refugee” claim.

The Globe and Mail (July 4, 2014) reported: “The Conservative government’s latitude to choose its own policies was curtailed yet again on Friday when a judge called health-care cuts for failed refugee claimants, and those from countries deemed by Ottawa to be safe, a form of “cruel and unusual treatment” and ruled them unconstitutional.

The ruling by Justice Anne Mactavish of the Federal Court in Ottawa was the latest sign that the executive branch of government and the judiciary are in open conflict. …

So rare is the use of Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – “cruel and unusual treatment or punishment” – that neither the government nor the refugees’ representatives were able to identify a single successful claim outside of criminal cases. …

Justice Mactavish said the government’s two-year-old policy of denying health care to certain classes of failed refugee claimants amounted to cruel and unusual treatment because it intentionally targeted vulnerable children and adults. She said it put at risk “the very lives of these innocent and vulnerable children in a manner that shocks the conscience and outrages our standards of decency.” She gave the government four months to restore the health-care funding. …

In this case, the government argued that it had the right to try to deter bogus claimants from coming to Canada, or overstaying, by denying them medical care, except where they had diseases that could spread to others. It said the cuts would save $80-million over four years, and those denied care could turn to charity, emergency rooms or private insurance.

Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said the government will appeal the ruling. “Failed claimants and those from safe countries like the U.S. or Europe should not be entitled to better health care than Canadians receive.” (The government would need to seek a stay of Justice Mactavish’s order if it wishes to continue with the cuts while an appeal is being heard.)”

Don’t forget these are “failed” refugee claimants. Even under our permissive interpretation of “refugee”, these people have not passed muster. However, as long as they are here, they are entitled to more benefits (like full dental care) than poor Canadians whose families may have been here for 10 generations.

Justice Mactavish’s inane ruling continues the reasoning of the ludicrous 1985 “Singh” decision by the Supreme Court which held that anyone, anyone, who could put his tiny toe on Canadian soil had a RIGHT to make a refugee claim and be given a formal hearing. Furthermore, while here, the claimant had ALL the rights of a Canadian citizen, except the right to vote. That meant the foreign would-be “refugee” was entitled to legal aid, welfare, medical care, public housing and language and job training. And, of course, the taxpayers must PAY the freight for someone we had not invited and who had simply decided to drop by.

Through the requirement of visas for certain problem countries (Czechoslovakia and its Gypsies), the government has tried to stem the flow of bogus refugees, seeking merely an opportunity to collect welfare in Canada for years on end and get their bodies and teeth tuned up through our health care system.

The only real long-range solution is to use Sec. 33 of the Constitution, the “notwithstanding clause” and reverse the Singh Decision and Justice Mactavish’s ruling. A sane immigration policy would stipulate that the ONLY way to enter Canada as an immigrant or “refugee” would be to apply and be vetted abroad.

And tonight, I received this e-mail from John McCallum Liberal Party critic for immigration, clearly showing that the Liberals are eager to make Canadians continue to have to pay tens of millions of dollars to support bogus “refugee” claimants.

Paul –

Last Friday, the Federal Court ruled that the Harper government’s “cruel and unusual” cuts to refugee health care were unconstitutional. Sadly instead of respecting the Court’s decision, the Conservatives have chosen to appeal it.

Liberals have been calling on the Harper government to reverse these cuts since they were first announced.

Join us now: click here to sign our petition.

Canada is known around the world as a place of compassion and a safe haven for those fleeing the most terrible conditions imaginable. But the Conservative government has repeatedly put that reputation at risk with their changes to our refugee system.

Photo: Out-o-Control Federal Judge Rules Failed Refugees Entitled to Full Medical Benefits</p>
<p>A Federal judge had decreed that failed "refugee" claimants are once again to have more benefits  than poor Canadians and that taxpayers must continue to PAY for people who chose to drop in and make a "refugee" claim.</p>
<p>The Globe and Mail (July 4, 2014) reported: "The Conservative government’s latitude to choose its own policies was curtailed yet again on Friday when a judge called health-care cuts for failed refugee claimants, and those from countries deemed by Ottawa to be safe, a form of “cruel and unusual treatment” and ruled them unconstitutional.</p>
<p>The ruling by Justice Anne Mactavish of the Federal Court in Ottawa was the latest sign that the executive branch of government and the judiciary are in open conflict. ... </p>
<p>So rare is the use of Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms – “cruel and unusual treatment or punishment” – that neither the government nor the refugees’ representatives were able to identify a single successful claim outside of criminal cases. ... </p>
<p>Justice Mactavish said the government’s two-year-old policy of denying health care to certain classes of failed refugee claimants amounted to cruel and unusual treatment because it intentionally targeted vulnerable children and adults. She said it put at risk “the very lives of these innocent and vulnerable children in a manner that shocks the conscience and outrages our standards of decency.” She gave the government four months to restore the health-care funding. ...</p>
<p>In this case, the government argued that it had the right to try to deter bogus claimants from coming to Canada, or overstaying, by denying them medical care, except where they had diseases that could spread to others. It said the cuts would save $80-million over four years, and those denied care could turn to charity, emergency rooms or private insurance.</p>
<p>Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said the government will appeal the ruling. “Failed claimants and those from safe countries like the U.S. or Europe should not be entitled to better health care than Canadians receive.” (The government would need to seek a stay of Justice Mactavish’s order if it wishes to continue with the cuts while an appeal is being heard.)"</p>
<p>Don't forget these are "failed" refugee claimants. Even under our permissive interpretation of "refugee", these people have not passed muster. However, as long as they are here, they are entitled to more benefits (like full dental care) than poor Canadians whose families may have been here for 10 generations.</p>
<p>Justice Mactavish's inane ruling continues the reasoning of the ludicrous 1985 "Singh" decision by the Supreme Court which held that anyone, anyone, who could put his tiny toe on Canadian soil had a RIGHT to make a refugee claim and be given a formal hearing. Furthermore, while here, the claimant had ALL the rights of a Canadian citizen, except the right to vote. That meant the foreign would-be "refugee" was entitled to legal aid, welfare, medical care, public housing and language and job training. And, of course, the taxpayers must PAY the freight for someone we had not invited and who had simply decided to drop by.</p>
<p>Through the requirement of visas for certain problem countries (Czechoslovakia and its Gypsies), the government has tried to stem the flow of bogus refugees, seeking merely an opportunity to collect welfare in Canada for years on end and get their bodies and teeth tuned up through our health care system.</p>
<p>The only real long-range solution is to use Sec. 22 of the Constitution, the "notwithstanding clause" and reverse the Singh Decision and Justice Mactavish's ruling. A sane immigration policy would stipulate that the ONLY way to enter Canada as an immigrant or "refugee" would be to apply and be vetted abroad.</p>
<p>And tonight, I received this e-mail from John McCallum Liberal Party critic for immigration, clearly showing that the Liberals are eager to make Canadians continue to have to pay tens of millions of dollars to support bogus "refugee" claimants.</p>
<p>"Paul -- </p>
<p> Last Friday, the Federal Court ruled that the Harper government's "cruel and unusual" cuts to refugee health care were unconstitutional. Sadly instead of respecting the Court's decision, the Conservatives have chosen to appeal it. </p>
<p> Liberals have been calling on the Harper government to reverse these cuts since they were first announced.  </p>
<p>Join us now: click here to sign our petition. </p>
<p> Canada is known around the world as a place of compassion and a safe haven for those fleeing the most terrible conditions imaginable. But the Conservative government has repeatedly put that reputation at risk with their changes to our refugee system. </p>
<p>Paul Fromm</p>
<p>Director</p>
<p>CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE

Paul Fromm

Director

CANADA FIRST IMMIGRATION REFORM COMMITTEE

Category: Uncategorized | Tags:

Vancouver Mayor Dating Chinese Pop Star

Posted on by

Vancouver Mayor Dating Chinese Pop Star

 

 

When the name of Haitian import Michaelle Jean, married to a White husband, was proposed to then Prime Minister Paul Martin for Governor-General, he gushed with enthusiasm. She was the perfect symbol of the New Canada, a foreigner in a mixed race relationship, to replace the then Governor-General, Chinese import, Adrienne Clarkson,  married to a White husband.

 

Promoting mixed race relationships is  a key part of the plan to replace the European founding/settler people of this Dominion.

 

Thus, it comes as little surprise to learn that Vancouver’s oh-so trendy Mayor Gregor Robertson now has a Chinese girlfriend,

named Wanting Qu.

 

The Hongcouver Blog by Ian Young on the South China Morning Post (January 14, 2015) website reports the story and contains some interesting factoids about Vancouver, Canada’s most miscegenated city.

 

“She has also helped develop the mayor’s substantial social media following in China (he has more than 88,000 followers on Weibo; Qu has 1.5 million) in various ways.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“For a start, Vancouver has the highest rate of mixed-race unions in Canada, according to a 2010 Statistics Canada report, based on 2006 census results.”

 

“It’s true that ethnic Chinese have one of the lowest rates of mixed race unions in Canada: Only 12.7 per cent of all ethnic Chinese in couples in Canada had partners of another race. Compare that to, say, 74.7 per cent of ethnic Japanese”

 

“And because Chinese immigration has been growing so rapidly, the proportion of ethnic Chinese in Canada who are foreign-born – 72 per cent according to the 2001 census – is far higher than for most other ethnicities.”

___________________________________________

 

A screenshot from the Chinese Youku video-sharing site, in which Wanting Qu sings “Happy Birthday” to Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson, when he turned 50 in September. Photo: Youku

Vancouver’s ridiculously photogenic mayor, Gregor Robertson, has a new girlfriend, the mainland-Chinese-born pop star Wanting Qu.

First, some background and a disclaimer: I reckon the relationship is worth scrutiny for at least a couple of non-prurient reasons, not the least of which is that Robertson’s own PR team put his private life front and centre last summer at the start of his re-election campaign. This was ostensibly in response to some pretty wild rumours circulating about the married mayor’s private life which remain unfounded; the excellent reason that they have not been repeated by the mainstream media is that there is no reason to believe that they are true.

But Robertson’s campaign team didn’t have to respond the way they did, with a full-court-press that included the release of a private email from a political opponent to the mayor (CCed to a fellow councillor) that recounted some of the rumours. Now, Vancouver’s mainstream media has its faults – but an over-willingness to poke about the private lives of its politicians is not one of them, and I find it difficult to believe that these rumours would have been printed without the intervention of Robertson’s own people.

The upshot was that Robertson’s separation from his wife, Amy, was confirmed to the general public in prominent fashion.

Vancouver mayor Gregor Robertson and Wanting Qu in an image posted by Qu to social media before their relationship became public knowledge. Photo: Twitter

Another reason the mayor’s relationship with 31-year-old Qu, who is based in Vancouver, deserves at least some examination is her paid position as the city’s Chinese tourism ambassador. She has also helped develop the mayor’s substantial social media following in China (he has more than 88,000 followers on Weibo; Qu has 1.5 million) in various ways. These included a bikini-clad shout-out to the mayor in August, when Qu undertook the ALS ice-bucket challenge.

A month later, she did a ‘Marilyn‘ and sang happy birthday to the mayor on the Chinese Youku video-sharing site when he turned 50 in September. She also attended the mayor’s inauguration in December and both spent the holiday season in Hawaii.

 

Neither the mayor nor Qu are commenting directly on the relationship (first reported by the Globe and Mail’s Frances Bula last week), and that’s their prerogative. Qu on Sunday obliquely observed on Instagram : “I have lived my life with integrity, strong morals and respect for the world. I believe in life you just gotta be who you are. And you’ll only attract those who are like you and live by the same values.”

There have been some sadly predictable racist remarks in various online forums. But asides from the public profiles of the presumably happy couple, their pairing represents nothing terribly remarkable. For a start, Vancouver has the highest rate of mixed-race unions in Canada, according to a 2010 Statistics Canada report, based on 2006 census results. The study found that 8.5 per cent of couples in Vancouver were in racially mixed unions, compared to the national average of just 3.9 per cent, Toronto’s 7.1 per cent and Montreal’s 4.4 per cent.

Wanting Qu’s ALS ice-bucket challenge, which she issued in August to Gregor Robertson, among others. Photo: YouTube

It’s true that ethnic Chinese have one of the lowest rates of mixed race unions in Canada: Only 12.7 per cent of all ethnic Chinese in couples in Canada had partners of another race. Compare that to, say, 74.7 per cent of ethnic Japanese (whose are the most prone to being part of a multi-racial couple, according to the census).

It might be tempting for some to think that this data therefore demonstrates a powerful romantic aversion among Chinese for other races (or, conversely, other races’ aversion towards Chinese) that makes Harbin-born Qu an oddity.

But closer examination will show otherwise. Over all, minority members born overseas were far less likely to be in a mixed couple than Canadian-born minority members (12 per cent to 56 per cent). It’s obvious when you think about it: People who immigrate tend to do so as adults, and as such are more likely to have formed a relationship in their former homelands. The effect is particularly pronounced among ethnic Chinese in couples, only 6 per cent of whom were in mixed unions if they were born outside Canada. But among ethnic Chinese born under the maple leaf, that rate soars to 54 per cent. In other words, most Canadian-born Chinese in couples had a non-Chinese partner.

And because Chinese immigration has been growing so rapidly, the proportion of ethnic Chinese in Canada who are foreign-born – 72 per cent according to the 2001 census – is far higher than for most other ethnicities. Among ethnic Japanese, only 23 per cent were born outside Canada (2001 census).

Another factor is likely at play in reducing the general likelihood of mixed race unions among Chinese, and that’s the sheer scale of the ethnic Chinese community. Members of smaller minorities (such as Japanese) simply don’t have as large a pool of potential romantic partners of the same ethnicity, regardless of any supposed race-based romantic preferences.

All of which goes to show, in a roundabout way, that racial romantic pre-determinism is a pretty wobbly concept at best. Black or white, Chinese or not, mayor or pop singer, the heart wants what the heart wants. The Hongcouver blog wishes Robertson and Ms Qu the very best.

The Hongcouver blog is devoted to the hybrid culture of its namesake cities: Hong Kong and Vancouver. All story ideas and comments are welcome. Connect with me by email ian.young@scmp.com or on Twitter, @ianjamesyoung70 

 

 

http://www.scmp.com/comment/blogs/article/1679522/vancouvers-mayor-gregor-robertson-dating-chinese-born-pop-star-wanting

Immigration Reformers Link GTA Traffic Gridlock to Massive Immigration

Posted on by

Immigration Reformers Link GTA Traffic Gridlock to Massive Immigration

PORT CREDIT, January 17, 2015. A dozen immigration reformers braved cold winds this afternoon to call for major cuts to immigration to help ease traffic gridlock in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). Members of Immigration Watch Canada and the Canada First Immigration Reform Committee displayed a banner “Fight Gridlock — Cut Immigration” on the pedestrian walkway above the Queen Elizabeth Way inbound to Toronto. Heavy traffic slowed right down. Many motorists honked or gave the thumbs up of approval. Some took pictures on their cellphones and tweeted or texted to their friends. One sorehead gave the group the finger.
 
The immigration reformers also leafletted several nearby parking lots and have vowed further protests
 
Traffic gridlock, GTA voters say, is their number one issue.
 
A statement circulated by the protesters proclaimed:
 
“Traffic gridlock, GTA voters say, is their number one issue.
 
Little surprise. The GTA has longer commute times than Los Angeles or Atlanta. Traffic gridlock costs us big time. Economists say it costs Ontario’s economy $7-billion a year! To say nothing of the wear and tear on nerves to say nothing of the wear on your car. How many times do you have to hit the brake when creeping along the QEW or the 401?
 
Every year, rush hour starts a little earlier. We’re now in gridlock at 3:00. How many more years will it be before it is 2:00!
 
Traffic gridlock is the result of Canada’s irresponsible immigration policies. Each year 125,000 immigrants flock to the GTA. Yet, our infrastructure — with the exception of the 407 —  has hardly changed since 1970! What worked well 40 years ago is choking and doesn’t work today.
 
To add the roads and transit needed to alleviate traffic gridlock will take years and billions of dollars.
 
In the meantime, if the federal government keeps the immigration doors wide open and keeps flooding the GTA, even if we build new roads, the gridlock will continue.
 
This is not anti-immigrant. It is common sense.
 
Traffic gridlock is one of the many hidden costs of immigration. Anyway, with 6.3% unemployment — 1.5-million Canadians unemployed, another 900,000 involuntarily in part-time jobs — there is just no economic justification for immigration.
 
SPEAK UP: Call or write your MP, your councillor and mayor.
 
Insist that they represent you and work to FIGHT TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK by CUTTING IMMIGRATION.
 

Thoughts on the Moslem Issue

Posted on by

Thoughts on the Moslem Issue

A Supporter Appreciates our Work

Dear Paul,

First I would like to congratulate you for the excellent materials that you circulate regarding the current turmoil in the world and the religious problems that we have in Canada. Unlike many other reports circulated, your reports stick to the facts.

In connection with the recently circulated video on the desecration of WWII war graves by Moslems in Libya, I believe this is only a portion of what is yet to come.  So much for the ‘Arab Spring’ !  It is regrettable to have to truthfully say that Libya was safer before under a dictator than in the lawless situation which currently exists there. Although definitely not one of my favourite newspapers, there was also an excellent article one day last week in the Daily Mail with a picture of the desecration.

Regarding the performance of our own Federal Government: While I still believe that Harper is probably the better choice of the three party leaders, I cannot understand how our leadership can be so blind when it comes to our immigration policies. I hear that the Federal Government is planning to accept a pile of refugees into Canada from Iraq. I think they said 10,000.  I do feel sorry for people caught up in the conflict, but it is one that they started and I think that they have to resolve their own problems – like we had to in WWII.  I believe that we should open our doors to ‘Christians only’.  I see the Moslems spreading like a cancer throughout the world. To my way of thinking, it like us deliberately infecting ourselves with a disease. How can we live in harmony with people who believe that we do not have the right to live unless we convert to Islam?  Obama has showed the world that he is an ineffectual leader who does not grasp the magnitude of the problem.  Definitely not someone to trust one’s future with. We have prided ourselves on permitting freedom of religion BUT this should not include any religion bent on destroying us from within. There are some Muslims, so called ‘moderates’ who deny that the Koran calls for the destruction of infidels. This is simply not true!  The ‘radicalized’ Muslims have no problem quoting passages from the ‘text’ calling for our conversion o Islam or facing the penalty of death. It’s time for us to ‘Wake up”

mos

At some point in time, the western world is going to have to take a stand. Multi-culturalism is a failed experiment. It should be our right as citizens of Canada to insist that immigrants to our country should be prepared to adopt : our culture, our ways and one of our two official languages. Our Prime Minister Wilfred Laurier got it right in 1907 when he called for just those things. One of your excellent articles called for our Government to “Screen all applicants for cultural compatibility”. This would certainly be a starting point to stop us accepting people and cultures bent on our destruction.  In conclusion Paul, I would like to thank you again for the excellent materials that you produce and circulate and your on going battle to promote truth and freedom of speech.

A person has the right to be a Muslim, BUT I should have the right as a citizen of Canada to say that the Muslim religion is not compatible with the Canadian Culture and way of life and that I wish my way of life (the Canadian Way of Life) to be protected and preserved.

Just try promoting Christianity in Saudi Arabia and see what happens !!!

W.A.B.

Category: Islam

Introduction

Posted on by

pic2    Immigration determines the future of a country, especially when that country is the recipient of massive immigration that is fundamentally changing the ethnic makeup of this country. Participatory democracy demands that such fundamental changes should only occur when there has been a full national debate and the resulting policy has been endorsed by Canadian citizens in a referendum.

    We commissioned a Decima research poll on Canadian attitudes to immigration. This poll found that a majority of Canadians backed the idea of a mandatory five year moratorium on all immigration and refugee intake until Canada’s endemic unemployment rate can be significantly lowered. Please visit our commentary section for more information.

Our Recommendations to the Legislative Review Secretariat, Ottawa:

    1. A five year moratorium on all immigration and refugee intake, until unemployment levels can be significantly lowered.

    2. A full national debate on immigration and population policy, with access to public television and radio to all sides of the debate;

    3. A binding national referendum on the government’s proposed immigration policy formed after the full national debate.

    4. That Parliament invoke the notwithstanding clause to overcome the Singh decision and to accept only those refugees who apply from abroad and are there vetted for security and health. Those arriving by air or land and claiming “refugee” status should be detained and turned back.

    5. All immigrants and visitors should be required to have a recent valid medical document stating that they are free of diseases.

Category: Canada First | Tags: