Canada Before 1970: Growing A Population Without Replacing It

In Western societies, there seems to be the mentality that populations must always grow. Furthermore, large numbers of people from very different backgrounds should be brought in to make this happen. At least, this is what public figures and media heads say, regardless of what the citizens want.

That being said, this “diversity” push is something that has only existed for the last 50 years or so. Before that, there was a focus on maintaining the demographic makeup. Let’s take a look.

A good starting place would be to see how many people are coming to Canada every year. Although this doesn’t tell the entire story, the numbers of Permanent Residents is a good place to start.

YEAR PERMANENT RESIDENTS % OF POPULATION
1852 29,307
1853 29,464
1854 37,263
1855 25,296
1856 22,544
1857 33,854
1858 12,339
1859 6,300
1860 6,276 0.2
1861 13,589 0.4
1862 18,294 0.6
1863 21,000 0.6
1864 24,779 0.7
1865 18,958 0.6
1866 11,427 0.3
1867 10,666 0.3
1868 12,765 0.4
1869 18,630 0.5
1870 24,706 0.7
1871 27,773 0.8
1872 36,578 1.0
1873 50,050 1.3
1874 39,373 1.0
1875 27,382 0.7
1876 25,633 0.6
1877 27,082 0.7
1878 29,807 0.7
1879 40,492 1.0
1880 38,505 0.9
1881 47,991 1.1
1882 112,458 2.6
1883 133,624 3.0
1884 103,824 2.3
1885 76,169 1.7
1886 69,152 1.5
1887 84,526 1.8
1888 88,766 1.9
1889 91,600 1.9
1890 75,067 1.6
1891 82,165 1.7
1892 30,996 0.6
1893 29,633 0.6
1894 20,829 0.4
1895 18,790 0.4
1896 16,835 0.3
1897 21,716 0.4
1898 31,900 0.6
1899 44,543 0.9
1900 41,681 0.8
1901 55,747 1.0
1902 89,102 1.6
1903 138,660 2.5
1904 131,252 2.3
1905 141,465 2.4
1906 211,653 5.3
1907 272,409 4.2
1908 143,326 2.2
1909 173,694 2.6
1910 286,839 4.1
1911 331,288 4.6
1912 375,756 5.1
1913 400,870 5.3
1914 150,484 1.9
1915 33,665 0.4
1916 55,914 0.7
1917 72,910 0.9
1918 41,845 0.5
1919 107,698 1.3
1920 138,824 1.6
1921 91,728 1.0
1922 64,224 0.7
1923 133,729 1.5
1924 124,164 1.4
1925 84,907 0.9
1926 135,982 1.4
1927 158,886 1.6
1928 166,783 1.7
1929 164,993 1.6
1930 104,806 1.0
1931 27,530 0.3
1932 20,591 0.2
1933 14,382 0.1
1934 12,476 0.1
1935 11,277 0.1
1936 11,643 0.1
1937 15,101 0.1
1938 17,244 0.2
1939 16,994 0.2
1940 11,324 0.1
1941 9,329 0.1
1942 7,576 0.1
1943 8,504 0.1
1944 12,801 0.1
1945 22,722 0.2
1946 71,719 0.6
1947 64,127 0.5
1948 125,414 1.0
1949 95,217 0.7
1950 73,912 0.5
1951 194,391 1.4
1952 164,498 1.1
1953 168,868 1.1
1954 154,227 1.0
1955 109,946 0.7
1956 164,857 1.0
1957 282,164 1.7
1958 124,851 0.7
1959 106,928 0.6
1960 104,111 0.6
1961 71,698 0.4
1962 74,856 0.4
1963 93,151 0.5
1964 112,606 0.6
1965 146,758 0.7
1966 194,743 1.0
1967 222,876 1.1
1968 183,974 0.9
1969 164,531 0.8
1970 147,713 0.7
1971 121,900 0.6
1972 122,006 0.6
1973 184,200 0.8
1974 218,465 1.0
1975 187,881 0.8
1976 149,429 0.6
1977 114,914 0.5
1978 86,313 0.4
1979 112,093 0.5
1980 43,137 0.6
1981 128,641 0.5
1982 121,175 0.5
1983 89,186 0.4
1984 88,272 0.3
1985 84,347 0.3
1986 99,355 0.4
1987 152,079 0.6
1988 161,588 0.6
1989 191,555 0.7
1990 86,452 0.6
1991 232,806 0.8
1992 254,790 0.9
1993 256,641 0.9
1994 224,385 0.8
1995 212,865 0.7
1996 226,071 0.8
1997 216,035 0.7
1998 174,195 0.6
1999 189,951 0.6
2000 227,456 0.7
2001 250,637 0.8
2002 229,048 0.7
2003 221,349 0.7
2004 235,823 0.7
2005 262,242 0.8
2006 251,640 0.8
2007 236,753 0.7
2008 247,247 0.7
2009 252,172 0.7
2010 280,689 0.8
2011 248,748 0.7
2012 257,887 0.7

Source for this chart is that data provided on page 3. Also, data for some earlier years is provided by Statistics Canada.

Even though large numbers of people have been coming to Canada for a long time, there was still a lot of social cohesion. This is because migrants were primarily selected from countries with a very similar makeup and composition.

Historically, the numeric predominance of those of British and French origin was unquestionable. Before the great wave of European migration to Canada between 1896 and the beginning of the First World War, Canada’s population was indeed mainly made up of those of British and French origin. For example, the 1871 Census of Canada shows that 60 percent of Canada’s 3.5 million people were of British origin, and 30 percent French origin; Europeans not of British nor French origin accounted for only 7 percent of Canada’s population in 1871 as well as in 1881 (Kalbach, 1990: 24). This demographic composition basically persisted until the turn of the century.

The wave of immigration to Canada prior to the First World War began to increase the stock of Europeans not from British or French origin. Between 1896 and 1914, over three million immigrants came to Canada. When the supply of emigrants from England and Western Europe was dwindling, Canada began accepting people from Eastern and Southern Europe, including Poles, Ukrainians, Hutterites and Doukhobors. In the period between the two world wars from 1915 to 1945, another two million immigrants came to Canada (Statistics Canada, 1983: A125-163).

The census data of Canada indicate that Canadians of European origin other than British and French increased from 8.5 percent of the total population in 1901 to 14.2 percent in 1921, and to 17.8 percent in 1941 (Kalbach, 1990: 24). In contrast, Canadians of British origin declined in relative terms from 57 percent of the total population in 1901 to 50 percent in 1941, but those of French origin remained at around 30 percent of the total population in 1901 and in 1941. In short, if the composition of Canadians of European origin other than British and French is used as an indicator of ethnic plurality, then there was an increase in diversity between 1901 and 1941. However, Canada’s population in 1941, as in 1871, was made up of people mainly of European origin, which accounted for 98 percent of the total population in 1941 and in 1871, despite the fact that the population had increased from 3.5 million people in 1871 to 11.5 million people in 1941.

The Government of Canada openly admits that traditionally, the bulk of immigration came from Europe. More specifically, it came from the West, from places like Britain and France. (See archive).

And what was the result of this? Very little in terms of enclaves or balkanization. The population grew, but without the genocidal “multicultural” push that goes around now. This type of system focused on cultural compatibility, something that would be unthinkable today.

TIME PERIOD REGION # OF MIGRANTS % OF TOTAL
1968-1972 Europe 387,670 52.6
United States 114,615 15.5
Central/South America 24,863 3.4
Carribean 53,100 7.2
Asia 112,584 15.3
Africa 22,014 3
Australia 18,656 2.5
Oceania 0 0
Not Stated 3,622 0.5
Total 737,124 100
1973-1977 Europe 324,131 37.9
United States 102,141 11.9
Central/South America 63,598 7.4
Asia 216,837 25.4
Africa 42,748 5
Australia 10,870 1.3
Oceania 7,937 0.9
Not Stated 0 0
Total 854,889 100
1978-1982 Europe 196,546 33.2
United States 49,407 8.4
Central/South America 36,262 6.1
Carribean 39,362 6.7
Asia 236,596 40
Africa 21,946 3.7
Australia 6,438 1.1
Oceania 4,502 0.8
Not Stated 232 0
Total 591,291 100
1983-1987 Europe 124.344 24.42
United States 36,214 7.1
Central/South America 56,442 11
Carribean 39,079 7.6
Asia 226,326 44.1
Africa 24,027 4.7
Australia 2,774 0.5
Oceania 3,771 0.7
Not Stated 38 0
Total 513,015 100
1988-1992 Europe 237,666 22.6
United States 33,686 3.2
Central/South America 91,061 8.7
Carribean 59,911 5.7
Asia 545,410 51.9
Africa 70,744 6.7
Australia 4,771 0.5
Oceania 8,534 0.8
Not Stated 0 0
Total 1,051,783 100
1993-1995 Europe 126,509 18.3
United States 19,433 2.8
Central/South America 39,199 5.7
Carribean 36,599 5.3
Asia 418,016 60.4
Africa 45,255 6.5
Australia 3,476 0.5
Oceania 3,791 0.5
Not Stated 0 0
Total 692,198 100

The Government’s own data tables show just how rapidly the source countries have been shifting. While immigration to Canada used to mainly be from Europe, it’s now overwhelmingly Asian. Looking at the Annual Immigration Reports to Parliament in recent years, this trend has only gotten worse.

Now, were the voters ever asked if they wanted to become minorities?

Article I
The Contracting Parties confirm that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.

Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Article III
The following acts shall be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) Attempt to commit genocide;
(e) Complicity in genocide.

Article IV
Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.

A Government doesn’t have to round up and execute its citizens in order to commit genocide. Another way is to flood the country with large numbers of very different people, with the purpose and intent of diluting and erasing the host population. Instead of having a national identity, society becomes “multicultural”.

One caveat of course: the people coming in are encouraged to maintain their own identities, customs, traditions, and language. The populations being replaced are expected to endlessly accommodate that.

If a larger population is needed, it’s entirely possible to grow it organically. However, modern efforts across the West can best be explained as attempting to erase groups entirely.

A little self promotion: Borderless Canada is still available online. Learn about what’s been going on in this country. Virtually all major issues can be directly tied to immigration and border security, and it’s not racist or bigoted to discuss these hard truths.

(1) https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2013/cic/Ci1-8-2012-eng.pdf
(2) https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/98-310-x/2011003/fig/fig3_1-2-eng.cfm
(3) https://justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/rp02_8-dr02_8/t2.html
(4) https://archive.ph/QkUeu
(5) https://justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/csj-sjc/jsp-sjp/rp02_8-dr02_8/p2.html
(6) https://archive.ph/PzcO3
(7) https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/genocide-convention.shtml
(8) https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/documents/atrocity-crimes/Doc.1_Convention%20on%20the%20Prevention%20and%20Punishment%20of%20the%20Crime%20of%20Genocide.pdf
(9) UN Convention On Punishing And Preventing Genocide

Demographic Makeup Of People Entering Canada Illegally 2017-2021

Now for something that isn’t covered much by mainstream (or alternative) media. Who exactly is coming into Canada illegally, in between official border ports of entry? What are the numbers? Fortunately, the Immigration and Refugee Board has at least some information to share.

RANK COUNTRY INTAKE ACC REJ ABAN WD&O RESOLVED PENDING
n/a Total 60,544 25,802 18,010 1,059 3,404 49,000 11,544
1 Nigeria 16,374 4,739 7,279 189 1,785 13,992 2,382
2 Haiti 9,350 2,210 4,595 323 517 7,645 1,705
3 Colombia 3,565 1,629 486 57 117 2,289 1,276
4 Pakistan 2,406 1,184 670 21 115 1,990 416
5 DR Congo 2,165 479 416 36 145 1,076 1,089
6 Turkey 2,011 1,812 43 <20 <20 1,901 110
7 Sudan 1,694 1,372 123 25 77 1,597 97
8 Angola 1,486 420 381 <20 <20 865 621
9 Eritrea 1,224 1,004 <20 <20 105 1,178 46
10 U.S.A. 1,203 24 754 57 160 995 208
n/a All Others 19,066 10,929 3,205 308 305 15,472 3,594

ACC = Accepted
REJ = Rejected
ABAN = Abandoned
WD&O = Withdrawn And Other

**The IRB lists some totals as <20, and they claim that this is done for privacy reasons. The logic seems to be that if there were only a few who crossed, it would be easier to identify them.

The above totals are from February 2017 to December​​ 2021. The IRB claims that it didn’t have access to such information prior to this.

Isn’t this lovely, that the bulk of the people ILLEGALLY entering Canada are from the 3rd World? But let’s be fair, we don’t have nearly enough rocket scientists and brain surgeons here already. Keep in mind, these people have entered the United States — at some point — and decided to continue onwards. They’ve already passed on at least one safe country, one that gets hundreds of thousands of applications per year.

And again, this could be stopped very quickly. However, politicians (of all stripes) actively work against the interests of their own citizens.

(1) https://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/statistics/Pages/irregular-border-crossers-countries.aspx
(2) https://archive.ph/x4T1i
(3) Wayback Machine

(Now Available) Borderless Canada: Replacement Migration & Fifth Columnists Operating Within

With all the content given out, occasionally, an ad needs to be run. And this is another book. The 4th one, Borderless Canada, is now available both in paperback and as an e-book. This helps support the costs of running the website, and ensures the information reaches a wider audience.

Borderless Canada: The many hidden costs of the mass migration policies, including economic, social, and cultural. This couldn’t have happened without many subversive interests pushing it. Many know that politicians act as puppets, but not how deep it goes.

Most people aren’t remotely aware of what’s happening on the subjects of borders and immigration. Nor do they grasp the full extent of subversion agents and NGOs working towards these goals. Partly, this is intentional, as politicians and media figures aren’t interested in a fully informed public. You think those subsidies are just a form of charity?

This cannot be explained as simple incompetence or cluelessness. The replacement of the West has long been a deliberate aim.

Also, this isn’t a partisan issue. The bulk of the “right wing” in Canadian politics supports this destruction, as do many of their voters. They just insist it be done legally, and with economic benefits.

Of course, earlier publications are still available.

Twenty Twenty-One: A condensed form of this research into the fake pandemic in Canada. Hard details and stats provided throughout, refuting virtually all major Government claims. Spoiler, there isn’t a “pandemic” at all.

Inside The Ontario Science Table: The sequel focuses on the “independent experts” calling for Ford to keep the Province locked down, and pushing and pandemic narrative. The ties to the University of Toronto and big pharma run very deep.

The Green Bankers Cartel: There’s a lot more than meets the eye to the climate change movement. Far from the image of being grassroots, the financial sector sees it as opportunity. Useful idiots support it anyway, without realizing that they advocate for policies that ensure their own enslavement. We are told “The debate is over” as a means of stifling legitimate concerns and inquiries.

All of these are available online either as ebooks, or paperback.

IMM #10(C): Review Of 2021 Annual Immigration Report To Parliament

Despite there supposedly being a global pandemic in 2020, the population replacement continues in Canada. However, it had to be slowed down (this year) to at least make things plausible. The mask is a nice touch: we need a constant reminder about this health crisis, otherwise we’d forget.

1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada

Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.

CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention.
CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan.
CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement).
CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974.
CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.

Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.

2. Annual Immigration Reports To Parliament

2004.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2005.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2006.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2007.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2008.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2009.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2010.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2011.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2012.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2013.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2014.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2015.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2016.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2017.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2018.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2019.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2020.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament
2021.annual.immigration.report.to.parliament

The information in this article, and similar ones, comes directly from information provided by the Government of Canada in their annual reports. These numbers, while likely not truly accurate, are at least a good starting point.

3. Immigration Largely Controlled By Provinces

Concurrent Powers of Legislation respecting Agriculture, etc.
.
95 In each Province the Legislature may make Laws in relation to Agriculture in the Province, and to Immigration into the Province; and it is hereby declared that the Parliament of Canada may from Time to Time make Laws in relation to Agriculture in all or any of the Provinces, and to Immigration into all or any of the Provinces; and any Law of the Legislature of a Province relative to Agriculture or to Immigration shall have effect in and for the Province as long and as far only as it is not repugnant to any Act of the Parliament of Canada.

Contrary to popular belief, immigration is largely set by the Provinces. This is laid out in Section 95 of the Constitution. While Ottawa may impose laws from time to time, the understanding seems to be that the Premiers will be mostly the decision makers. While it’s understandable to get angry at Trudeau, he’s far from the only deserving target.

Additionally, there are talks underway to launch a Municipal Nominee Program, which will allow cities to directly bring people in, and to sponsor their bids to become permanent residents. It’s unclear at this point how large it will ultimately be.

4. Key Highlights From The Year 2020

AS stated before, it’s not entirely clear how many people are staying after some kind of temporary visa, v.s. how many leave. We also don’t have hard data on the “inadmissibles” who don’t leave, and on the visitors who overstay. Consequently, take this as a rough estimate:

184,606 new permanent residents
-51,101 temps transitioning to PR
=133,505 new permanent residents brought into Canada

Temporaries Brought Into Canada
256,740 (Student Visas Issued)
+84,609 (Temporary Foreign Worker Program)
+242,130 (International Mobility Program)
= 583,452 (in the temporary classes)

2,044 “inadmissibles” allowed under Rule 24(1) of IRPA
115 “inadmissibles” allowed under Rule 25.2(1) of IRPA

648,789 eTAs (electronic travel authorizations)
257,330 TRV (temporary resident visas)

How many people remained in Canada? Who knows?

The Government brags about expediting work permits for “essential workers”, even as Canada experienced record high unemployment. They even created a program for “refugees” to get accelerated permanent residence if they work in health care settings. This comes at a time when Canadian workers are being let go for refusing the experimental shots.

Foreign students (under a rule change) became exempt from the 20 hour/week work limit that their visas typically imposed. Supposedly, this was to enable them to provide essential services. Again, this seems screwed up given how many Canadians were forced out of work.

Foreign students also received emergency benefits designed for Canadians, although the full extent of this is not yet published.

In January 2020, the G.T.A./IIRC started their program to give out permanent residencies to 500 people — and their families — who had overstayed their initial visas. This could be interpreted as an amnesty-for-illegals program, and we’ll have to see how much it expands.

IIRC also extended the Interim Federal Health Program, or IFHP, which is a plan that also covers so-called asylum claimants. This applies also to people who’ve illegally entered from the United States. Some 14% of claimants in 2020 had entered the country illegally, primarily via Roxham Road.

There’s also an initiative underway to bring in large numbers of people from Hong Kong, who claim to be fleeing persecution. Interesting, as Canada doesn’t seem to be run much better these days.

The Rainbow Refugee Assistance Program is supposed to grow from 15 to 50. This is to resettle people alleging they are persecuted because of their questionable behaviours.

Canada also will allow people (women primarily) fleeing domestic violence to get a temporary permit, with a the possibility of becoming a permanent resident. There isn’t any information given about whether the abuser will be deported.

There is, of course, the usual GBA+ nonsense in the report.

5. Continued Population Replacement

(Page 18 of the 2004 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 24 of the 2005 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 18, 19 of the 2006 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 19, 20 of the 2007 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 21, 22 of the 2008 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 16 of the 2009 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 14 of the 2010 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 18 of the 2011 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 15 of the 2012 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 19 of the 2013 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 16 of the 2014 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 16 of the 2015 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 10 of the 2016 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 14 of the 2017 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 28 of the 2018 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 36 of the 2019 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 33 of the 2020 Annual Report to Parliament)

(Page 36 of the 2021 Annual Report to Parliament)

Ever get the sense that people are European descent are being replaced? It’s no coincidence. The plan for decades has been to bring in large numbers of people from the 3rd World (mostly Asia and Africa), to remake society.

As usual, the top 3 are: (a) India; (b) China; and (c) The Philippines. No surprise that the enclaves in Canada are growing. More data from the recent census will be released later this year, and the results shouldn’t be a shock to anyone.

6. Temporary Visitors To Canada

TRV = Temporary Resident Visa
eTA = Electronic Travel Authorization

YEAR TRV Issued eTA Issued Totals
2016 1,347,898 2,605,077 3,952,975
2017 1,617,222 4,109,918 5,570,197
2018 1,898,324 4,125,909 6,024,233
2019 1,696,871 4,077,471 5,774,342
2020 257,330 648,789 906,119

Travelers entering Canada dropped by 85% in 2020, compared to 2019, according to the Government’s data. Now, if we could just do that to visa holders, and make it permanent.

7. More “Inadmissibles” Let Into Canada

Broadly speaking, there are two provisions within IRPA, the Immigrant and Refugee Protection Act, that allow people who were previously deemed inadmissible to Canada to be given Temporary Resident Permits anyway. Here are the totals from the Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration. Note: the first one listed only started in 2010.

Those allowed in under Rule 25.1(2) of IRPA

YEAR TRP Issued Cumulative
2010 17 17
2011 53 70
2012 53 123
2013 280 403
2014 385 788
2015 1,063 1,851
2016 596 2,447
2017 555 3002
2018 669 3,671
2019 527 4,198
2020 115 4,313

From 2010 to 2020, a total of 4,313 people who were otherwise inadmissible to Canada were allowed in anyway under Rule 25.1(2) of IRPA. This is the category that Global News previously reported on. As for the other one, under Rule 24(1) of IRPA, Global News leaves that out:

Year Permits Cumulative
2002 12,630 12,630
2003 12,069 24,699
2004 13,598 38,297
2005 13,970 52,267
2006 13,412 65,679
2007 13,244 78,923
2008 12,821 91,744
2009 15,640 107,384
2010 12,452 119,836
2011 11,526 131,362
2012 13,564 144,926
2013 13,115 158,041
2014 10,624 168,665
2015 10,333 178,998
2016 10,568 189,566
2017 9,221 198,787
2018 7,132 205,919
2019 6,080 211,999
2020 2,044 214,043

From 2002 to 2020 (inclusive), a total of 214,043 people previously deemed inadmissible to Canada were given Temporary Resident Permits anyway. This has almost certainly been going on for a lot longer, but is as far back as the reports go. Now let’s consider the reasons these people are initially refused entry.

SEC = Security (espionage, subversion, terrorism)
HRV = Human or International Rights Violations
CRIM = Criminal
S.CRIM = Serious Criminal
NC = Non Compliance
MR = Misrepresentation

YEAR Total SEC HRV Crim S.Crim NC MR
2002 12,630 ? ? ? ? ? ?
2003 12,069 17 25 5,530 869 4,855 39
2004 13,598 12 12 7,096 953 4,981 20
2005 13,970 27 15 7,917 981 4,635 21
2006 13,412 29 20 7,421 982 4,387 18
2007 13,244 25 8 7,539 977 4,109 14
2008 12,821 73 18 7,108 898 4,170 17
2009 15,640 32 23 6,619 880 7,512 10
2010 12,452 86 24 6,451 907 4,423 36
2011 11,526 37 14 6,227 899 3,932 11
2012 13,564 20 15 7,014 888 5,206 18
2013 13,115 17 10 6,816 843 5,135 8
2014 10,624 12 2 5,807 716 3,895 14
2015 10,333 3 3 5,305 578 4,315 28
2016 10,568 8 4 4,509 534 2,788 20
2017 9,221 10 5 5,035 591 3,412 121
2018 7,132 5 3 4,132 559 2,299 131
2019 6,080 2 0 3,202 546 2,139 175
2020 2,044 2 1 666 131 1,000 37

In 2020, only 2,044 people barred were allowed in under Rule 24(1) of IRPA, which is the lowest it’s been since this legislation was enacted. Nonetheless, ZERO of these people should be coming in.

Interestingly, even though the Government has wide discretion to let people into the country under 24(1) and 25.1(2) of IRPA, it chose not to use its discretion to prohibit anyone from entering.

Even if people are excluded from Canada — for a variety of valid reasons — often they will still be given temporary entrance into Canada. Will they ever leave? Who knows?

8. Students & Temporary Workers

There are also some other categories. Below are the “temporary” categories listed in the Annual Immigration Reports to Parliament. Now, let’s take a look at all of it in context. Data is compiled from the 2004 to 2021 Annual Reports (which cover the years of 2003 to 2020).

Year Stu TFWP IMP Total
2003 61,293 82,151 143,444

2004 56,536 90,668 147,204

2005 57,476 99,146 156,622

2006 61,703 112,658 174,361

2007 64,636 165,198 229,834

2008 79,509 192,519 272,028

2009 85,140 178,478 263,618

2010 96,157 182,276 278,433

2011 98,383 190,842 289,225

2012 104,810 213,573 318,383

2013 111,865 221,310 333,175

2014 127,698 95,086 197,924 420,078

2015 219,143 73,016 175,967 468,126

2016 265,111 78,402 207,829 551,342

2017 317,328 78,788 224,033 620,149

2018 356,876 84,229 255,034 696,139

2019 402,427 98,310 306,797 807,534

2020 256,740 84,609 242,130 583,452

Stu = Student Visa
TFWP = Temporary Foreign Worker Program
IMP = International Mobility Program

Even during a “global pandemic” there were still 583,452 international student and temporary worker visas issued. This does represent a drop of about 28% from the 807,534 that came in 2019. Still, this is a staggering large number.

There are, of course, a number of pathways to remain in Canada longer and/or transition in permanent residence. Let’s not pretend that they’re all leaving afterwards. In fact, recent changes have allowed students to remain in their home countries while collecting time towards a PR designation here.

9. Illegals Entering Via U.S./Canada Border

Although the report focused primarily on LEGAL immigration into Canada, the illegal brand is still worth talking about, since so few actually do. The United Nations gives detailed instructions and guidance on how to go about circumventing the border. The result, quite predictably, is that people keep trying to cross over.

YEAR: 2019
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 871 1 16 1 888
February 800 1 6 2 808
March 967 13 22 0 1,002
April 1,206 15 25 0 1,246
May 1,149 27 20 0 1,196
June 1,536 26 5 0 1,567
July 1,835 23 15 1 1,874
August 1,712 26 22 2 1,762
September 1,706 19 17 0 1,737
October 1,595 18 8 1 1,622
November 1,118 9 21 0 1,148
December 1,646 2 5 2 1,653
TOTAL 16,136 180 182 9 16,503
YEAR: 2020
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 1,086 7 7 0 1,100
February 976 2 2 0 980
March 930 7 18 0 955
April 1 0 5 0 6
May 17 0 4 0 21
June 28 1 3 1 33
July 29 2 17 0 48
August 15 3 0 0 18
September 30 4 7 0 41
October 27 0 4 0 31
November 24 0 8 0 32
December 26 2 8 0 36
TOTAL 3,189 28 84 1 3,302
YEAR: 2021
MONTH QUEBEC MANITOBA British Columbia OTHERS TOTAL
January 28 1 10 0 39
February 39 0 1 0 40
March 29 5 2 0 36
April 29 2 2 0 33
May 12 3 13 0 28
June 11 0 6 0 17
July 28 5 6 0 39
August 63 2 11 0 76
September 150 0 19 0 169
October 96 0 17 0 113
November 832 1 12 0 845
December 2,778 0 33 0 2,811
TOTAL 4,095 19 132 0 4,246

Although not listed in the Annual Immigration Report to Parliament, this is worth a mention. Illegal crossings from the U.S. did drop quite drastically in the Spring of 2020. Of course, the Government had to play along and make this “pandemic” seem real. In recent months, however, it seems the numbers are creeping back up again.

Keep in mind, the text of the Safe Third Country Agreement requires both Canada and the U.S. to consult with the UNHCR on refugees, and to get input from NGOs. We haven’t had meaningful borders in a long time.

As a reminder: the Trudeau Government scrapped the DCO, or Designated Country of Origin, back in 2019. This would allow for claims from “safe” countries to be denied much more quickly. However, with things the way they are, it seems nowhere is really safe. While the issue was very mainstream from 2017 to 2019, it seems to have disappeared.

In June 2020, a new policy kicked in to finally track who is leaving the country. Even more strange that a Trudeau would bring it in when he did. Probably to make it harder for people fleeing his regime.

Overall, the replacement agenda slowed down in 2020, but it’s about to be kicked back into overdrive. Not a good situation to be in.

Emergencies Act Invoked: Bank Accounts To Be Frozen, Double Standard For Protesting

Expect your bank accounts to be at risk if you hold the wrong opinions, or have contributed to the wrong causes. Any pretense of due process has gone out the window.

Many of us wondered when the shoe would drop, and it finally has. Ottawa has invoked the Emergencies Act, and is not even pretending to care about the public’s concerns anymore.

Perhaps the most chilling is from Chrystia Freeland. These “convoys” have provided an excuse for the Federal Government to encroach even further into the personal and financial lives of Canadians. Moreover, banks are now required to comply with some measures, and strongly encouraged on others.

In case you find Freeland too cringey to listen to, here’s a summary of the measures that were announced regarding banking and finance.

  • Anti-money laundering/terrorist financing laws to include crowd-funding platforms
  • Payment processers to be responsible as well
  • Digital assets (and cryptocurrencies) subjected to disclosure laws
  • All crowd funding platforms must register with FinTrac Canada
  • All “large and suspicious” transactions must be reported
  • Reports used as intelligence gathering for law enforcement
  • Legislation will be brought to make these measures permanent
  • Financial institutions can cease services (personal or corporate) based on suspicions
  • Financial institutions “urged to review relationships” with anyone involved in blockades
  • Financial institutions urged to report suspicions to RCMP or CSIS
  • Accounts can be SUSPENDED OR FROZEN without a court order
  • Banks freezing accounts protected from civil liability if done in good faith
  • Federal Government has new authority to share “information” with financial institutions
  • Corporate bank accounts to be frozen if trucks are used in blockades
  • Insurance will be suspended if trucks are used in blockades

Not only is there much more leeway given to freeze or suspend services based on suspicions, but Ottawa intends to “provide information” to financial institutions, and ask them to review relationships. Reading between the lines a bit, it comes across as an attempt to bankrupt, or at least greatly inconvenience.

While there is supposedly Parliamentary oversight, it doesn’t help when everyone is sworn to secrecy. Therefore, the public will likely never know what’s really going on.

Orders and regulations
.
8 (1) While a declaration of a public welfare emergency is in effect, the Governor in Council may make such orders or regulations with respect to the following matters as the Governor in Council believes, on reasonable grounds, are necessary for dealing with the emergency:
.
(a) the regulation or prohibition of travel to, from or within any specified area, where necessary for the protection of the health or safety of individuals;
.
(b) the evacuation of persons and the removal of personal property from any specified area and the making of arrangements for the adequate care and protection of the persons and property;
.
(c) the requisition, use or disposition of property;
.
(d) the authorization of or direction to any person, or any person of a class of persons, to render essential services of a type that that person, or a person of that class, is competent to provide and the provision of reasonable compensation in respect of services so rendered;
.
(e) the regulation of the distribution and availability of essential goods, services and resources;
.
(f) the authorization and making of emergency payments;
.
(g) the establishment of emergency shelters and hospitals;
.
(h) the assessment of damage to any works or undertakings and the repair, replacement or restoration thereof;
.
(i) the assessment of damage to the environment and the elimination or alleviation of the damage; and
.
(j) the imposition
(i) on summary conviction, of a fine not exceeding five hundred dollars or imprisonment not exceeding six months or both that fine and imprisonment, or
(ii) on indictment, of a fine not exceeding five thousand dollars or imprisonment not exceeding five years or both that fine and imprisonment,
.
for contravention of any order or regulation made under this section.

Most interesting: a violation under this order can result in a criminal charge and up to 5 years in jail. Perhaps those isolation centres will come in handy after all.

And by “directing essential services” the Government can effectively override free will and choice by declaring their trades or fields to be essential. Also, say goodbye to property rights, as this Act allows for property to be seized or disposed of.

Liability
Marginal note: Protection from personal liability
.
47 (1) No action or other proceeding for damages lies or shall be instituted against a Minister, servant or agent of the Crown, including any person providing services pursuant to an order or regulation made under subsection 8(1), 19(1), 30(1) or 40(1), for or in respect of any thing done or omitted to be done, or purported to be done or omitted to be done, in good faith under any of Parts I to IV or any proclamation, order or regulation issued or made thereunder.

What a shocker: people are immune from civil liability for the damages they cause under this Act, as long as they claim it’s being done in good faith.

David Lametti, (the Attorney General), tries to convince the public that this is a temporary and limited measure. Keep in mind, medical martial law has already been in effect for 2 years. So it seems disingenuous that this is the real aim. Expect it to be renewed many times.

Things are about to get ugly.
This trucker protest is being used as an excuse to further erode rights and freedoms.

Trudeau, Freeland and Lametti weren’t kidding. They absolutely did order that assets must be frozen, and business relations cut off, for people not following this dictate. Moreover, no business can be sued as long as this was done “in good faith.

As for using public health as a means to control the population, check out the earlier pieces on Health Canada and PHAC. These entities are never what they appear to be, and few bother to check deep enough into it.

If things weren’t bad enough, there are now double standards as to who can legally participate in so-called illegal gathering. Certain classes of people are allowed to protest, while others aren’t

Prohibition — public assembly
2 (1) A person must not participate in a public assembly that may reasonably be expected to lead to a breach of the peace by:
(a) the serious disruption of the movement of persons or goods or the serious interference with trade;
(b) the interference with the functioning of critical infrastructure; or
(c) the support of the threat or use of acts of serious violence against persons or property.
.
Minor
(2) A person must not cause a person under the age of eighteen years to participate in an assembly referred to in subsection (1).

Prohibition — entry to Canada — foreign national
3 (1) A foreign national must not enter Canada with the intent to participate in or facilitate an assembly referred to in subsection 2(1).
Exemption
(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to
(a) a person registered as an Indian under the Indian Act;
(b) a person who has been recognized as a Convention refugee or a person in similar circumstances to those of a Convention refugee within the meaning of subsection 146(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations who is issued a permanent resident visa under subsection 139(1) of those regulations;
(c) a person who has been issued a temporary resident permit within the meaning of subsection 24(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and who seeks to enter Canada as a protected temporary resident under subsection 151.1(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations;
(d) a person who seeks to enter Canada for the purpose of making a claim for refugee protection;
(e) a protected person;
(f) a person or any person in a class of persons whose presence in Canada, as determined by the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration or the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, is in the national interest

Now, many people will not be familiar with IRPA, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Those rules give foreigners all kinds of rights, even for people in the country illegally. Here are those new exemptions that are referred to in the Canada Gazette:

Temporary resident permit
.
24 (1) A foreign national who, in the opinion of an officer, is inadmissible or does not meet the requirements of this Act becomes a temporary resident if an officer is of the opinion that it is justified in the circumstances and issues a temporary resident permit, which may be cancelled at any time.

Humanitarian and compassionate considerations — request of foreign national
.
25 (1) Subject to subsection (1.2), the Minister must, on request of a foreign national in Canada who applies for permanent resident status and who is inadmissible — other than under section 34, 35 or 37 — or who does not meet the requirements of this Act, and may, on request of a foreign national outside Canada — other than a foreign national who is inadmissible under section 34, 35 or 37 — who applies for a permanent resident visa, examine the circumstances concerning the foreign national and may grant the foreign national permanent resident status or an exemption from any applicable criteria or obligations of this Act if the Minister is of the opinion that it is justified by humanitarian and compassionate considerations relating to the foreign national, taking into account the best interests of a child directly affected.

Section 24(1) of IRPA allows for people who have been deemed inadmissible to Canada, for many reasons, to enter the country anyway. Reasons listed include criminal offenses, serious criminal offenses, misrepresentation, and human rights violations.

As for part (f) in the recent order, that references Section 25(1) of IRPA, which allows for threats to national security to enter — and be given permanent residence, if a Minister deems it to be in the public interest. So people banned from Canada (initially), and threats to national security, are allowed to take part in gatherings that would otherwise be considered illegal. Interesting.

Protected people” also seems to encompass family members when dealing with those entering Canada for refugee or other related reasons

The regulations against protesting also don’t apply to Indians, or to people coming to Canada to apply to be a refugee. Perhaps blockading railroad tracks is okay, depending on the skin colour.

Foreign nationals supposedly aren’t supposed to enter for the purpose of illegal public assemblies…. except if you ignore the exceptions.

Freezing bank accounts is allegedly to cut down on violence and terrorist activity. However, terrorists and felons are exempt from the restrictions on gatherings.

So who isn’t protected from being arrested for “unlawful gatherings”? Actual Canadians. Threats to national security, and “inadmissibles” let in anyway are allowed to get away with it. So are people coming to Canada to claim asylum — even if it’s from the United States.

Canadians can have their assets frozen, and have their free speech rights limited. However, there are several categories of people who are subjected to different rules. Some emergency.

Is there Parliamentary oversight? In theory, yes, but it doesn’t help when everyone involved is sworn to secrecy. Even if we did, all parties are basically on the same page.

(1) https://twitter.com/i/events/1492674034143690753
(2) https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/E-4.5/FullText.html
(3) https://www.fintrac-canafe.gc.ca/intro-eng
(4) https://canucklaw.ca/canada-emergencies-act-tyranny-no-property-rights-indemnification-publication-exemption-parliamentary-secrecy/
(5) https://canucklaw.ca/health-canada-initially-created-for-population-control-measures/
(6) https://canucklaw.ca/cv-62g-public-health-agency-of-canada-created-as-branch-of-who-bill
(7) https://www.canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p2/2022/2022-02-15-x1/pdf/g2-156×1.pdf#page=5
(8) Emergencies Act Protesting Regulations
(9) https://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/I-2.5/page-4.html#h-274473
(10) https://orders-in-council.canada.ca/results.php?lang=en
(11) https://orders-in-council.canada.ca/results.php?lang=en
(12) https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/corporate/publications-manuals/operational-bulletins-manuals/permanent-residence/protected-persons/stage-1-eligibility.html
(13) https://canucklaw.ca/full-scale-of-inadmissibles-getting-residency-permits-what-global

Ontario Divisional Court Rules Requirement For Teachers To Be Proficient In Math Is Unconstitutional

There is a group that’s asking for handouts in order to water down the standards required to teach in Ontario. Unfortunately, it seems that they’ve had success.

The Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council is an NGO that claims to advocate on behalf of (potential) teachers looking to get certified in Ontario. The group states that it was created largely in response to the new requirement that new teachers have a certain level of proficiency prior to getting to teach students. The online begging started quickly.

Is this really in the best interests of students? Is eliminating a pretty reasonable requirement in the name of “diversity and equity” the way to go about this? It’s pretty alarming that (apparently) large numbers of people can obtain and undergraduate degree, and a bachelor of education, and have a limited grasp of mathematics.

This also highlights a serious flaw with the legal system in Canada. NGOs can commence lawsuits claiming they have a “public interest standing”, and try to get the laws changed to suit their political ideologies. Providing the papers are worded properly, this is routinely down. Courts often grant such standing.

The Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council was founded in early October [2019] largely in response to the Math Proficiency test which was made a mandatory requirement for the qualification of new teachers. According to the OCT, “On August 20, 2019 two regulations were filed: Regulation 271/19, Proficiency in Mathematics, under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, and Regulation 272/19, Objects of the Office under the Education Quality and Accountability Office Act, 1996. As a result certification requirements were updated to ensure that Ontario teachers are prepared for the modern demands of a changing society and increasingly dynamic learning environment.”

We believe that this test is not equitable, fair, justified or backed by data. The EQAO office has been rushed into creating a massive test in just months. In the past, EQAO has taken 3 years to roll out new tests. There is no definitive evidence which suggests that new teachers will become more effective math instructors as a result of this test, nor that students will perform better in math as a result of this. The last government-implemented test for teachers cost taxpayers $22 million and the results were mostly abandoned. This new legislation is costing tens-of-millions of dollars for a test which decides the futures of thousands of Ontarians. This new legislation comes to teacher candidates who have spent tens of thousands of dollars on their education and carefully planned the steps they would need to take to reach their goals. These thousands of jobs deeply affect the economy and future of our great province. Read our Email Templates on the Newsletter page to see our questions and arguments regarding this test. Help us, the people, even if our government will not.

It’s interesting that this group claims there’s no evidence that such requirements help. From the looks of their members, most probably couldn’t pass an introductory statistics course.

In February 2020, there was a podcast for “Education Is A Right“. Apparently, the right to a QUALITY education isn’t that important. If this really was about the students, there would be efforts to attract, retain, and upgrade the best teachers available. Instead, this group takes the opposite approach.

This isn’t something that anyone should be proud of. The Ontario Divisional Court essentially says that pandering to the anti-white diversity crowd is more important than providing quality education. Quite simply, whites passing at too high a rate implies systemic racism.

Parents would be up in arms if they were made aware of this. That said, it seems doubtful that there has been any publicity within those circles. At least the College of Teachers had enough sense to reject this idiocy.

One would think that this group would want to do what they can to ensure people of all groups are able to pass basic proficiency testing in math. However, that’s not the way they go. Turning to the ruling:

Significant Disparities in Success Rates
[32] The EQAO collected demographic information about Field Test takers through the voluntary demographic questionnaire which revealed significant disparities in success rates based on test-takers’ race, language and disabilities.

[33] In particular, the Field Test demographic data showed that non-White candidates writing in French were only successful 55 percent of the time, whereas White candidates writing in French were successful 84 percent of the time. Candidates who identified as belonging to non-White ethno-racial groups (such as African, Indigenous, Latino and Middle Eastern) failed at a significantly higher rate than White candidates. Candidates who indicated they had a cognitive disability failed the Field Test at over twice the rate of candidates without a disability.

Apparently there are differences in the average cognitive abilities between groups. The solution is obviously to reduce (or eliminate) standards, to ensure there is no difference.

Also, let’s not mince words. This isn’t just an effort to dumb down the teaching profession. This is an attempt to reduce the number of whites, and replace them with non-whites.

What Is the Appropriate Remedy?
[161] A declaration will issue that the Mathematics Proficiency Test and the legislative provisions that create it infringe s. 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the infringement cannot be justified under s. 1. Specifically, the Proficiency in Mathematics regulation (O. Reg 271/19), as amended, and s. 18(1)(c) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 are of no force or effect.

[162] A declaration will issue that the Ontario College of Teachers shall grant certification to teacher candidates who have not passed the Mathematics Proficiency Test (or shall grant full certification in the case of teacher candidates whose certification is conditional on passing the Mathematics Proficiency Test) but have otherwise met all other certification requirements.

Conclusion
[167] The application for judicial review is granted. The following relief is ordered:
(a) The Mathematics Proficiency Test violates s. 15(1) of the Charter, is not justified under s. 1, and is unconstitutional;
.
(b) O. Reg. 271/19, Proficiency in Mathematics, as amended, under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 is unconstitutional and of no force and effect;
.
(c) Paragraph s. 18(1)(c) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, S.O. 1996, c.12 is unconstitutional and of no force or effect;
.
(d) The Ontario College of Teachers shall grant certification to teacher candidates who have not passed the Mathematics Proficiency Test (or shall grant full certification in the case of teacher candidates whose certification is conditional on passing the Mathematics Proficiency Test) but who have otherwise met all other certification requirements; and
.
(e) The Respondent shall pay the Applicants $90,000 in costs of the application.

Basically, the Ontario Divisional Court ruled that it was discriminatory in order to force all teachers to have a certain mathematical background.

And on top of it, a $90,000 costs award was also handed down. Now, will the donors get a refund for their contributions, or will the group owners just pocket it?

Bella Lewkowicz is a French teacher with Ottawa-Carleton District School Board. The group itself boasts some pretty impressive educational credentials. It’s baffling then why they would work like this to dumb down the teaching profession. Is it guilt? Self-hatred? Or is this some more destructive impulse?

(1) https://www.otcc.ca/
(2) https://www.otcc.ca/get-involved
(3) Home _ Ontario Teacher Candidates’ Council
(4) https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/news/ontario-court-declares-that-the-ontario-math-proficiency-test-is-unconstitutional/
(5) https://twitter.com/OTCC19
(6) https://www.gofundme.com/f/otcc-legal-fund?utm_campaign=p_cp_url&utm_medium=os&utm_source=customer
(7) https://twitter.com/otffeo/status/1471940285210968070
(8) https://www.otffeo.on.ca/en/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/12/2021-12-16-OTCC-v-Ontario-FINAL-signed-by-all.pdf
(9) Court Ruling Divisional Court 2021.12.16 OTCC v Ontario FINAL signed by all
(10) http://edisaright.ca/episode-31-student-teachers-challenge-new-math-test-in-ontario
(11) https://www.linkedin.com/in/bella-lewkowicz-5232951/