Tag Archives: IMMIGRATION

Maxime Bernier Warns People Not to Trust Pierre Poilievre

Posted on by
Lavone Darnel4:53 PM (5 hours ago)
to

From:Maxime Bernier

Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2024 12:30 PM

Subject: Poilievre will be a huge disappointment

Pierre Poilievre keeps saying he wants a “carbon tax election”.

He considers scrapping the carbon tax his most important priority.



This in itself should tell you all you need to know about how unambitious he is and how disappointing a Poilievre government will be.

(Let alone the fact that he will simply replace the carbon tax with subsidies to “green” technologies and carbon capture in order to reach the Paris Accord targets, which he still supports.)

If that’s his priority, how can anyone expect him to adopt any of the bold policies that Canada needs?

  • He won’t cut back unsustainable spending.
  • He won’t repeal Trudeau’s laws and abolish Trudeau’s programs.
  • He won’t stop sending money for foreign wars.
  • He won’t send to jail the transgender industry monsters who mutilate our kids.
  • He won’t stop mass immigration and protect Canadian identity.

If he were serious about fixing Canada’s problems, Poilievre would call for a “mass immigration election”, given this is by far the biggest issue we face and it is literally destroying our country.

But he won’t because he’s just Trudeau lite.

Lavone, the whole country is fed up with Trudeau and yes, realistically, yes, it’s almost guaranteed that Poilievre will be the next prime minister.

But that makes it even more important for the People’s Party to have strong showing at the next election.

There must be a credible populist and patriotic opposition to the next Conservative government, not just a collection of globalist and socialist parties.

We must be there to keep Poilievre on his toes and offer a real alternative when Canadians are inevitably disappointed.

Ten Reasons To Rethink Mass Immigration To Canada

Posted on by
Ten Reasons To Oppose Mass Immigration In Canada

Ten Reasons To Rethink Mass Immigration To Canada

Published On: May 1, 2024Tags: Immigration

By Riley Donovan

Swiss novelist Max Frisch, referring to the foreign “guest workers” allowed into Europe after the Second World War, said, “We wanted workers…but we got people instead.”

1. Housing Crisis

This one is simple enough: Prices are determined by the relationship between supply and demand. As Canada’s population has grown through large-scale immigration, which reached a rate of nearly 1.3 million in 2023 alone (when including non-permanent residents like foreign workers and international students), both home prices and rents have soared.

Don’t lose touch with uncensored news!  Join our mailing list today.

Vancouver, Toronto, and Hamilton are now the three least affordable cities in North America. In his 2010 book Millionaire MigrantsUBC (University of British Columbia) Professor David Ley found a positive correlation coefficient of 0.94 between Vancouver and Toronto house prices and net international migration. For more evidence on the relationship between immigration and housing prices, check out Madeline Weld’s excellent article on the topic: “Blatantly Oblivious to the Blindingly Obvious.”

The result is social chaos and displacement, with younger generations feeling locked out of the housing market and delaying having children, and elderly Canadians on a fixed income returning to work to meet rent or mortgage payments.

2. Strained Healthcare

This one is also pretty simple: Immigrants need healthcare too! Adding large numbers of future patients from overseas every year is exacerbating the pre-existing problems with our healthcare system.

Though the population has grown by 5 million people in the last ten years alone, Canada has added just 167 medical residencies. In 2023, Canada accepted 471,550 permanent residents, as well as around 800,000 foreign workers and international students. Despite the federal government’s claim that the solution is to bring in doctors and nurses from overseas, in reality, we only accept about 4,000 immigrant healthcare workers per year.

As a result, more than 6 million Canadians and counting do not have access to a family doctor.

3. Farmland Loss

Despite having the second-largest landmass in the world, just 4.3% of Canada is arable, and 90% of Canadians live in a winding line of settlements within 160 KM of the U.S. border. Most immigrants settle in this same strip, which drives urban expansion: 15 million acres of farmland have been lost since 1976. Ontario loses 319 acres of farmland every day. Since 2001, Canada has lost the equivalent of seven small farms per day.

This loss of farmland weakens Canada’s food security, forcing us to depend on importing food from other nations—in an increasingly fractious world order. It also fuels urbanization, threatening Canada’s beloved countryside landscapes, and the rural lifestyle many of us are attached to.

4. Crowding of Schools

Like so many effects of mass immigration, the overcrowding of Canadian schools is a function of the law of supply and demand—which our political elite is apparently unaware of! Simply put: Provinces and school districts are being overwhelmed by large numbers of additional students from newly-settled immigrant families. In Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown and Stratford received 375 newcomer students who were neither predicted nor planned for. Surrey, B.C., is considering putting schools in high rises!

To be sure, school crowding is not the fault of the immigrant families in question. Both immigrant and native-born Canadians alike are the victims of the classroom crowding caused by an out-of-control federal immigration policy.

5. Foreign Interference

From the alleged Chinese interference in recent Canadian elections to the assassination of Khalistan separatist Hardeep Singh Nijjar outside a Surrey temple, Canada is now a hotspot for foreign interference. While politicians of all stripes have denounced the meddling of foreign states in Canadian affairs, none have explicitly linked it to the presence of large foreign diaspora populations on Canadian soil.

The fact is, the presence of large diasporas invites foreign interference. This is especially true of China, which considers all ethnic Chinese to be nationals of China—regardless of their place of residency. For Xi Jinping, overseas Chinese play an irreplaceable role in China’s rise. The link between diaspora populations and foreign interference appears to be an ironclad rule of geopolitics, and has been seen in Europe as well, with Turkish president Erdogan urging Turks in Germany to vote against German Chancellor Merkel after a diplomatic rupture between the countries.

6. Declining Living Standards

Large-scale immigration is touted as necessary to Canada’s economic success, but this could not be further from the truth. While Canada’s immigration-driven population growth does grow the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), it lowers GDP per capita. In other words, while the economic pie grows, most people’s slice gets smaller!

This process has gotten so bad that the National Bank of Canada released a report warning that Canada is in a “population trap” whereby any increase in living standards is impossible—a problem which usually occurs in emerging economies like India or Sub-Saharan Africa!

7. Urban Sprawl and Densification

The federal government describes immigration in abstract terms: addressing labour shortages, offsetting ageing populations, or growing the GDP. In reality, immigrants are not just workers, they are people—people who need a roof over their heads! To accommodate immigration-driven population growth, a large amount of Canada’s energy and wealth is spent endlessly building both single-family developments and high rises.

The urban sprawl strategy is most visible in places like Calgary, with new cookie-cutter developments being continually built on the surrounding prairie. Alberta saw a population boom of 184,000 in 2023 alone (with international migration accounting for far more than interprovincial migration), so this looks likely to continue. The densification approach is most apparent in British Columbia, which recently abolished single-family zoning in most communities to accommodate immigration-driven population growth.

8. Declining Social Cohesion

Social cohesion is a measure of the strength of the bonds linking members of a group to each other—and to the group itself. As ethnic and cultural diversity increases because of large-scale immigration, the number and severity of society’s cultural fault lines increases.

One way in which this is manifesting in Canadian society is brawls between or within diaspora groups. On September 2nd, 2023, about 150 Eritreans clashed in the parking lot of Calgary’s Falconridge Plaza, armed with sticks and pipes. Similar clashes occurred in Edmonton and Toronto. The origin of the disputes was a difference of views about the government in Eritrea. In November of 2023, viral videos emerged of a clash between Hindus and Sikhs on Diwali in Mississauga.

9. Incompatible Cultural Practices

Most of Canada’s immigration now comes from India, Asia, Africa, and the Middle East. While culturally rich in their own way, cultures and religions in these regions often hold values diametrically opposed to those of Anglo Canadian and Quebecois society. The result is the import of behaviours incompatible with—or even offensive to—the Canadian way of life, such as:

10. Erosion of National Identity

By 2036, immigrants are projected to make up about 30% of the Canadian population. By 2050, roughly half the country’s population will be non-white. In some areas, these projections have already been reached or surpassed. In Brampton, Ontario, 65% of the population is South Asian. Richmond, British Columbia, became majority Chinese in 2016. In Quebec, the French language is in serious decline because of large-scale immigration.

If immigration targets remain unchanged, there will be a dramatic change in the country’s ethnic, cultural, and linguistic composition. Many citizens, both native-born and immigrants, will be uncomfortable with a change at this rate and scale to the country they know and love. To make matters worse, the successive federal governments, which have overseen Canada’s policy of large-scale immigration, have never consulted Canadians on whether they actually want this kind of change. [Published in Druthers, May, 2024]

What do you think?
Originally published at dominionreview.ca

Also read Riley Donovan’s eye-opening report on the Century Initiative at:
dominionreview.ca/century-initiative-the-lobbyists-that-want-to-raise-canadas-population-to-100-million/

Canada must build a border wall ASAP

Posted on by

Canada must build a border wall ASAP

I am worried. Very worried. In the wake of the Iowa caucuses, the New Hampshire Primary, and
Biden’s ongoing failures, I now believe that Donald Trump is unstoppable. He will not only win
the GOP nomination, but the White House.


While this is  great news for the United States, it is very bad news for Canada, especially those
pockets of Canada where progressive Americans of means seek refuge. I live in one of those
pockets. Worse still, I live in a tourist destination well known to this demographic.  I am in close
proximity to three blue states in the Pacific Northwest.


I have seen this (horror) movie before.


When Trump won in 2016, my community was inundated with these accursed contemptibles.
One could not safely walk one’s dog or stroll down an isle of the local supermarket or frequent
an outdoor cafe without bumping into one of them. Beneath their superficial good cheer, there
was a seething cauldron of rage looking for any opportunity to vent. On too many occasions I
was the chosen sounding board. Lucky me. Apparently these woke head cases mistook me for a
trained clinical psychologist.  But I am simply not equipped to treat Americans with Trump
Derangement Syndrome.


 These encounters would follow a predictable pattern. After a brief exchange of banalities. the
creative American liberal would find a way to insert a gratuitous anti-Trump remark entirely out
of context. Much in  the same way that virtue-signalling  Covidian cultists felt obliged to inform
you that they had just been vaccinated, as if it were a badge of honour rather than what it actually
was.  A badge of fear, wilful ignorance, indoctrination and groupthink.


 Typically their tirade was launched from the presumption that Canadians know as little about
American politics as Americans do about Canada’s. So they would proceed to school me. It was
like having MSNBC played back to me. When we parted I felt so stuffed with lying bullshit that
I had to resist the impulse to sprint to the nearest drugstore in search of a laxative.  I am pretty
resilient but there is only so much misinformation I can digest in one sitting.   Frankly I have
found these people insufferable, and have come to tremble when they approach each and every
summer, when their numbers become overwhelming.


While one can theoretically endure their rantings by wearing earplugs or feigning deafness, localresidents have not been able to endure their devastating impact on real estate prices and rents. 
As Professor Alberto Saiz of the University of Pittsburgh concluded from his study of the
negative impact of tourism on housing affordability,  affluent tourists behave much as Julius
Caesar did. Only instead of “He came, he saw, he conquered”  it’s “They came, they saw and
they bought”, real estate that is, epricing locals out of the housing market. The result is a
community like mine. A madhouse for four warm months and a ghost town in the colder months.
A place where forty percent of housing units belong to absentee owners and essential workers
could n’t find shelter.  That’s the xenophobic fact of the matter.


The spectre of a waves upon waves of mask-wearing morons pouring across the border to escape
Trump shakes me to the core I can barely contend with the CBC parrots who make up two-
thirds of permanent Canadian residents here, but when their idiocy is shored up by American
blue state progressives, I will feel like Custer at Little Big Horn. How can I repel these zombies?
I feel helpless. I know they’re coming but I can’t fight them  off.  At least the Texans at the
Alamo had guns, but in Jacinda Trudeau’s Republic, Canadians may soon be forbidden to arm
themselves with a pea shooter.


Canadians, that is, reality-based Canadians, desperately need protection from this woke horde. 
We can rid our country of Trudeau in the next election, assuming there is one, but how can we
stop a tidal wave of blue county hordes in 2025?


Perhaps I should sell my house to one of them and use the proceeds to buy a house in Idaho or
Montana. Or in one of the 11 counties in eastern Oregon who want to secede and cut themselves
off from Leftwing lunacy. It would be a win-win. They can live out the rest of their life in
California North and run it into the ground the same way they ran Seattle, Portland and San
Francisco into the ground.. And  I can spend the rest of my life hanging around people with a
modicum of common sense. The culture shock might kill me. But I’d take the risk.


Imagine me living in a place where I was able to say what is on my mind without first looking
over my shoulder. Imagine not being compelled to publicly say something I don’t believe to be
true, like the contention that a man can have a baby or the US Mexico border is secure. Imagine
not having to  celebrate mental illness on “pride” days. Imagine living in a jurisdiction where
parents could protect their kids from Drag Queens and groomers.   Or living in a world where
election results are not determined by the ability of governments and their Big Tech collaborators
to deny access to crucial information? Or living in a state or province where citizens could make
an informed decision about an inadequately tested gene therapeutic because skeptics could
debate government appointed medical "experts" on an even playing field.


Well, I can dream, can’t I?


If I could cross the Iron Curtain and reach that Promised Land to the south, it would be Back to
the Future. A return to the Canada I once knew. That was when Communism was a dirty word
and people knew what a woman was.
Tim Murphy

Canada’s Inability To Process Applications Highlighted In Auditor General’s Report

Posted on by

Canada’s Inability To Process Applications Highlighted In Auditor General’s Report

Canada’s Auditor General says the mismanagement and changing priorities of immigration officials has caused an inventory backlog and resultant extension of waiting times.

“Most of the delays were really being caused by inefficient management practices around applications and managing the inventory,” said Karen Hogan at the release of her audit of Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada.

“There’s a backlog of inventory that, at times, is greater than the immigration level for a given year.

“The department has the ability to improve how they process applications, but also to be more transparent with the applications about what their wait time might actually be.”

With Canada’s record immigration levels targets for the upcoming years, at 465,000 this year, 485,000 in 2024, and 500,000 in 2025, the Auditor General’s findings hint at a systemic incapacity to handle the additional workload.



The audit was conducted to establish IRCC’s efficiency – or lack thereof – in processing permanent residence applications.

Eight permanent residence programs were focused on under the economic, family, and refugee and humanitarian classes.

All of those programs remained backlogged at the end of the previous year.

“On average, privately sponsored refugees waited 30 months for a decision while overseas spouses or common-law partners waited 15 months to be reunited with their partners in Canada,” Hogan says. “While processing times improved in most of the programs we examined, they continued to exceed the department’s service standards for most applications in 2022.”

Moreover, the Auditor General reported that some applications waited in the queue for longer periods of time after they were initially submitted by applicants. This was most common with refugee applications, which waited an average of 15 to 20 months before receiving an initial assessment.


Video

YouTube video player

Differences in size and age of application backlogs by country of citizenship existed in seven of the eight permanent resident programs examined by the Auditor General.

While improvements have been made, the report said that the length of time some applications spent in the system is increasing, especially for refugee and spousal sponsorship applications from overseas.

In response to the audit, IRCC Minister Marc Miller said that his department has continued reducing backlogs by digitizing applications, hiring and training new staff, and relying on automation to increase processing capacity and efficiency.

“Immigration is critical to Canada’s long-term success, and we recognize the importance of ensuring that our systems operate efficiently,” he said.

“I am optimistic, considering the progress made by IRCC despite all the challenges it faced over the past few years.”

The report said that by the end of 2022, 99,000 refugees were still waiting their applications to be processed.

The processing time for refugee applications is 3 years on average, and many applicants spend years waiting on a decision.

Privately sponsored refugees waited 30 months on average for a decision, while overseas spouses or common-law partners waited an average 15 months to be reunited with their partners in Canada, compared to the 12-month service standards.

PNP Processing Time Increases

In the family class, upwards of 21,000 applications were finalized within six months of being received – ahead of at least 25,000 older applications that were in the backlog at the end of 2022.

In the Provincial Nominee Program (PNP), the backlog time increased from 12 to 20 months from January to December of 2022.

The age of applications for in-Canada spousal sponsorships increased from 27 to 47 months.

The report further demonstrated that backlogs vary by country in seven out of eight audited programs, especially for government-assisted refugees, federal skilled workers, and sponsored spouses who applied from out of country.

In the government-assisted refugees program, for example, more than half of the applications submitted by Somalian citizens and the Congolese citizens were backlogged.

In comparison, only one-third of Syrian applications were in backlog.

While these three countries have the most applications for government-assisted refugee sponsorships, their visa offices are also the most under-resourced.

“The department continued to assign application workloads to offices without assessing whether they had enough resources to process them,” said the audit.

The report’s overall point – Canada is taking more applications than it can handle under the current immigration targets the government has set.

Another contributing factor is the failure of the Immigration Minister to exercise his authority to “apply intake controls” during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Auditor General’s Recommendations:

  • To provide applicants with clear expectations about timelines for a decision, IRCC should establish “achievable and reliable” service standards for PR application processing. This includes refugee applications. Additionally, online information on expected processing times should be provided for all permanent resident applications and consider the volume and age of applications in its inventories.
  • IRCC should take steps to identify and address the differential wait times to support timely processing in all PR programs, as it works within the annual admission targets set by the Immigration Levels Plan. Moreover, it should develop and implement a plan to collect race-based and ethnocultural information from applicants directly to address any racial disparities in wait times.
  • IRCC should examine backlogged applications to identify and action processing delays within its control, including waiting for officer actions or follow-up. Older backlogged applications should also be prioritized while working to achieve the annual admission targets set by the Immigration Levels Plan.
  • To improve consistency of application processing times across its offices, IRCC should match assigned workloads with available resources, and it should support these decisions with reliable information on the available capacity within its offices. Immediate action needs to be taken by it to address application backlogs that have accumulated in certain offices with limited capacity.
  • To support timely processing for all applicants, IRCC should examine differential outcomes in processing times related to the implementation of automated decision-making tools and reduce these disparities to the extent possible, including by reallocating sufficient resources to the applications directed to the manual processing.
  • IRCC should implement – without further delay – online application portals for its refugee programs, while also working to complete its Digital Platform Modernization Initiative.

Canada Tests the Limits of Its Liberal Immigration Strategy

Posted on by
American Renaissance

Posted on August 18, 2023

Canada Tests the Limits of Its Liberal Immigration Strategy

Paul Vieira, Wall Street Journal, August 14, 2023

High levels of immigration made Canada the second-fastest growing developed-world economy in recent years, trailing only the U.S., as it competed to attract high-skilled workers from around the world.

Now, the newcomers are starting to strain the country’s ability to absorb them, putting at risk an important engine of the country’s growth.

The country of 40 million people last year welcomed more than one million permanent and temporary immigrants, Statistics Canada said. That influx generated a population growth of 2.7%; the increase of 1.05 million people was nearly equivalent to last year’s increase in the U.S., a country with more than eight times Canada’s population.

In the next two years, Canadian officials say they will boost the number of permanent newcomers by almost a third, with most being skilled migrants such as carpenters, computer scientists and healthcare workers who qualify under a merit-based points system.

The system, touted by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government but first developed in the 1960s, has helped drive economic growth, attract entrepreneurs and fill vacancies for skilled positions. It has been broadly supported across the Canadian political spectrum, with the goal of attracting the world’s best and brightest to Canada.

But the intake of newcomers is increasing so rapidly that analysts and newly arrived immigrants say it is adding fuel to an overheated housing market, straining a stressed healthcare system and clogging up roads in cities unaccustomed to traffic jams.

The country’s housing prices remain among the highest in the world even after a rapid and hefty rise in interest rates, according to data compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. The price of a Canadian home sits 36% above 2020 levels because residential construction can’t keep up with population growth, analysts say.

TD Bank economists, in a report last month, forecast that based on current demographic trends, the shortfall in housing units that are needed to keep up with projected demand could roughly double to a half-million units within just two years.

Historically, newcomers flocked to major cities such as Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal, but they are now also settling in smaller urban and suburban areas.

The total population of Canada’s capital region, around Ottawa, grew by 8.5% between 2016 to 2021, according to the national census, and house prices there surged 84% in the same period, based on data from the Canadian Real Estate Association. In the Kitchener-Waterloo-Cambridge region, a technology and manufacturing hub 70 miles west of Toronto, the population grew 10% to 575,000. In the 2016-21 period, house prices more than doubled.

As immigration has surged, Canada’s gross domestic product per capita—widely used by economists to measure a country’s standard of living—has declined. National Bank Financial said last month that Canada’s per-capita output is on track to fall 1.7% in the second quarter from a year ago, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicts Canada’s GDP-per-capita growth could be one of the lowest among developed-world economies over the next four decades.

Canada’s aggressive immigration “camouflaged the real underlying problem in this country, which is a lack of business investment and productivity,” said David Rosenberg, former chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch and now head of Rosenberg Research. This is showing up in everything from stressed public-transportation, roads, healthcare and housing, he said.

{snip}

For Canada’s 155th Anniversary : “The Demolition Of A Nation, One Step At A Time”

Posted on by

For Canada’s 155th Anniversary : “The Demolition Of A Nation, One Step At A Time”
The Demolition of a Nation, One Step At A Time (revised)
By Tim Murray,Immigration Watch Canada Writer

On July 1, 2022, Canada observed 155 years of Confederation. But as this bulletin points out, is there a nation still to celebrate?
Please note the following two prophetic statements on the consequences of mass immigration to Canada and Australia . One is by former Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King and the other by Australian historian Geoffrey Blainey:
“…the people of Canada do not wish, as a result of mass immigration, to make a fundamental alteration in the character of our population.” Prime Minister Mackenzie King, May 1st, 1947
“It is rare for a nation… to turn in a completely new direction. It is unusual for a democracy take such a turn. People are therefore entitled to inquire whether the distinctive character of their nation—and some of its greatest achievements—will remain if people from very different cultures are encouraged to come and, as far as possible, to maintain their own cultures. “ Geoffrey Blainey (“All for Australia”, 1984 p. 154)
The following is a link to a site which documents the demolition of thousands of City of Vancouver heritage houses in the last 20 years. Ironically, the people who performed many, if not most, of the actual demolitions, were Punjabi Sikhs :
https://www.facebook.com/VancouverVanishes
We are providing photos of Vancouver Heritage Houses which were demolished as a result of mass immigration.
65428331_2989718811068837_3748217100225740800_
Demolitions, if viewed in slow motion, are revealed to be a sequential process. They begin with the destruction of the ground floor, and work their way up, until the entire building “suddenly” collapses. Viewed in hindsight, it may appear that the collapse of Canada’s identity was almost instantaneous. But in fact, it did not happen overnight. Our cultural, ethnic and environmental edifice was brought down incrementally, by a series of policies and laws that spanned some forty years. Let’s start at the beginning, in 1962, at the “ground floor” of implosion, and then follow the chain of disintegration up to 2006 and our present predicament, with Canada teetering on the edge of complete re- colonization and assimilation.
(1) 1962 Prime Minister John Diefenbaker’s Progressive Conservative government declared that independent immigrants and their immediate families would be admitted to Canada from everywhere in the world. However, while the Tories said that all comers were welcome, it was successive Liberal governments which set up the machinery to get them.
(2) 1965 In response to a global mood to support the movement for colonial independence and repudiate the history that made the Holocaust possible, Canada signed the “United Nations International Convention on All Forms of Racial Discrimination”. This post-war shift in attitude served to discredit principles that were used to legitimize exclusions in existing immigration policy. The signing of this UN Convention, a seemingly innocuous action, came to have a profound impact on subsequent immigration policy-making.
(3) 1966 The Pearson government’s White Paper on Immigration Policy advocated a universal admissions policy. The country was to be cut from its cultural moorings, as European immigrants would no longer be given preference. This change in immigration selection criteria constituted a crucial change in direction for the country. It was a confluence of two beliefs. One, that Canada should cast its immigration net widely to capture “the best and the brightest”, and two, that Canada was morally obligated to embrace immigrants from across the world without reference to their ethnic, racial, religious or cultural origins. No longer would the nation’s cultural cohesion be a consideration in deciding who gets in and how many.
(4) 1967 The “point system” was introduced. As T. Triadafilopolous of the University of Toronto put it, “Through the points system, Canada would select immigrants according to a set of universal criteria, including educational credentials, language competency in English and/or French, and labour market potential. Applicants’ ethnic and racial backgrounds were no longer to be considered in determining their eligibility for admission to Canada. The result of this change …was precisely what (Prime Minister Mackenzie) King tried to avoid: the diversification of immigration and consequent transformation of Canada’s demographic structure. Whereas immigrants from ‘non-traditional’ source regions …comprised only a small fraction of Canada’s total immigration intake from 1946 to 1966, by 1977 they made up over 50% of annual flows. Changes in immigration policy shattered the foundations of ‘white Canada’ and created the conditions for Canada’s development into one of the most culturally diverse countries in the world. (from “Dismantling White Canada: Race, Rights and the Origins of the Point System”)
basicImage
(5) 1967 The Immigration Department was ordered to no longer list immigrants by ethnic origin but rather by “country of last residence”. This allowed the government to conceal the fact that many third world immigrants had traveled to Canada from traditional source countries like the UK.
(6) 1971 Multiculturalism is declared official state policy. Henceforth, Canada was no longer to be perceived as consisting of our two founding cultures, English and French, but as a mosaic of equivalent ethnic fragments. Canada was to become the helpless victim of a social engineering project whose sweeping scope was yet to be comprehended.
(7) 1974 Biologist Jack R. Vallentyne of the Fisheries and Marine Service called for a national population policy. His call was ignored. Vallentyne, a former professor at Cornell University, was made leader of the Eutrophication (pollution) Section of the Freshwater Institute in Winnipeg. It was in that capacity that Vallentyne became alarmed at the extent to which overpopulation and over-development was promoting eutrophication of our water resources.
(8) 1976 The Science Council of Canada released its report number 25, “Population, Technology and Resources” which concluded that perpetual population growth would stress Canada’s limited non-renewable resources. It advocated (A) restricting immigration and (B) stabilizing Canada’s population. Another forgotten report.
basicImage
(9) 1976 Voluminous anecdotal evidence had come to challenge the claim that European interest in emigrating to Canada had diminished, as prospective skilled and educated immigrants from Britain and the Continent with immediate family were being turned away in droves. Immigration officials in 1976 conceded that as many as 60% of British applicants were being rejected while unskilled third world immigrants with poor language skills were welcomed with open arms. The vision of the 1966 White Paper was being fulfilled. The number of immigrants with skills steadily declined while the number who were sponsored as relatives increased from 34% in 1966 to 47% by 1973.
(10) 1976 Canada’s first separatist party, the Parti Quebecois, was elected. By this action, Quebec Francophone voters indicated that they were not prepared, as English Canadians were apparently were, to see their unique culture dismembered by a multicultural globalist agenda. Quebecers were not willing to go down with the English Canadian ship.
(11) 1980 English Canada got its second wake-up call when Quebec held its first referendum on separation. After it was defeated, English Canada went back to sleep, and the global “out-reach” to non-traditional sources of immigration continued with Official Multiculturalism still in place.
(12) 1980-1983 In response to a recession, the government of Pierre Elliot Trudeau cut immigration levels from 143,000 to 89,000. It was the only time in recent decades that a federal administration reduced immigration quotas in deference to tougher economic times and the need to defend jobless Canadians. Thereafter, immigration policy would be the prisoner of political imperatives, most specifically ethnic vote-seeking.
(13) 1982 The “Charter of Rights and Freedoms”—forming part of the Constitution Act—was signed into law. It relegated Parliament to a secondary role—and through it diminished the ability of a majority of the population to influence the direction of the country. It allowed the courts to strike down provincial and federal statutes to satisfy individual rights. Consequently, as writer Frank Hilliard observed, it achieved Pierre Trudeau’s goal of altering our British Parliamentary system and replacing it with a model that divided society into ethnic communities, each with its own cultural norms. It is noteworthy that the Charter’s Section 27 requires the Charter to be interpreted in a ‘multicultural context’.
basicImage
(14) 1986 Employment Equity Act—allowed a staggering number of recently-arrived immigrants to leap-frog over resident Canadians to secure jobs in the federal public sector. The Act became a template for similar legislation in other provinces which also affected the private sector.
(15) 1986-89 The Health and Welfare department of the federal government completed a report “Charting Canada’s Future” which concluded that Immigration has only a short-term effect on Canada’s age structure. Moreover, increases in immigration to as high as 600,000 per year would have, in the long-term, no impact on the age structure. Even changing the age structure of immigrants from 23% below age 15 in 1988 to 30% below 18 and then 50% below 15 would have little long-term impact on Canada’s overall age structure. That message continues to be ignored to this day.
(16) 1988 The Multiculturalism Act—institutionalized the policy of multiculturalism begun by Pierre Trudeau.
(17) 1988 Breaking with Trudeau’s belief that Canadians should not apologize to ethnic lobbies for alleged past injustices, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney apologized and compensated the Japanese-Canadian community for the federal government’s internment of Japanese-Canadians during the Second World War. The apology began an era of grovelling which can be seen for what it was, not a sincere desire for redress, but a naked grasp for the ethnic vote.
basicImage
(18) 1991 The Intelligence Advisory Committee, with input from Environment Canada, the Defence Department and External Affairs produced a confidential document for the Privy Council entitled “The Environment: Marriage Between Earth and Mankind”. The report stated that “Although Canada’s population is not large in world terms, its concentration in various areas has already put stress upon regional environments in many ways.” It added that “Canada can expect to have increasing numbers of environmental refugees requesting immigration to Canada, while regional movements of the population at home, as from idle fishing areas, will add further to population stresses within the country.” The document was apparently buried.
(19) 1991 The Economic Council of Canada, in a research report (“The Economic and Social Impacts of Immigration”), concluded that immigration has been of no significant benefit to the economy. Once again, it was a message that is still forgotten.
(20) 1991 Immigration Minister Barbara McDougall of the Progressive Conservative government of Brian Mulroney launched the policy of mass immigration, which greatly increased immigration levels to 250,000 per year. Like the Liberals’ White Paper policy of 1966, which was engineered by Tom Kent to defeat “Tory Toronto” by recruiting immigrants from ‘non-traditional’ sources, the McDougall policy was designed as a political stratagem to woo ethnic voters away from the Liberals by earning their gratitude. Mass immigration then must be seen as primarily a political weapon to defeat rival political parties rather than a policy that confers a legitimate economic or demographic benefit to Canada.
(21) 1994 July 6 Canada’s state broadcaster, CBC/Radio-Canada, with Policy 1.1.4, declares that its mandate requires that its programming should “reflect the multicultural and multiracial nature of Canada”. “In fact”, the CBC continued, “by the reasons of the ethnic diversity of the audience, the Corporation has long practiced a policy of cultural pluralism in its programming, and intends to continue to reflect the multicultural richness and multiracial characteristics of Canadian society in keeping with the Corporation’s obligation to ‘contribute to shared national consciousness and identity’. Schedule planners and programs staff are expected to demonstrate continuing awareness of and sensitivity to this aspect of CBC/Radio-Canada role.” In so doing, the CBC in effect became the voice of immigrant ethno-cultural lobbies and power blocs, while the views of the full cross-section of mainstream Canadian society were largely excluded.
basicImage
(22) 1995 A second referendum on separation was held in Quebec. It was defeated by the narrowest of margins, 0.8%. Many would argue that the 1995 referendum was hijacked by the federal government, which poured in a ton of money in publicity largely exceeding the amount authorized by the referendum laws. The Gomery commission subsequently found many key Liberal figures guilty of fraud. In addition, for good measure, the federal government fast-tracked the citizenship process for all new immigrants in Quebec in the months leading up to the referendum . This action was timely, as it allowed these immigrants to vote and tip the scales to victory for the “No” side.
(23) Premier Jacques Parizeau accurately blamed the loss on the ethnic vote, which had grown with mass immigration. Failing to see that their own society was being undermined by the very same forces that were undermining Quebec, English Canadians rejoiced. However, the result clearly illustrated that since 1980, an increasing proportion of the Francophone population were opposed to the multicultural makeover of their society.
(24) 1997 The $2.4 million federally-commissioned Fraser Basin Ecosystem Study, led by Dr. Michael Healey of UBC, was released. It stated that BC’s Fraser Basin was overpopulated by a factor of three. Healey later urged all levels of government to develop a Population Plan for the country. The study was ignored by the government that funded it.
basicImage
(24) 2001 The Population Institute of Canada made a presentation to the House of Commons Committee on Immigration which recommended that the government develop a Population Plan for Canada, as called for by Dr. Michael Healey. The presentation fell on deaf ears.
(25) 2005 Ontario’s Environment Commissioner, Gordon Miller, released a report that challenged the provincial government’s plans to accommodate an additional 4.4 to 6 million people for Ontario over the next 25 years. In introducing this annual report, Miller issued strong cautions. “One of the troubling aspects of the improved planning system is that it is still based on the assumption of continuous, rapid population growth. Government forecasts project that over the next 25 years, Ontario’s population will increase from just over 12 million to 16.4 million or perhaps as high as 18 million. Three quarters of these people are expected to settle in the urban area around Toronto and in the Greenbelt lands. Even with higher development densities, this is a vast number of people settling in an already stressed landscape. ” He added that the area did not have the water resources to support the population increase, nor the ability to handle sewage created by the increase. Miller was vilified for his comments.
(26) 2006 Following Mulroney’s precedent of apologizing and compensating Japanese-Canadians for the wartime actions of Mackenzie King’s government, Prime Minister Harper compensated Chinese-Canadians for federal laws that were enacted before the First World War to protect Canadian jobs from the importation of cheap Chinese labour. The compensation came with a profuse apology.
basicImage
(27) 2006 The C.D. Howe Institute reported that immigration levels would have to be raised to impossibly stratospheric levels to have any effect in slowing the rate of Canada’s aging population.
(28) 2013 Canada’s most famous environmentalist, Dr. David Suzuki, said that Canada was overpopulated and that immigration levels should be reduced. Like Gordon Miller, Suzuki was vilified by everyone except the general public, who evidenced their approval in the comments section of newspapers across the country which carried the story.
(29) 2013 Reacting to growing ethnic enclaves and the threat of the emergence of a parallel Islamic society, the Parti Quebecois government introduced a Charter that would re-establish the secular nature of Quebec society, a hard won achievement of the Quiet Revolution of the 1960s. Recognizing that support for the Charter would represent a clear repudiation of the multicultural agenda, the political class and the English media denounced the proposal.
(30) 2014 The fact that the Charter enjoyed the support of a majority of Quebecers—and apparently a majority of Canadians in the rest of Canada– the media and the political establishment attempted to discredit the Parti Quebecois government by raising the prospect of another referendum on sovereignty. This was (and is) a ploy to shift the focus away from the Charter.
(31) 2015 Two months following his electoral victory, the new Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, essentially confirmed that the mission of cultural and ethnic fragmentation conceived five decades before had been accomplished. In fact, it had gone beyond that. Canada was no longer even a multicultural state—or a nation—but something the world had never seen before. “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada”, Trudeau proudly observed, “There are (just) shared values—openness, respect, compassion, willingness to work hard, to be there for each other, to search for equality and justice. Those qualities are what make us the first post-national state.” A state, in other words, that has been cast adrift, cut from its cultural, ethnic and moral moorings.
basicImage
(32) In reviewing these policies , pronouncements and laws, it is apparent that the promotion of official multiculturalism and quota hiring (“employment equity”) were conceived to work in tandem with mass immigration, so that immigrants would be made to feel fully integrated and at home with their new country.
(33) This great “multicultural experiment” then, was essentially an immigration project which changed the ethnic profile of the nation and grew the population by 25%. It was an experiment conducted by a political class on ordinary Canadians without the consent of ordinary Canadians. The project had no electoral mandate. The result is that most Canadians feel like lab rats living in an environment they no longer recognize. They bear witness to the demolition of a nation.
Vancouver, Toronto and Hamilton are the three least affordable cities in North America.
Visit our website
The high cost of housing has essentially shut many Canadians, especially first-time buyers and most newcomers,out of the home ownership market.
For sensible immigration policies for the 21st century
See what’s happening on our social sites ‌  ‌

The White Inferiority Complex

Posted on by

Throne, Altar, Liberty

The Canadian Red Ensign

The Canadian Red Ensign

Friday, September 18, 2020

The White Inferiority Complex

For decades, hurling the epithet “racist” was the liberal’s go-to method of acknowledging anyone who disagreed with him from a standpoint somewhere to his right. In this same period this method served its purpose of discouraging disagreement with progressive liberalism well. Those who belonged to the mainstream of whatever was considered to be conservatism at the time, which was generally what had been considered liberalism a decade or so earlier, were, for some reason that has never really been explained, particularly sensitive to this accusation, and every time the liberal used this dreaded word they would rush to be the first to throw whoever was on the receiving end of the accusation under the bus. 
Eventually, however, this word lost most of its bite. It had simply been used too often and against too many people. When everyone is a racist, nobody is a racist, and people stop caring when you call somebody a racist. While it made something of a comeback this year, when used with the modifier “systemic”, for a few years now it has been largely replaced in liberal usage with “white supremacist.”


By trading the worn out “racist” for the fresh “white supremacist”, liberals exchanged an insult that had lost most of its meaning through overuse for one that was more powerful than the original had ever been, but in doing so they made themselves look absurd. For one thing white supremacist has a much narrower range of meaning than racist, with connotations of ideology, zeal, commitment, and activism that the word racist does not. There are very few actual white supremacists left and when liberals try to use this expression in the way they used to use racist they invite ridicule upon themselves. 


There is another aspect to the absurdity of the charge of white supremacism being flung around like so much monkey excrement. It is quite evident to anybody with open eyes that if any sort of bad racial thought presently infests the minds of the white people of Western Civilization it is not a sense of superiority over others, much less a feeling of supremacy over others, but rather a sort of inferiority complex. 
What other explanation can there be for the fact that even though the United States, after its Supreme Court abolished all de jure discrimination against blacks, established de jure discrimination against whites in 1964, and Canada, the United Kingdom, and all other Western countries decided to follow this foolish American precedent, and for over a generation anti-white discrimination has been the only established racism in Western Civilization, nevertheless white people have been willing to affirm the proposition that Western countries are “white supremacist” and that they therefore enjoy “privilege” on the basis of their skin colour? 
How else do we explain all the white people who are enthusiastic supporters of Black Lives Matter? BLM, despite the organization’s innocuous if also truistic and banal name, is not about a positive agenda of promoting the security and well-being of black people. Abortion rates have been disproportionately high among black people for decades, but BLM couldn’t care less about all the black lives lost to abortion. They are, in fact, allied to the pro-abortion, feminist cause. Nor does BLM care about all the black lives taken by black perpetrators of violent crime. Blacks are overrepresented among both the perpetrators and the victims of violent crime in general, which has been the case for as long as statistics have been kept about this sort of thing and shows no sign of ceasing to be the case any time soon, and this overrepresentation is even larger for homicide. The inevitable and natural corollary of this is that blacks are also overrepresented among crime suspects, arrests, convictions, and incarcerations. The black lives lost to black crime are not black lives that matter to BLM. BLM cares only about blaming the overrepresentation of blacks among suspects, arrests, etc., on the racism of white police. For this is what BLM is truly about – spreading hatred of police officers, Western Civilization in general but with a focus on the United States, and especially of white people. 


It makes about as much sense, therefore, for white people to support BLM as it would for black people to go around wearing white robes with pointy hoods. Yet this year, in which BLM has, ahem, removed its mask and revealed its true colours like never before, it would have been difficult not to notice the prominent participation of whites in the record-breaking wave of race riots and the “Year Zero” Cultural Maoist assault on historical monuments and statues. That is even without taking into account the lionizers of BLM and its cause among white newspaper and television commentators, white university professors, white clergymen, white corporate executives, white celebrities, and white politicians. 


There is a name for this sort of inferiority complex. It is called liberalism. While there are many different liberalisms with many different meanings, the one that I have in mind here is that of the liberal whom Robert Frost defined as “a man too broadminded to take his own side in a quarrel.” Although I must say that when the poet penned that worthy diagnosis it probably never occurred to him that the disease would progress to the point where those infected actively take up arms against their own side. 
This, however, is the stage of the condition in which we find ourselves today and it may very well prove to be the terminal stage. 


Today, whether they seriously believe it to be true or not, a sizeable portion of whites are willing to affirm that racism is a moral offence for which light-skinned people of European ancestry bear a unique guilt, that they are guilty of it even if they are not conscious of having thought a racist thought, said a racist word, or committed a racist act, that this unconscious racism supposedly built into the very fabric of society is worse than the overt racial hatred that is often directed against whites by blacks and others with an anti-white axe to grind, and that it is their moral duty, therefore, to express contrition or shame whenever any non-white person chooses to take offence at something they have said or done or merely the fact that they are living and breathing, and to ignore or excuse explicit expressions of racial animus directed against them, even when these are violent in tone. 
Western liberalism has clearly undergone a mutation from when its humanitarian and universalist ideals merely generated a blindness to the legitimate particular interests of Western nations and peoples. It now actively opposes those interests. 


Think about the implications of the ubiquitous calls to end “systemic racism.” Many, perhaps most, white people have been jumping on board this bandwagon. Perhaps they do not understand that “systemic racism” is a technical term, from neo-Marxist Critical Race Theory, and that it designates this idea of an embedded racism which all white people and only white people are guilty of whether they are conscious of racist thought and actions or not. Perhaps they think it means institutional policies and practices that explicitly discriminate on racial grounds. If the latter is what they think, however, then they are mistaken if they think that racism of this sort, other than the kind that is directed against them, exists in Western countries today. This crusade against “systemic racism” in the Critical Race Theory sense of the term can only have the result, if successful, of making the explicit discrimination against white people that has been institutionalized in all Western countries since the ‘60’s and ‘70s of the last century, worse. 


There is a far worse manifestation of this mutant strain of the liberalism virus. Taken together, a number of liberal policies that have been in place in most if not all Western countries for over four decades, constitute an existential threat to white people. One of these policies is the use of large scale immigration from non-Western countries to offset the declining fertility that has been produced by, among other factors, the anti-natalism of social liberalism’s pro-contraception, pro-abortion, views. The result of this policy having been in place for decades has been the massive demographic transformation of Western societies to the point where in several countries that in living memory were almost entirely white, whites are on the verge of dropping to minority status. When you add to this the introduction in the same time frame of the aforementioned anti-white institutional discrimination, and the vilification of whites in the news media, popular education, and the revisionist educational curriculum, what you end up with is a recipe for a sort of self-inflicted genocide. Indeed, for decades now, Critical Race Theorists such as the late Noel Ignatiev have couched their anti-white ideas in explicitly genocidal language such as “the abolition of the white race”. When called out over this they have defended their rhetoric by saying that the “white race” they are talking about is a social construct, but their arguments have a rather hollow ring to them when we consider that these people would be the first to cry genocide if the same language were used about any other race and that the activist movement that has been built upon the foundation of their theory has translated such rhetoric into even cruder terms and actions that are not so easily explained away. These same people insist that “it is okay to be white” is a dangerous and offensive racist slogan. 


Yet despite all of this, liberalism has been largely successful at convincing a large segment of the white population to regard anyone who dares to speak out against this suicidal combination of policies as being a bigger and more real threat than that combination itself. Indeed, there are several liberal organizations in North America that do nothing else except identify those who speak out against white liberalism’s racial suicide pact and wage a campaign of character assassination against them. 


Liberalism is usually wrong about everything and it is certainly wrong about this. The West does not have a “white supremacist” problem in this day and age. What it is suffering from is rather that many, perhaps most, white people have become infected with a sick-minded racial inferiority complex in which they regard their skin colour as a badge of racial guilt which can only be atoned for through racial suicide. You will be waiting a long time, however, for liberals to acknowledge this. That would mean admitting that liberalism is the problem. Liberals would sooner demonize all those who share their own skin colour than admit that liberalism could be wrong. Posted by Gerry T. Neal at 6:15 AM Labels: abortion, antiracism, Black Lives Matter, contraception, Critical Theory, feminism, immigration, liberalism, Noel Ignatiev, racism, systemic racism, Year Zero

An Alberta Skilled Worker’s Cry from the Heart for Doctor Murdered By African Immigrant

Posted on by
Dr. Walter Reynolds, another victim of Canada’s failed immigration policy

An Alberta Skilled Worker’s Cry from the Heart for Doctor Murdered By African Immigrant

Dear Prime Minister:


You may recall my e-mail last year that although I’m working and paying taxes here in Red Deer, I am unable to secure a family Doctor

Well today we have one less Doctor which I hope you are aware of who was savagely murdered by his head being smashed in with a hammer. Today the media released the names and photos of the murderer and the murdered and now the choice of weapon used makes sense. I’d like to think that you will address this tragedy to the Canadian people and reiterate your cliche that ‘diversity is our strength’ while holding a straight face

Nobody in their right mind believes this cliche but you are continuing your father’s legacy at flooding our once civilized nation with people that have backwards religions and from failed cultures that clearly with every hammer blow hate us.


You, sir, are a despicable man and the true enemy of every real Canadian and I know I speaks for many in saying it would bring us great pleasure if one day you and your family are the victims of the hammer wielding savages that you continue to set loose on us. — Mike, Skilled Worker

Maxime Bernier Promises Major Immigration Reform: Slash Numbers, Stop the Illegals, Defund Multicult

Posted on by

Maxime Bernier Promises Major Immigration Reform: Slash Numbers, Stop the Illegals, Defund Multicult & Put Canada & Canadian Needs First

“The People’s Party of Canada immigration platform finally offers us a start at regaining control of our borders and stopping the financial drain $40-billion/year caused by poorly screened & excessive immigration.’ Paul Fromm, Canada First Immigration Reform Committee

PAUL AND MAXIME BERNEIR 1

 

I want to discuss with you today the People’s Party position on immigration.

For decades now, there has only been one acceptable position among our political and intellectual elites: more, and more, and more immigration.

There is a taboo around this topic. As soon as you raise a concern about the level of immigration, someone will accuse you of harbouring anti-immigrant views and being racist or xenophobic.

The result is that all the other parties have the same position. They are all in favour of mass immigration.



Maxime Bernier, Leader of the People’s Party of Canada

Immigration Rally

Mississauga, July 24, 2019

 


The Liberals have increased immigration levels from an average of 250,000 per year during the last decades to 350,000 in 2021, a 40% increase.

Andrew Scheer gave a speech on immigration a few weeks ago. He did not say anything relevant or significant. He did not mention any number. Instead, he spent half an hour pleading that he is not racist.

No lessons to receive

I’m not going to spend 30 minutes rejecting accusations of racism. Only 30 seconds. That’s all I need to refute a false and ridiculous accusation.

I don’t care one bit about people’s race or skin colour. I have said many times that racists and bigots are not welcome in our party. We care about shared values, culture and identity.

You can be of any ethnic background or faith, and be a Canadian, if you share fundamental Canadian values, learn about our history and culture, and integrate in our society.

There are nominated candidates of all races and religions in the PPC. With names like Salim Mansour, Rocky Dong, Jigna Jani, Tahir Gora, Jude Guerrier, Jing Lan Yang, Salomon Rayek, and many, many others.

We have no lessons to receive from anyone about openness and inclusiveness.

And the journalists who don’t want to recognize this and keep coming back with questions about bigotry can just take a hike!

No taboo

Immigration is a very important question. It’s completely absurd to turn it into a taboo subject.

And the majority of Canadians agree with us.

The reason those in favour of mass immigration don’t want to have any debate on this issue is because they know they would lose it.

Every survey that has come out in recent years shows that a large proportion of Canadians, depending on the question, support a lower immigration level.

In an Angus-Reid poll last year, 49% said it was too high, while only 6% wanted Canada to accept more immigrants.

Who are the extremists? The left-wing media and activists say we are extremists because we want to cut immigration.

But they are the extremists! The Liberals are the extremists! We are the mainstream!

Canada already accepts more immigrants than almost any other country: 21% of our population was born outside of Canada. More than one in five.

Our ratio is higher than in the US, where it is 15%. It is almost double that of European countries like France, Germany and the UK, where the foreign born constitute only 12% of the population. And where there have been for many years social tensions related to immigration.

Canada has always been a country largely open to immigration, because of its vastness and its relative youth. I believe that by and large, our immigration policy has been very successful.

But that doesn’t mean this will always continue, as we keep increasing immigration to new record levels. We are not immune to the conflicts and social tensions happening elsewhere.

I want Canada to still be a peaceful, prosperous and harmonious society 25 years from now, with well-integrated immigrants.

Maintaining Canada’s national identity

So let’s ignore the critics and discuss the specific reasons immigration levels should be lowered.

Most fundamentally, it has to do with social harmony and the maintenance of our Canadian national identity.

Last year, in August, just before I left the Conservative Party, I published six tweets that caused quite a controversy.

I was criticizing Justin Trudeau’s slogan that “diversity is our strength.” I attacked the Liberal cult of diversity and extreme multiculturalism.

I recognized that of course, Canada is and has always been a diverse country. We have First Nations and Inuit, two official languages, a multiethnic population, and very different regional cultures. The culture of Cape Breton is very different from that of the Eastern Townships in Quebec, or that of southern Alberta, or Nunavut.

All these regional cultures are intrinsically Canadian. They developed in Canada. They don’t exist anywhere else in the world. They deserve to be nurtured and to survive.

My problem with Trudeau’s slogan, and with the policies that go with it, is not that I am against diversity. It’s the belief that more and more diversity is always better. And that there is no limit to it.

As I wrote in one of my tweets, if anything and everything is Canadian, does being Canadian mean something? Shouldn’t we emphasize our cultural traditions? What we have built and have in common? What makes us different from other cultures and societies?

In the past, immigrants who came here gradually integrated into our society. They kept some aspects of the culture of their country of origin, of course. And that influenced and changed our society. They became Canadian, but with a distinct flavour.

This is a type of multiculturalism that enriches our society. And it is perfectly fine.

But that is very different than coming here to recreate the society and culture you left behind.

Living permanently in an enclave apart from the larger Canadian society.

And moreover, being officially encouraged by the government to continue to do so rather than to integrate into Canadian society and adopt Canadian culture and values.

A nation must be based on a sense of belonging, of participating in a common national project, sharing the same values, being different from the rest of the world.

It’s only when these sentiments are widely shared that we can develop the trust and common understanding necessary for our institutions to function.

Our country was almost torn apart because of the misunderstandings between Francophone Quebecers and the rest of Canada.

Many First Nations members feel alienated from Canadian society.

So why would we want to emphasize cultural, religious and ethnic differences, which have been one of the main causes of conflict throughout human history? This is insane.

We can already see the consequences in the way ethnic politics has become the norm among the other parties. They don’t talk to Canadians. They address themselves to ethnic voting blocs. To Ukrainian Canadians, Italian Canadians, Chinese Canadians, Muslim Canadians, Sikh Canadians.

Trudeau does it, Scheer does it, Singh does it.

Even our foreign policy now depends on appealing to these ethnic political clienteles, instead of being based on the interests of Canada as a whole.

If we continue on the present course, all these little tribes will have less and less in common, apart from their dependence on government in Ottawa.

Multiculturalism and balkanization

Some people have accused me of abandoning my free-market ideas because I talk about these issues. But this is totally misguided.

Mass immigration, open borders, unvetted immigration, extreme multiculturalism: all of this has nothing to do with freedom.

On the contrary, it’s a very dangerous type of social engineering. It amounts to large-scale government intervention in society and culture.

It will bring increasing cultural balkanisation, distrust, social conflict, and potentially violence, as we are seeing in other countries where division has reached a critical level.

In his 1991 book on multiculturalism, the late advisor to John F. Kennedy, Arthur Schlesinger, warned that “countries break up when they fail to give ethnically diverse peoples compelling reasons to see themselves as part of the same nation.”

Three years later, Canadian author Neil Bissoondath published Selling Illusions: The Cult of Multiculturalism in Canada. That’s a very good title!

Bissoondath wrote that encouraging ethnic differences leads immigrants to adopt a psychology of separation from the mainstream culture. And he blamed multiculturalism for creating enclaves that isolate ethnic groups, at the expense of the unity and cohesion of our society.

Let me cite one more scholar. In his current research, Canadian political scientist Eric Kaufmann shows that lower immigration rates also help newcomers themselves. Because the lower rates bring greater integration, while also making the established population more welcoming.

In case there is a CBC journalist reporting this. Please note that these writers are not Far Right white supremacists. Just trying to help my good friends at CBC here!

Protecting Western Values

And let’s stop being politically correct. We must recognize that not all values, not all social customs, not all cultures, are equally valuable.

Our distinct values are those of contemporary Western civilization. They include democracy, individual rights and freedoms, including freedom of religious belief and freedom to criticize religion.

Our distinct values also include equality between men and women, the equal treatment of all citizens regardless of ethnicity, religion, or sexual orientation, the rule of law, separation of state and religion, tolerance and pluralism, and loyalty to the wider society instead of to one’s clan or tribe.

When I say that newcomers to Canada must integrate into our society and share our values, it is to these Western values that I am referring.

Values that our ancestors fought for. Values that explain why we are one of the freest, most dynamic, and most prosperous societies in the world. Classical liberal values.

In most non-Western societies still today, these values are not widely accepted or practiced. In fact, that’s precisely the reason why millions of people from around the world want to come to Canada and other Western countries.

Among the threats to our values and way of life is political Islam, or Islamism, the fastest-growing and most dangerous radical ideology in the world today, which is responsible for so much violence in so many countries.

There is growing evidence that Islamists are pushing their agenda here in Canada, with the support of money from the Middle East.

One of the main critics of Islamism in Canada is our star candidate, Salim Mansur. He too wrote a book about multiculturalism a few years ago.

In it, he described official multiculturalism, sponsored by the state, supported by taxpayers, and enforced by human rights commissions acting as the thought-police, as a lie.

A lie based on the idea that all cultures are equal. A lie destructive of our Western liberal democratic heritage, traditions, and values based on individual rights and freedoms.

The biggest peddler of this lie in Canada is of course Justin Trudeau.

He simply doesn’t care about Canada’s culture and identity, heritage and traditions. He sees himself as a citizen of the world.

That’s why he described Canada as the first post-national state, with no core identity. This fits with his support for globalism, and for the United Nations.

I’m not exaggerating when I accuse the Liberals of putting Canada on a road to destruction. Because if we allow Trudeau to implement his globalist vision, Canada will eventually cease to exist as a distinct nation.

We have to reverse this trend if we want to make sure that we, and our children, still have a country that is like the Canada we know, with its values and its unique identity intact, 25 years from now.

The downsides of mass immigration

Let me move on to other arguments.

The main argument that is presented in favour of immigration is the economic one. Immigrants bring their skills, their entrepreneurship, and their dreams. They fill manpower shortages, as our society ages and our workforce declines. This makes our society richer, younger and more dynamic.

This is certainly true, but only to some extent. It depends on the kind of immigrants we welcome.

Immigration is actually very costly for governments. There’s all the government programs to manage it of course. But a larger cost is the fact that immigrants pay on average about half as much in income taxes as other Canadians but absorb nearly the same value of government services.

A study from 2011 put the cost to taxpayers at roughly $6,000 per immigrant. For a total annual cost of somewhere between $16 billion and $24 billion.

$24 billion is a lot of money. Eight years later, and with a much higher level of immigration, the costs can only have gone up.

One reason for this is that immigrants generally have lower wages than non-immigrants.

But another key reason is that the proportion of immigrants who come to Canada because they have the right skills, based on their education, work experience and knowledge of an official language, is not very high. And it has been dropping under the Liberal government.

Right now, only about 55% of newcomers are selected through the economic program. The rest come through the family reunification program or are refugees.

But even that 55% does not tell the whole story. It consists of the principal applicants and their immediate family. If you remove the spouses and children, only 26% of all the people who come to Canada every year actually fulfill our economic needs.

If you are not grasping the significance of this, let’s look at it from the other side. It means that three quarters of all immigrants who come to Canada are dependents, do not have the right qualifications that we need, may not master any of our official languages, or are too young or too old to work.

These people do not contribute very much or at all to our economy. But they cost a lot in terms of social services.

Canadians are a compassionate people and we should be. But at what cost? Are Canadians happy to subsidize 74% of our current immigrants?

If the main objective of Canada’s immigration policy is to fulfill the economic needs of our country, it’s an obvious failure.

And it won’t be fixed by simply increasing the total number of immigrants. That will cost us even more.

Another justification we often hear for an increase in immigration levels is that we are an aging society, and we need immigrants to reverse this trend.

However, demographic studies have shown that this is a myth. Newcomers are a bit younger on average than Canadians, but not enough to have a noticeable impact on the rate of aging.

The Liberal government is making matters worse by increasing the number of parents and grand-parents accepted under the family reunification program every year, from 5000 to 20,000.

This, of course, is an easy way for them to pander and buy votes among immigrant communities. But again, it defeats the purpose.

I can understand why immigrants would want to bring the rest of their extended family here, including older ones who will benefit from our health care system.

But we cannot be the welfare state of the planet. Canadians know that government funding is limited and we already fall short of caring for our own. We have long waiting lists for surgeries, and so many other problems to solve here first.

Another economic downside of mass immigration is that it inflates housing prices in our big cities. More than 41% of all immigrants to Canada settle in Toronto and Vancouver, which have some of the least affordable housing among big cities in the world.

There are other reasons for these sky-high prices of course, including zoning laws and monetary policy. But lower immigration would bring demand down and allow more Canadians in these cities to afford a house.

All these economic arguments in favour of reducing immigration levels are rarely discussed. It’s time to break the taboo and have a real debate.

Refugees

Finally, there is the issue of refugees.

There are horrible cases of wars, persecution and human rights violations in the world. With the result that there are about 25 million refugees.

It’s absolutely tragic. I encourage Canadians to do what they can to help through private organizations. But at the level of government, my duty, my moral obligation, must be to first help those in need among our own population.

Justin Trudeau however sees himself as some kind of world minister already, managing a file in a world government. And so in 2018, Canada welcomed more resettled refugees than any other country. More than the United States, a country with ten times our population. And as many as all of the European Union.

In addition to this, we have had to deal with tens of thousands of asylum seekers illegally crossing our borders over the past three years.

Accepting all these refugees will cost Canadian taxpayers billions of dollars.

The UN’s Global Compact for Migration, which the Liberal government signed last year, aims to normalize this kind of situation, and to make it easier for millions of people to move to Canada and other Western democracies.

What is going on is exactly what you would expect. The Liberals haven’t lost control of our borders. They are deliberately attempting to erase it.

Policies

Given all these considerations and principles, here are the policies that the People’s Party of Canada proposes to implement if it forms the next government.

First: immigration levels.

Canadian society cannot successfully integrate 350,000 immigrants and refugees every year, as the Liberals, and probably also the Conservatives, are planning to do.

This is equivalent to adding one Nova Scotia to our population every three years, or one Manitoba every four years. And pack the majority of them in a few crowded cities.

Support for immigration will continue to diminish, and social tensions are likely to rise, if we continue doing this. We need to slow down.

A People’s Party government will substantially lower the total number of immigrants and refugees we accept every year, from 350,000 to between 100,000 and 150,000, depending on economic and other circumstances.

Second: Multiculturalism.

In a free society, immigrants have the right to cherish and maintain their cultural heritage. It should be clear that the People’s Party will never support any government measure to force them to abandon it. But that doesn’t mean we have any obligation to help them preserve it either, with government programs and taxpayers’ money.

When they decide to move from their country of origin to this one, immigrants must be willing to leave some of their life behind, and be prepared to become full members of their new country.

The vast majority of Canadians rightly expect them to learn about our history and culture, master one of our official languages, and adopt widely shared Canadian values.

Official multiculturalism is based on the false idea that there is no unified Canadian society, no distinct Canadian culture, to integrate into. That we are just a collection of tribes living side by side.

We are all Canadians. We must focus on what unites us as Canadians, not what divides us.

A People’s Party government will repeal the Multiculturalism Act and eliminate all funding to promote multiculturalism. We will instead emphasize the integration of immigrants into Canadian society.

Third: Focusing on economic immigrants.

If the main economic benefit that we derive from welcoming immigrants is that they answer the needs of sectors where there is a scarcity of manpower with specialized skills, then we should make sure we have a much higher proportion of skilled immigrants who can fulfil this need.

It’s irresponsible to have only 26% of all immigrants and refugees in this category. If we reduce the total number of immigrants, but double that proportion to 50%, there will be no reduction in the absolute number of economic immigrants compared with previous years.

A People’s Party government will reform the point system and the various programs to ensure that our immigration policy is focused on accepting a larger proportion of economic immigrants with the right skills.

We will accept fewer resettled refugees and will considerably limit the number of immigrants accepted under the family reunification program, including abolishing the program for parents and grand-parents.

And we will change the law to make birth tourism illegal. Canada is not a shopping centre, where any foreigner expecting a child can come and buy a citizenship or future education and employment opportunities for their children, without following the proper immigration channels.

Fourth: Selecting immigrants who share our values.

The safety and cohesion of our society depends on citizens accepting the basic Canadian values and societal norms I mentioned earlier.

A People’s Party government will ensure that every person hoping to immigrate to Canada undergoes a face-to-face interview and answers a series of specific questions to assess the extent to which they align with these values and societal norms.

We will increase resources for CSIS, the RCMP and Canadian Immigration and Citizenship to do these interviews and thorough background checks on all classes of immigrants. With fewer immigrants to process, there will be more resources available to achieve this.

Immigrants whose responses or background checks demonstrate that they do not share mainstream Canadian values will be rejected.

Finally, on the issue of refugees.

A People’s Party government will take every measure necessary, in partnership with our American neighbours, to stop the flow of illegal migrants at the border.

We will declare the whole border an official port of entry and send back to the US anyone trying to enter illegally.

Instead of making it easier to enter Canada and helping these illegal refugees, as the Liberal government has done, we will make it more difficult, by fencing off the areas where it takes place such as Roxham Road in Quebec.

For resettled refugees, in addition to accepting a smaller number, we will rely on private sponsorships instead of having the government pay for all the costs of resettling these refugees in Canada.

We will stop our reliance on the United Nations for refugee selection. And we will give priority to refugees belonging to persecuted groups who have nowhere to go in neighbouring countries.

For example, Christians, Yazidis, and members of other minority religions in majority Muslim countries. Members of the Ahmadi community, and other Muslims in these countries who are persecuted because they reject political Islam and adhere to Western values. And members of sexual minorities.

And finally, we will take Canada out of the UN’s Global Compact for Migration. Our immigration laws will be made in Canada, for the interest of Canadians.

Conclusion

This has been a long speech. So my conclusion will be brief.

The primary aim of Canada’s immigration policy should be to economically benefit Canadians and Canada as a whole.

It should not aim to forcibly change the cultural character and social fabric of Canada, as radical proponents of multiculturalism want. Canada has its own distinct identity, worth preserving, among the nations of the world.

It should not put excessive financial burdens on the shoulder of Canadians in the pursuit of humanitarian goals. Canadians are generous, but it is not our responsibility to solve all the world’s problems.

And it should not be used as a political tool to pander and buy votes among immigrant communities. This kind of ethnic politics practiced by all the other parties will lead to even more social division.

We are all Canadians. The People’s Party will unite Canadians with an immigration policy designed to benefit all of us.

Thank you.

Immigration Is Killing Ontario’s Small Towns

Posted on by

Immigration Is Killing Ontario’s Small Towns

by Maggie McDougal

Elora, Ontario
Historic town: Elora, Ont. is one of many towns targeted for a massive influx of immigrants looking for “quieter” places to “raise their children” as the children of Canadian residents are forced out due to rising housing prices and businesses committed to hiring foreign immigrants only.

Iwas on my way to work one morning around the beginning of March, when I decided to stop at MacDonald’s for a morning coffee, one of the few luxuries I can afford, despite having trained for four different fields of work throughout my life in Ontario, Canada. At my current job, I am by far the highest educated worker, with vast training, including a graduate degree in the chief public service that the organization provides: human services. Yet, I am employed on contract at the lowliest clerical job, with the poorest status, and wages and without benefit, not even vacation time (only money in lieu of vacation). That in it-self should raise the eyebrows of the handful of critical thinkers that still exist in this nation.

Immigration is a working class issue, make no mistake about it. If you were waiting for the wealthy to intervene and to try and stop immigration, that isn’t going to happen — ever!

At this point, the immigration tap doesn’t need to only be turned off, we actually need restoration efforts to make up for the losses sustained by Canadians proper — restorative justice.

I waited for my coffee, which was being poured by a long-time Canadian such as myself. Likely he was forced to take any job in order to continue to live in this town, like citizens in so many other small Ontario towns, which have suffered for decades as the jobs left for nations where products could be manufactured at a lower cost to create a product of poor quality to sell back to people like us.

I reached for the newspaper rack, and ended up with a newspaper in my hand, which I have learned through the application of my critical thinking skills to distrust and despise. Yet, it was in my hand, so I read the headline, “The Future Of Ontario’s Small Towns Is Immigration.”1

I was served my coffee and I gulped it down, not paying attention to it, but rather the headline and burning my mouth and throat in the process. The pain was no comparison to the raw feeling of acid burning in my gut as I continued to read the front page newspaper story, which the low wage workers serving me would likely never even get a chance to glance at throughout their stress-full day at work.

Imagine having watched your entire community being fed a steady diet of raw potatoes and turnips for thirty years, and in order to survive you’ve swallowed it, but not because you liked it, but because you had been led to believe it was the only way to survive. And then one day you discovered that you could have been eating steak and lobster, and it was all a grand farce, because the joke was on you and the rest of the folks in your towns and communities all across the nation.

Reading that Toronto Star article, on that freezing cold morning in March, I recognized that “we” the working class had all been made complete fools, not once but again and again and again, as lie after lie was unveiled for us by grinning political shysters.

Immigrants resent me for being Canadian

I am an environmental refugee, having twice fled the shameless and unnecessary destruction of the green spaces in and around central Ontario, in the name of atrocious and unnecessary development projects which include row after endless row of cookie cutter housing for immigrants. At forty-five years of age, I have watched the replacement of Canada’s host population with nothing but wall to wall immigrants. I have experienced deep hate and racism from immigrants in the workplace and in the communities I have lived in. The hate they direct at me is called “internalized oppression.” They resent me for being Canadian. It has been vicious abuse from them and nobody is interested in hearing my story, and seems like nobody ever will.

I came to live in the community my husband spent much of his youth in, and which is a two and half hour drive from Toronto. One would think that I had travelled far enough to escape, but not so. In the decade since coming here, we have watched the community emptied out of working class Canadians, many of whom were in tears at having to return to urban centres such as Toronto and surrounding communities. Like all of us, they had to go where they could find work. As if that wasn’t enough, to further aid the destruction of the community the provincial government has mandated the closure of small hospitals in all small Ontario communities, as they move to a centralized model for healthcare. They have also closed high schools and junior schools to ensure real estate opportunities for the new, wealthy immigrants.

There is one common theme for people who live in Central Ontario, north of Toronto, “Good luck finding a job, eh!”

Most of those who are able to live here and find work have to accept that their children will have to leave and come home only when they have a long weekend. Most of these children would love to work and live in the communities they were raised in, and have deep roots in, but they can’t.

With no jobs for us, where are the jobs coming from for the immigrants?

Apparently, while this exodus continues all around us, the Toronto Star, for some reason is assured that the future of our small towns across this province is immigration. The logical question, which media outlets such as the Toronto Star, and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) will never pose is: How can the future of Ontario’s small towns be immigrants, when there is no future here for Canadians?

I want to jump to the heart of the matter: Where are the jobs coming from for the immigrants when there are no jobs here for Canadian citizens and their children?

One has to accept that assertions such as this one, made by mainstream media are steeped in knowledge of a strategy at-work, one which includes many sectors of society working together to ensure high employment rates amongst immigrants and not citizens, no matter how educated. Such a duplicitous strategy is often referred to as a conspiracy or elites breathing together for their own gain.

Immigration portal of Leeds & Grenville

As a human services professional I have become aware over the past decade of the agencies that are funded by the government to find immigrants jobs, and which provide incentives to their staff to do so. The Local Immigration Partnerships which exist in every single community in Ontario and which are working with private enterprises and local social service agencies, to ensure new immigrants find jobs, but not us. We are not the future, we are ghosts walking around remembering amongst ourselves about what was, but which we cannot celebrate any longer, for fear of being labelled and losing what few options for employment we still have.

There is a vast network of immigration lobbyists that have lined their pockets with gold, as they lead Canadians to believe that we must remove the shirts from our backs, and leave our home communities, in order to make way for the immigrants, lest we be accused of our lack of humanity.

Last week, CBC Radio aired a live phone in program called Disappearing Life Lines and it exposed some of the different stories not being heard from small town Ontario. It basically spelled out for us the death of Ontario’s small towns. The guests on the program cited the unnecessary closure of high schools and hospitals in towns such as the one I live in, as a final death knell and guarantee of population decline. Yet, the pro-immigrant CBC Presenter made no connection between this and the Toronto Star‘s assertion that the future of Ontario’s small towns is immigrants. If these towns are brimming with so much opportunity, then how come Canadian citizens have been so hard pressed to find any? Why would they leave if there are opportunities?

First they let our jobs disappear by allowing industry to flee to the Third World, causing a dramatic decline in the population of Ontario’s small towns. They could have simply applied protectionist policies to protect Canadians from greedy corporations — of course they couldn’t do that because protectionism is a taboo word in globalist circles. Then they over-populated central Ontario through immigration, and now they are going to re-populate our beloved small towns with wealthy immigrants, when the Canadians who long to live in these towns can’t afford to stick around!

One immigrant is quoted in the Toronto Star article as stating, “A smaller community makes the transition easier. There is no hustle and bustle, and people … It would have taken me much longer to settle down in a big city like Toronto,” said the 35-year-old from Bangalore, a metropolitan city in India with a population of nine million.

“There are more opportunities and less competition here. The salaries are not as high as in the big cities, but the cost of living is lower,” said Joseph, who works as an operation and planning co-ordinator at an area trucking company.

Joseph states exactly what we Canadians like about our small towns, and the way we would like to keep them, but there is no opportunity in these communities for most Canadians, so exactly how does he come to find it?

The article goes on to state: According to the latest census, populations fell between 2011 and 2016 in one in four of Canada’s 723 municipalities with 5,000 people or above, with those further from urban centres more likely to show a decline in population than those close to a larger city.

Neither the Toronto Star nor the CBC haven’t wasted their time interviewing Canadian Citizens who have been forced to leave small towns for the urban centres, because we don’t ever want to get near the heart of the matter, lest some truth be revealed to the general public.

Finally, the new measures instituted by Ontario politicians to bring the price of houses down in Toronto, brought UP the price of houses in small communities across the rest of the province, which in my mind is more evidence of a larger strategy at work, not to control an out of control market, but rather to spread the “out of control” aspect of it to the impoverished working poor who are clinging to life in small town Ontario.

Employment agencies do not advocate for Canadians and place them into jobs

In the town I live in, a Syrian refugee family was given a handsome house to live in, while a homeless guy spent the last two winters in a cardboard hovel tucked into a corner of the local cemetery. He is a nice man, whom I am sure could be placed in to do a good job, but that’s not ever going to happen, is it? Government funded employment agencies are not in the business advocating for Canadians and placing them into jobs. They are only good at collecting government money and engaging in nonsense such as the resume critique.

One million wealthy immigrants are on the way and will be enjoying the good life here in Canada by 2020. Millions of Canadians will most definitely be displaced by them including in the area of jobs, housing, business opportunities, political opportunities … the list goes on and on. The best part is that the Trudeau government has made it clear that the one million are not headed to Canada’s major cities. Oh no, these immigrants are going to be provided with INCENTIVES to settle in our small towns. The same small towns the host population can only dream of living in and which most Canadians have to wait until they retire to live in.

I have lost everything, at this point, I don’t feel there is a future for me and what is left of my family. I missed the chance to have children because I wasn’t able to afford to and now there is nothing but hollowness inside of me. I don’t know what I will do with the rest of my life, but it is very sad to think of the future. I don’t know what I risk by writing this letter, or what they will do to me, but I just had to write it.

There is an alarm belling ringing, and it is warning us about the future, and it is time to listen to it.


[1] The article I read on the front page of the Toronto Star was titled, “The Future Of Ontario’s Small Towns Is Immigration,” but the version I found online is titled: “For Small Towns On The Bay Of Quinte, The Future Is Immigration.” Maybe there was a virulent reaction to the original title, or at least we can hope.