TSCE #10: Does Allowing Illegal Aliens Into Canada Violate International Agreements?

(UN Office on Drugs and Crime)

1. Important Links

(Other articles on trafficking, smuggling, child exploitation)
https://canucklaw.ca/tsce-9-other-accounts-worth-following/

Links On Trafficking/Smuggling
CLICK HERE, for UN Review On Smuggling Migrants.
CLICK HERE, for UN Convention On Transnational Crime.
http://archive.is/q0XqK
CLICK HERE, for UN Protocol Against Human Trafficking.
http://archive.is/cjnJt
CLICK HERE, for UN Opt. Protocol On Rights Of The Child.
http://archive.is/onmrr
CLICK HERE, for UN Global Initiative To Fight Trafficking.
http://archive.is/Fjuv6
CLICK HERE, for UN Protocol To Prevent/Punish Trafficking.
CLICK HERE, for UN Rights Of The Child, Sale, Prostitution, Porn.
http://archive.is/onmrr
CLICK HERE, for Eliminate Worst Forms Of Child Labour.
http://archive.is/OZQM
CLICK HERE, for the Rome Statute, Int’l Criminal Court.
CLICK HERE, for Gov’t Of Canada On Trafficking.
http://archive.is/RQVYA

CLICK HERE, for Washington Times on child abduction for border crossings.

From S3CA Court Case
CLICK HERE, for abuse of Safe Third Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for Prothonotary strikes out Statement of Claim.
CLICK HERE, for Uppity Peasants on the moral arguments.
CLICK HERE, for arguments to appeal S3CA dismissal.
CLICK HERE, for reply submissions in S3CA appeal.
CLICK HERE, for hypocrisy in Toronto/Vancouver cases.
CLICK HERE, for appeal in S3CA challenge dismissed.

2. Context For This Piece

Canada has signed several international treaties, relevant to the prevention of trafficking, smuggling, and other exploitation of people. These agreements include:

  • “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
  • “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
  • “ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”

The purpose, as you can imagine, is for governments around the world to cooperate in preventing these activities from happening. Also, it is to punish those responsible when it does happen. Accordingly, they must be taken seriously.

But what happens when certain governments turn a blind eye to people illegally crossing their borders? What happens when governments enact policies that openly encourage human smuggling and trafficking to occur? Does this not help circumvent the very treaties which are designed to keep vulnerable people safe?

This is a bit of a rhetorical question, but I believe the answers are “yes”. Should make for interesting discussion, especially if this ever gets advanced in court. As outlined in the last article, the appeal of the Prothonotary’s decision was dismissed. This is unjust, considering how big the issue of illegal crossings into Canada is.

3. Link Between Illegal Crossings/Trafficking

More on the research is available in this review. It details the size and scale of smuggling and trafficking, and gives much needed background information on the people who are likely to be involved. The original source is linked here, and well worth a read.

(UN Office on Drugs and Crime)

(There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)

(UN abhors smuggling, but fake refugees get a pass)

2.1 Smuggling of migrants and the concepts of irregular migration and trafficking in persons
2.1.1 Irregular migration
The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.

In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents.

Yes, this has been brought up before, but it is designed to hammer the point home. Smuggling of people across borders is directly connected to the “irregular migration” that occurs at the end. It is the end result of these actions which show no respect for national borders or sovereignty. The UN review is rather blunt on the subject.

2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’”

Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
legitimate and illegitimate sides
. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.

The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.

In some sense, this is quite obvious. Of course smuggling and trafficking are businesses, where the commodity being shipped is the people.

4. Protocol to Prevent, Suppress/Punish Trafficking

The full name of this treaty is the “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. New York, US November 2000”.

Canada is a signatory to this treaty, and as such, should be expected to participate in good faith. Here is the preamble to the treaty, followed by a few Articles contained within.

The States Parlies to this Protocol,
.
Declaring that effective action to prevent and combat trafficking in persons, especially women and children, requires a comprehensive international approach in the countries of origin, transit and destination that includes measures to prevent such trafficking, to punish the traffickers and to protect the victims of such trafficking. including by protecting their internationally recognized human rights,
.
Taking into account the fact that, despite the existence of a variety of international instruments containing rules and practical measures to combat the exploitation of persons, especially women and children, there is no universal instrument that addresses all aspects of trafficking in persons,
.
Concerned that, in the absence of such an instrument, persons who are vulnerable to trafficking will not be sufficiently protected,
Recalling General Assembly resolution 53/111 of 9 December 1998, in which the Assembly decided to establish an open-ended intergovernmental ad hoc committee for the purpose of elaborating a comprehensive international convention against transnational organized crime and of discussing (he elaboration of, inter alia, an internationa.1 instrument addressing trafficking in women and children,
.
Convinced that supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime with an international instrument for the prevention, suppression and punishment of trafficking in persons, especially women and children, will be useful in preventing and combating that crime.
Have agreed as follows:

The goal is pretty straightforward, to create a universal and inclusive agreement on how to combat human trafficking.

The main difference between smuggling and trafficking is one of consent. Smuggled people are willing accomplices, while trafficked people are essentially prisoners. While this treaty specifically refers to trafficked people, the same measures should be taken considered people who are smuggled.

First, you can’t usually tell right away if the person is willing or not.

Second, the nations these people are entering should have some rights.

Article 2
Statement of purpose The purposes of this Protocol are:
(a) To prevent and combat trafficking in persons, paying particular attention to women and children;
(b) To protect and assist the victims of such trafficking, with full respect for their human rights: and
(c) To promote cooperation among States Parties in order to meet those objectives.

Article 11
Border measures
I. Without prejudice to international commitments in relation to the free movement of people, States Parties shall strengthen, to the extent possible, such border controls as may be necessary to prevent and detect trafficking in persons.
2. Each State Party shall adopt legislative or other appropriate measures to prevent, to the extent possible. means of transport operated by commercial carriers from being used in the commission of offences established in accordance with article S of this Protocol.
3. Where appropriate, and without prejudice to applicable international conventions, such measures shall include establishing the obligation of commercial carriers. including any transportation company or the owner or operator of any means of transport, to ascertain that all passengers are in possession of the travel documents required for entry into the receiving State.
4. Each State Party shall take the necessary measures, in accordance with its domestic law, to provide for sanctions in cases of violation of the obligation set forth in paragraph 3 of this article.
5. Each State Party shall consider taking measures that permit, in accordance with its domestic law, the denial of entry or revocation of visas of persons implicated in the commission of offences established in accordance with this Protocol.
6. Without prejudice to article 27 of the Convention. States Parties shall consider strengthening cooperation among border control agencies by, inter alia. establishing and maintaining direct channels of communication.

Our current process of letting the RCMP escort people across the border only to release them a few hours later does the public no good at all. Even if people are being willfully smuggled (as opposed to trafficked against their will), we should not be letting such people enter the country on these terms.

The 2000 agreement Canada signed onto “should” mean something substantive. It shouldn’t allow people to flaunt our laws, with possibly trafficked persons in the group.

5. Rights Of Child Not To Be Exploited

This UN Protocol is called the “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children,
child prostitution and child pornography”.

Considering also that the Convention on the Rights of the Child recognizes the right of the child to be protected from economic exploitation and from performing any work that is likely to be hazardous or to interfere with the child’s education, or to be harmful to the child’s health or physical, mental, spiritual, moral or social development,
.
Gravely concerned at the significant and increasing international traffic in children for the purpose of the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
.
Deeply concerned at the widespread and continuing practice of sex tourism, to which children are especially vulnerable, as it directly promotes the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography,
.
Recognizing that a number of particularly vulnerable groups, including girl children, are at greater risk of sexual exploitation and that girl children are disproportionately represented among the sexually exploited,

Article 9
1. States Parties shall adopt or strengthen, implement and disseminate laws, administrative measures, social policies and programmes to prevent the offences referred to in the present Protocol. Particular attention shall be given to protect children who are especially vulnerable to such practices.
2. States Parties shall promote awareness in the public at large, including children, through information by all appropriate means, education and training, about the preventive measures and harmful effects of the offences referred to in the present Protocol. In fulfilling their obligations under this article, States Parties shall encourage the participation of the community and, in particular, children and child victims, in such information and education and training programmes, including at the international level.
3. States Parties shall take all feasible measures with the aim of ensuring all appropriate assistance to victims of such offences, including their full social reintegration and their full physical and psychological recovery.
4. States Parties shall ensure that all child victims of the offences described in the present Protocol have access to adequate procedures to seek, without discrimination, compensation for damages from those legally responsible.
5. States Parties shall take appropriate measures aimed at effectively prohibiting the production and dissemination of material advertising the offences described in the present Protocol.

Article 10
1. States Parties shall take all necessary steps to strengthen international cooperation by multilateral, regional and bilateral arrangements for the prevention, detection, investigation, prosecution and punishment of those responsible for acts involving the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism. States Parties shall also promote international cooperation and coordination between their authorities, national and international non-governmental organizations and international organizations.
2. States Parties shall promote international cooperation to assist child victims in their physical and psychological recovery, social reintegration and repatriation.
3. States Parties shall promote the strengthening of international cooperation in order to address the root causes, such as poverty and underdevelopment, contributing to the vulnerability of children to the sale of children, child prostitution, child pornography and child sex tourism.
4. States Parties in a position to do so shall provide financial, technical or other assistance through existing multilateral, regional, bilateral or other programmes.

This protocol seems reasonable enough. Making sure that children are not being harmed or exploited is a valuable societal function.

However, when we allow people to enter Canada illegally, and release them into the country soon afterwards, we have no way of knowing what will happen. Our system, which rewards people for deliberately bypassing official border crossings does everyone a disservice.

No decent person wants children to be exploited, sexually or otherwise. But having laws that make it easy to do so ensures that it will happen at some point.

6. Eliminating Worst Child Labour

This international agreement is the “CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROHIBITION AND IMMEDIATE ACTION FOR THE ELIMINATION OF THE WORST FORMS OF CHILD LABOUR ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCE AT ITS EIGHTY-SEVENTH SESSION, GENEVA, 17 JUNE 1999”.

Article 2
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “child” shall apply to all persons under the age of 18.

Article 3
For the purposes of this Convention, the term “the worst forms of child labour” comprises:
(a) all forms of slavery or practices similar to slavery, such as the sale and trafficking of children, debt bondage and serfdom and forced or compulsory labour, including forced or compulsory recruitment of children for use in armed conflict;
(b) the use, procuring or offering of a child for prostitution, for the production of pornography or for pornographic performances;
(c) the use, procuring or offering of a child for illicit activities, in particular for the production and trafficking of drugs as defined in the relevant international treaties;
(d) work which, by its nature or the circumstances in which it is carried out, is likely to harm the health, safety or morals of children.

Article 4
1. The types of work referred to under Article 3(d) shall be determined by national laws or regulations or by the competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, taking into consideration relevant international standards, in particular Paragraphs 3 and 4 of the Worst Forms of Child Labour Recommendation, 1999.
2. The competent authority, after consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned, shall identify where the types of work so determined exist.
3. The list of the types of work determined under paragraph 1 of this Article shall be periodically examined and revised as necessary, in consultation with the organizations of employers and workers concerned.

Article 5
Each Member shall, after consultation with employers’ and workers’ organizations, establish or designate appropriate mechanisms to monitor the implementation of the provisions giving effect to this Convention.

Article 6
1. Each Member shall design and implement programmes of action to eliminate as a priority the worst forms of child labour.
2. Such programmes of action shall be designed and implemented in consultation with relevant government institutions and employers’ and workers’ organizations, taking into consideration the views of other concerned groups as appropriate.

All of these articles are completely reasonable, and admirable goals. However, to repeat from earlier, how do we enforce these things we have committed ourselves to doing if we aren’t willing to properly enforce a border? How can we make sure the children (and adults too) are being let in under the pretenses we are told?

Without taking the time to check thoroughly, how can the RCMP, (and Border Services) ensure that they are not unwitting accomplices to human trafficking or human smuggling?

7. What If People Aren’t Who They Claim?

Canada of course has other international obligations. These listed are just 3 of them related to prevent of people being exploited.

  • “Protocol to Prevent. Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons. Especially Women and Children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime”, in 2000
  • “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography”
  • “ILO Convention 182 concerning the Prohibition and Immediate Action for the Elimination of the Worst forms of Child Labor”

Let’s take a look at what is happening across the U.S./Mexico border: people are abducting children in order to pass as a “family unit” when illegally crossing into the U.S.

The government warned federal judges in 2016 that their attempts to create a catch-and-release policy for illegal immigrant families would lead to children being “abducted” by migrants hoping to pose as families to take advantage.

The court brushed aside those worries and imposed catch-and-release anyway.

Two years later, children are indeed being kidnapped or borrowed by illegal immigrants trying to pose as families, according to Homeland Security numbers, which show the U.S. is on pace for more than 400 such attempts this year. That would be a staggering 900 percent increase over 2017’s total.

This Washington Times article details how adults wanting to illegally cross into the U.S. are actually abducting children to appear as a “family unit”. That’s right, children are being kidnapped to make it easier for others to stay in the United States illegally. An article in May 2019 suggested that 1/3 of “families” crossing were not blood related at all.

Sure, the adults use children to cross the border. What happens to them afterwards?

Is permitting illegal crossings a violation of international agreements? In context, many people who say yes they are.

8. How Diligent Is IRB/CBSA?

This evidence transcript is from a Parliamentary meeting on the illegal crossings going on. Let’s look at a few sections of the testimony.

Spoiler, it’s not very encouraging. 16 month wait times, and it’s based largely on the honour system. Of course, we take people at their word that they, and “their” children, are who they claim to be.


The response team has both operational and adjudicative thrusts. I’d like to underline that this response has not diminished in any way IRB’s ongoing commitment to one of the key objectives of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which is the security of Canadian society. For example, the IRB has a publicly accessible policy that requires that the RPD not accept a refugee claim until CBSA has had a reasonable opportunity to complete its security screening. This policy remains in place for all claims, including those heard through the response team. There are other processes related to security matters that I would be happy to discuss during the question period, if they are of interest.

Since July 1, more than 8,000 claims were referred to the RPD. Before this, we were projecting an intake of 40,000 cases for this fiscal year. The strain on the organization to handle this many people's hearings is enormous, as our capacity to hear cases this fiscal year, following a plan of action for efficiency and internal reallocation of funds, is roughly 2,000 per month, or 24,000 per year. 

Naturally, claimants whose hearings are not brought before a decision-maker of the response team in the next two months will wait to be scheduled like other claimants. Wait times before the <strong>Lacolle arrivals were already at approximately 16 months per person</strong>. Intake in the eastern region, in the month of September alone, was equal to the eastern region's intake for all of 2016.

Mr. Larry Maguire:
What kind of lag time would we see in that?

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
We have a 16-month wait time for our regular stream. But are you asking me about when the basis of claim form will be expected?
That practice notice is just a temporary practice notice. We’re going to wait to see probably until the end of November before we reconsider whether or not we suspend that practice notice in which case it would go back to 15 days.

Mr. Larry Maguire:
How do you keep track of those people in the meantime? Where are they?

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
If you go to our website, it says that you need to submit all the information around tombstone data, like address, and you have to keep us apprised of your changes of address and contact information. If you have counsel or if you have a consultant who is working with you, we need their contact information as well.
We are in contact with them about the scheduling and their claim processing.

Mr. Larry Maguire:
Are either of you aware of any process that CBSA or others would use to make sure they know where all the illegal immigrants that come across are in Canada at all times?

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
Do you mean by that, people who have crossed the border irregularly?

Mr. Larry Maguire:
Yes.

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
You have to ask CBSA but we all keep track of the claimants relative to the information they’ve given us. They are responsible for keeping all of us up to date on their changes of address and where they are in the country, which is how my colleague was able to describe where the secondary migration to other cities has happened.

Mr. Larry Maguire:
When you say “they”, is that information that immigration or CBSA has given you, or is it the individuals themselves?

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
The claimants are responsible for maintaining their files up to date. Like any court procedure, you would always be responsible to that tribunal for your information. These are very official processes with the claimants.

Mr. Larry Maguire:
You were saying there were 8,000 crossings since September 1, or was it July 1?

Ms. Shereen Benzvy Miller:
That’s the number that had been referred to us since July 1, and we don’t keep the statistics about the number of people crossing. We only become seized with the matter when the referral has been by CBSA or IRCC. Our data are always about our caseload, not about the number of people who have interfaced with IRCC or CBSA.


S3CA Appeal Dismissal: Quotes From Ruling

1. Previous Posts

CLICK HERE, for abuse of Safe Third Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for Prothonotary strikes out Statement of Claim.
CLICK HERE, for Uppity Peasants on the moral arguments.
CLICK HERE, for arguments to appeal S3CA dismissal.
CLICK HERE, for reply submissions in S3CA appeal.
CLICK HERE, for hypocrisy in Toronto/Vancouver cases.

2. Quotes From Ruling W/Feedback

Rule 221 is the rule which the original motion to strike was brought. However, the reason for citing the Toronto cases was another part of Rule 221, which prohibits inconsistent pleadings. More on that later

It’s interesting that these allegations are seen as bare assertions, when court protocol dictates that allegations be taken as fact at least in initial pleadings. Despite the abundance of evidence available about illegal crossings, they were considered “personal opinions” by the original Prothonotary.

This summary is actually pretty accurate here.

Okay, this isn’t too bad.

The Justice fails to mention that in the appeal motion there was an evidence affidavit submitted which contained plenty of evidence that the illegal crossings were going on.

Why was this not done initially? Because initial pleadings are not supposed to include evidence. And motions to strike are not allowed to contain evidence. So the appeal motion was the first opportunity to add proof.

And yes these are “discretionary”, meaning that Prothonotaries can essentially do what they like.

Yes, they should be read as generously as possible. This was not done here.

Some real mental gymnastics here. Wanting a secure border is cited, but apparently that doesn’t count for the purposes of asserting a personal interest. Nor is objecting unscreened/unvetted people into the country and posing a potential danger seen as asserting a personal interest.

Obviously, having a secure border benefits a person individually, as well as society as a whole. This is arguing for the sake of arguing.

Not sure what to make of this. The Appeal Justice asserts that providing security for the people is a legitimate state function, and that there is a real person interest in pursuing this.

However, despite having a real and recognized interest in the matter, it apparently doesn’t translate into having standing to bring such. I need to demonstrate how letting unvetted illegals into the country impacts me personally.

The million dollar question here: is protecting Canada’s borders a serious justifiable issue? Most people would probably agree that it is. As for (iii), where else could the matter be brought? If the politicians won’t fix it, then what remedies are available?

“If as the Plaintiff repeatedly asserts”…. Okay, is letting people simply bypass border controls because of the wording NOT a loophole?

Not a serious issue worth the court’s time, apparently.

Interesting how the court both claims:
(a) Material facts were not plead; and
(b) These are personal opinions are bare assertions

Yes, crossing the border illegally to get benefits one is not entitled to is unjust enrichment.

However, nice strawman. The “it’s not about money” line referred to stating this matter was not brought for personal enrichment. it was not that there was not money at stake paying for these fake refugees. This is being taken completely out of context.

This was addressed in a previous post. Currently, there are 3 cases in the Toronto Branch of Federal Court. These cases involve people trying to overturn the Safe 3rd Country Agreement altogether. It seems absurd that the Government can tell a Toronto Court that the S3CA is necessary, but tell a Vancouver Court that there is no need to close any loopholes.

There are the 3 cases.
They can be found online.
And yes, these files were cited in the appeal motion.

MOHAMMAD MAJD MAHER HOMSI ET AL v. MCI ET AL
Court File: #IMM-775-17

NEDIRA JEMAL MUSTEFA v. MIRC ET AL
Court File: #IMM-2229-17

THE CANADIAN COUNCIL FOR REFUGEES ET AL v. MIRC ET AL
Court File: #IMM-2977-17

Yet, Prothonotaries have broad discretion to rule things “opinion” even before evidence is allowed to be heard. The Court can simply “choose” to not hear certain matters, no matter how meritorious.

3. So, What Happens Now?

This ruling by Justice Crampton is nonsensical, and not something that can be ignored.

Guess the next step is Federal Court of Appeals.

What’s Really In U.S. Defense Bill S.1790

1. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for Senate Bill S1790, signed Dec 21, 2019.
http://archive.is/81Hbp
CLICK HERE, for the PDF version.

2. Context For This Article

Donald Trump campaigned to become U.S. President in 2015 and 2016. He ran on an openly “America FIRST” platform. That sounded great, but is he living up to that promise?

Well, importing a replacement work force to put your own people out of their jobs isn’t really “America first”. However, it does provide lots of cheap labour, driving down wages.

That aside, what about defense spending? Donald Trump’s recent defense spending bill may provide some insight into how (if at all) that pledge is being kept.

3. Section 214: Affirmative Action Edu Research

SEC. 214. RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES FOR HISTORICALLY BLACK COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES AND MINORITY-SERVING INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION.
Section 2362 of title 10, United States Code, is amended—
(1) by redesignating subsections (d) and (e) as subsections (e) and (f), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection
(c) the following new subsection: ‘‘
(d) INCENTIVES.—The Secretary of Defense may develop incentives to encourage research and educational collaborations between covered educational institutions and other institutions of higher education.’’.

Focusing on pandering to a group, instead of choosing the best people. Affirmative action is a failed concept, and we should be honest about it. Also see section 262 for mandating a study about it.

4. Section 223: Climate Change Policies

SEC. 223. DIRECT AIR CAPTURE AND BLUE CARBON REMOVAL TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM.
(a) PROGRAM REQUIRED.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of Homeland Security, the Secretary of Energy, and the heads of such other Federal agencies as the Secretary of Defense considers appropriate, shall carry out a program on research, development, testing, evaluation, study, and demonstration of technologies related to blue carbon capture and direct air capture. (2) PROGRAM GOALS.—The goals of the program established under paragraph (1) are as follows:
(A) To develop technologies that capture carbon dioxide from seawater and the air to turn such carbon dioxide into clean fuels to enhance fuel and energy security.
(B) To develop and demonstrate technologies that capture carbon dioxide from seawater and the air to reuse such carbon dioxide to create products for military uses.
(C) To develop direct air capture technologies for use—
(i) at military installations or facilities of the Department of Defense; or
(ii) in modes of transportation by the Navy or the Coast Guard.

Spoiler, but Carbon Dioxide is not pollution.

5. Section 229: Racial/Gender Diversity

SEC. 229. DIVERSIFICATION OF THE RESEARCH AND ENGINEERING WORKFORCE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE.
(a) ASSESSMENT REQUIRED.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Under Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering and in consultation with the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, shall conduct an assessment of critical skillsets required across, and the diversity of, the research and engineering workforce of the Department of Defense, including the science and technology reinvention laboratories, to support emerging and future warfighter technologies.
(2) ELEMENTS.—The assessment required by paragraph
(1) shall include analysis of the following:
(A) The percentage of women and minorities employed in the research and engineering workforce of the Department of Defense as of the date of the assessment.
(B) Of the individuals hired into the research and engineering workforce of the Department in the five years preceding the date of the assessment, the percentage of such individuals who are women and minorities

Who cares about the melanin and chromosomes of the engineers involved? Simply hire the best and most qualified people to begin with. There shouldn’t be any such considerations.

6. Section 529: Strategy For More Diversity

SEC. 529. STRATEGIC PLAN FOR DIVERSITY AND INCLUSION.
(a) PLAN REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Defense shall design and implement a five-year strategic plan for diversity and inclusion in the Department of Defense.
(b) ELEMENTS.—The strategic plan under this section—
(1) shall incorporate existing efforts to promote diversity and inclusion within the Department; and
(2) may not conflict with the objectives of the 2018 National Military Strategy.
(c) DEADLINE.—The Secretary shall implement the strategic plan under this section not later than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Whatever happened to simply selecting qualified people?

7. Section 540I: Race & Gender Crime Stats

SEC. 540I. ASSESSMENT OF RACIAL, ETHNIC, AND GENDER DISPARITIES IN THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Defense shall provide for the carrying out of the activities described in subsections (b) and (c) in order to improve the ability of the Department of Defense to detect and address racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in the military justice system.
(b) SECRETARY OF DEFENSE AND RELATED ACTIVITIES.—The activities described in this subsection are the following, to be commenced or carried out (as applicable) by not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act:
(1) For each court-martial conducted by an Armed Force after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Defense shall require the head of the Armed Force concerned—
(A) to record the race, ethnicity, and gender of the victim and the accused, and such other demographic information about the victim and the accused as the Secretary considers appropriate;
(B) to include data based on the information described in subparagraph (A) in the annual military justice reports of the Armed Force.

Here’s a spoiler: 13% do 50%.
That’s according to the FBI.
Probably a true principle here as well.

8. Section 1123: Criminal Record Disclosure

Sure, let’s remove the mandatory advance disclosure about criminal records.

9. Section 1205: Gender Perspectives Req.

SEC. 1205. GENDER PERSPECTIVES AND PARTICIPATION BY WOMEN IN SECURITY COOPERATION ACTIVITIES.
Consistent with the Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 (Public Law 115–68), the Secretary of Defense, in coordination with the Secretary of State, should seek to incorporate gender perspectives and participation by women in security cooperation activities to the maximum extent practicable.

At least Trudeau is open that he promotes this sort of thing. Here, it is slipped into a defense bill that is thousands of pages long.

10. Section 1215: Special Visa Reporting Req.

SEC. 1215. SPECIAL IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAM REPORTING REQUIREMENT.
(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of the Department of State shall submit a report, which may contain a classified annex, to—
(1) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Foreign Relations, and the Committee on Armed Services of the Senate; and
(2) the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives.
(b) CONTENTS.—The report submitted under subsection
(a) shall evaluate the obstacles to effective protection of Afghan and Iraqi allies through the special immigrant visa programs and suggestions for improvements in future programs, including information relating to—
(1) the hiring of locally employed staff and contractors;
(2) documenting the identity and employment of locally employed staff and contractors of the United States Government, including the possibility of establishing a central database of employees of the United States Government and its contractors;
(3) the protection and safety of employees of locally employed staff and contractors;
(4) means of expediting processing at all stages of the process for applicants, including consideration of reducing required forms; (5) appropriate staffing levels for expedited processing domestically and abroad;
(6) the effect of uncertainty of visa availability on visa processing;
(7) the cost and availability of medical examinations; and
(8) means to reduce delays in interagency processing and security checks.

Serious question: will there be a pathway to citizenship for these visa holders?

11. Section 1219: Extending Afghan Visas

SEC. 1219. MODIFICATION AND EXTENSION OF THE AFGHAN SPECIAL IMMIGRANT VISA PROGRAM.
(a) PRINCIPAL ALIENS.—Subclause
(I) of section 602(b)(2)(A)(ii) of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is amended to read as follows: ‘‘(I) by, or on behalf of, the United States Government; or’’.
(b) EXTENSION OF AFGHAN SPECIAL IMMIGRANT PROGRAM.— Section 602(b)(3)(F) of the Afghan Allies Protection Act of 2009 (8 U.S.C. 1101 note) is amended—
(1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘2015, 2016, AND 2017’’ and inserting ‘‘2015 THROUGH 2020’’;
(2) in the matter preceding clause
(i), by striking ‘‘18,500’’ and inserting ‘‘22,500’’;
(3) in clause (i), by striking ‘‘December 31, 2020’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2021’’; and
(4) in clause (ii), by striking ‘‘December 31, 2020’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2021’’.

Interesting. This defense spending bill includes extending visas for Afghans, and issuing more of them. One might think this would be an immigration matter.

12. Section 1260I: Huawei Not Entirely Banned

SEC. 1260I. LIMITATION ON REMOVAL OF HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO. LTD. FROM ENTITY LIST OF BUREAU OF INDUSTRY AND SECURITY. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of Commerce may not remove Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. or any of its affiliates (in this section collectively referred to as ‘‘Huawei’’) from the entity list unless and until the Secretary certifies to the appropriate congressional committees that—
(1) Huawei has sufficiently resolved or settled the charges that were the basis for the addition of Huawei to the entity list in a manner that is consistent with the standards for the removal of an entity from the entity list under the Export Administration Regulations;
(2) Huawei has sufficiently resolved or settled any other charges that Huawei violated sanctions imposed by the United States;
(3) regulations have been implemented that sufficiently restrict exporting to, and importing from, the United States items that would pose a national security threat to telecommunications systems in the United States; and
(4) the Department of Commerce has mitigated, to the maximum extent possible, other threats to the national security of the United States posed by Huawei.

Why not just ban them outright? You do know that China uses it to spy on you and gather intel. Business interests should not override national security concerns.

13. Section 1749: Ban On Confederate Names

SEC. 1749. PROHIBITION ON NAMES RELATED TO THE CONFEDERACY.
(a) PROHIBITION ON NAMES RELATED TO THE CONFEDERACY.— In naming a new asset or renaming an existing asset, the Secretary of Defense or the Secretary of a military department may not give a name to an asset that refers to, or includes a term referring to, the Confederate States of America (commonly referred to as the ‘‘Confederacy’’), including any name referring to—
(1) a person who served or held leadership within the Confederacy; or
(2) a Confederate battlefield victory.
(b) ASSET DEFINED.—In this section, the term ‘‘asset’’ includes any base, installation, facility, aircraft, ship, equipment, or any other property owned or controlled by the Department of Defense or a military department.
(c) SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Nothing in this section may be construed as requiring a Secretary concerned to initiate a review of previously named assets.

Way to erase a part of American history.

14. Section 5321: Climate Change Concerns

SEC. 5321. ESTABLISHMENT OF CLIMATE SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL.
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—Title I of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new section: ‘‘SEC. 120. CLIMATE SECURITY ADVISORY COUNCIL. ‘‘
(a) ESTABLISHMENT.—The Director of National Intelligence shall establish a Climate Security Advisory Council for the purpose of— ‘‘
(1) assisting intelligence analysts of various elements of the intelligence community with respect to analysis of climate security and its impact on the areas of focus of such analysts; ‘‘
(2) facilitating coordination between the elements of the intelligence community and elements of the Federal Government that are not elements of the intelligence community in collecting data on, and conducting analysis of, climate change and climate security; and ‘‘(3) ensuring that the intelligence community is adequately prioritizing climate change in carrying out its activities.

Yes, the military, which is in charge of keeping the nation safe will also have to factor climate change or “climate security” into everything that they do.

15. Section 5712: Chinese Infiltration?

SEC. 5712. REPORT ON BEST PRACTICES TO PROTECT PRIVACY AND CIVIL LIBERTIES OF CHINESE AMERICANS.
(a) SENSE OF CONGRESS.—It is the sense of Congress that—
(1) the People’s Republic of China appears to be specifically targeting the Chinese-American community for intelligence purposes;
(2) such targeting carries a substantial risk that the loyalty of such Americans may be generally questioned and lead to unacceptable stereotyping, targeting, and racial profiling;
(3) the United States Government has a duty to warn and protect all Americans including those of Chinese descent from these intelligence efforts by the People’s Republic of China;
(4) the broad stereotyping, targeting, and racial profiling of Americans of Chinese descent is contrary to the values of the United States and reinforces the flawed narrative perpetuated by the People’s Republic of China that ethnically Chinese individuals worldwide have a duty to support the People’s Republic of China; and
(5) the United States efforts to combat the People’s Republic of China’s intelligence activities should actively safeguard and promote the constitutional rights of all Chinese Americans.

I’m not convinced this is just a stereotype. China does send spies under pretenses of being students or being temporary workers. It is not paranoid or discriminatory to wonder about this. Ethnic ties ARE generally much stronger than civil ties.

16. Section 5713: Infiltration In Academia?!

SEC. 5713. OVERSIGHT OF FOREIGN INFLUENCE IN ACADEMIA.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) COVERED INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The term ‘‘covered institution of higher education’’ means an institution described in section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002) that receives Federal funds in any amount and for any purpose.
(2) SENSITIVE RESEARCH SUBJECT.—The term ‘‘sensitive research subject’’ means a subject of research that is carried out at a covered institution of higher education that receives funds that were appropriated for—
(A) the National Intelligence Program; or
(B) any Federal agency the Director of National Intelligence deems appropriate.
(b) REPORT REQUIRED.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act and not less frequently than once each year thereafter, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with such elements of the intelligence community as the Director considers appropriate and consistent with the privacy protections afforded to United States persons, shall submit to congressional intelligence committees a report on risks to sensitive research subjects posed by foreign entities in order to provide Congress and covered institutions of higher education with more complete information on these risks and to help ensure academic freedom.
(c) CONTENTS.—The report required by subsection
(b) shall include the following:
(1) A list of sensitive research subjects that could affect national security.
(2) A list of foreign entities, including governments, corporations, nonprofit organizations and for-profit organizations, and any subsidiary or affiliate of such an entity, that the Director determines pose a counterintelligence, espionage (including economic espionage), or other national security threat with respect to sensitive research subjects.
(3) A list of any known or suspected attempts by foreign entities to exert pressure on covered institutions of higher education, including attempts to limit freedom of speech, propagate misinformation or disinformation, or to influence professors, researchers, or students.
(4) Recommendations for collaboration between covered institutions of higher education and the intelligence community to mitigate threats to sensitive research subjects associated with foreign influence in academia, including any necessary legislative or administrative action.

I don’t suppose any of those hordes of foreign students may be complicit in all of this? Foreign students, foreign funding, and U.S. taxpayers pick up the rest of the tab. What could possibly go wrong?

17. Section 6746: “Might” Allow Spies In?

SEC. 6746. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON CONSIDERATION OF ESPIONAGE ACTIVITIES WHEN CONSIDERING WHETHER OR NOT TO PROVIDE VISAS TO FOREIGN INDIVIDUALS TO BE ACCREDITED TO A UNITED NATIONS MISSION IN THE UNITED STATES.
It is the sense of the Congress that the Secretary of State, in considering whether or not to provide a visa to a foreign individual to be accredited to a United Nations mission in the United States, should consider—
(1) known and suspected intelligence activities, espionage activities, including activities constituting precursors to espionage, carried out by the individual against the United States, foreign allies of the United States, or foreign partners of the United States; and
(2) the status of an individual as a known or suspected intelligence officer for a foreign adversary.

Right. Don’t outright block and prohibit the people known or suspected to be involved in espionage. Instead, it should be “considered”.

18. Section 7438: Sunset Clause

SEC. 7438. SUNSET.
This title shall cease to be effective on the date that is 5 years after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Okay, it expires in 5 years.

19. Section 7611: Liberian Refugees

SEC. 7611. LIBERIAN REFUGEE IMMIGRATION FAIRNESS.
(a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section:
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as otherwise specifically provided, any term used in this Act that is used in the immigration laws shall have the meaning given the term in the immigration laws.
(2) IMMIGRATION LAWS.—The term ‘‘immigration laws’’ has the meaning given the term in section 101(a)(17) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(17)).
(3) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means the Secretary of Homeland Security.
(b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (3), the Secretary shall adjust the status of an alien described in subsection (c) to that of an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence if the alien—
(A) applies for adjustment not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act; (B) is otherwise eligible to receive an immigrant visa; and (C) subject to paragraph
(2), is admissible to the United States for permanent residence.

Why is an amnesty for Liberians slipped into this “defense spending” bill? How does it have anything to do with defense spending, or military capabilities?

20. Final Thoughts

Yes, there is some money for the wall (or rather, replacing sections of fencing). There’s also a ton of money for various weapons and toys.

But an awful lot of garbage that doesn’t need to be in there. There doesn’t seem to be any sign that Trump is ending, or even scaling down existing U.S. wars and military ventures.

How will all of this be paid for? Just put it on the national credit card of course. Annual deficits, or overall debts, no longer seem to matter to Federal politicians. All of this isn’t really “America first!”

Canadian Parliament Discusses Work Permits That Are Issued For Illegals

1. Important Links

CLICK HERE, for 42nd Parliament on illegals entering Canada.
http://archive.is/elDlW
CLICKI HERE, for September 28, 2017 meeting evidence.
http://archive.is/uxtIR
CLICK HERE, for October 3, 2017 meeting evidence.
http://archive.is/cAsj9
CLICK HERE, for the October 5, 2017 meeting evidence.
http://archive.is/H7uM7
CLICK HERE, for the May 3, 2018 meeting evidence.
http://archive.is/GBRrl
CLICK HERE, for the May 29, 2018 meeting evidence.
http://archive.is/zIFLn
CLICK HERE, for a 2001 StatsCan longitudinal study.

Previously On Canuck Law
https://canucklaw.ca/facts-figures-the-ugly-truth-about-replacement-migration-in-canada/
CLICK HERE, for the hypocrisy in Federal Court cases.
CLICK HERE, for abuse in Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for a small amnesty-for-illegals program in Toronto.
CLICK HERE, for a critique against sanctuary cities.
CLICK HERE, for 22M+ illegals in US, amnesties.

2. Context For This Piece

Canadians want secure borders. They don't want people just strolling in an staying on obviously bogus refugee/asylum claims. Understandably, they also want to know what their Parliament is doing about this issue.

And while our politicians, particularly "conservatives" repeatedly claim to be taking the issue very seriously, the records speak otherwise. So let's take a look at what exactly has been going on.

3. Witnesses And Meetings

May 29, 2018 (Meeting 112)
Canada Border Services Agency
Jacques Cloutier, Vice-President, Operations Branch

Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Mike MacDonald, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy

Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Patrick Tanguy, Assistant Deputy Minister, Government Operations Centre, Emergency Management and Programs Branch

House of Commons
Hon. Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Hon. Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Commr Brenda Lucki

May 3, 2018 (Meeting 108)
Canada Border Services Agency
Jacques Cloutier, Vice-President, Operations Branch

Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Louis Dumas, Director General, Domestic Network, Operations
Mike MacDonald, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy

Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Patrick Tanguy, Assistant Deputy Minister, Government Operations Centre, Emergency Management and Programs Branch

Immigration and Refugee Board
Greg Kipling, Director General, Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs Branch
Shereen Benzvy Miller, Deputy Chairperson, Refugee Protection Division

Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Gilles Michaud, Deputy Commissioner, Federal Policing
Jamie Solesme, Superintendent, Federal Policing, Criminal Operations

October 5, 2017 (Meeting 73)
Canada Border Services Agency
Jacques Cloutier, Acting Vice-President, Operations

Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Michael MacDonald, Director General, Operations Sector
Paul MacKinnon, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy

Department of Foreign Affairs, Trade and Development
Niall Cronin, Director, North America Advocacy

Department of National Defence
BGen Lise Bourgon, Director General Operations, Strategic Joint Staff

Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Patrick Tanguy, Assistant Deputy Minister, Government Operations Centre, Emergency Management and Programs Branch

House of Commons
Hon. Ahmed Hussen, Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Hon. Ralph Goodale, Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Joanne Crampton, Assistant Commissioner, Federal Policing Criminal Operations

October 3, 2017 (Meeting 72)
Department of Citizenship and Immigration
André Baril, Director, Asylum Policy
Michael MacDonald, Director General, Operations Sector
Paul MacKinnon, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Greg Kipling, Director General, Policy, Planning and Corporate Affairs Branch
Shereen Benzvy Miller, Deputy Chairperson, Refugee Protection Division

September 28, 2017 (Meeting 71)
Canada Border Services Agency
Jacques Cloutier, Acting Vice-President, Operations

Department of Citizenship and Immigration
Louis Dumas, Director General, Domestic Network, Operations
Michael MacDonald, Director General, Operations Sector
Paul MacKinnon, Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy

Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Patrick Tanguy, Assistant Deputy Minister, Government Operations Centre, Emergency Management and Programs Branch

Royal Canadian Mounted Police
Joanne Crampton, Assistant Commissioner, Federal Policing Criminal Operations

4. Sept 28, 2017 "Evidence"

Here are some quotes from the meeting. The topic of open work permits will be mentioned many times in these 5 meetings.

[Translation]
.
Through these measures, we are working to reduce the wait times for eligibility interviews from a few months to a few weeks, after which eligible claims are referred to the IRB.
[English]
This timely scheduling of eligibility interviews is crucial because in order to apply for an open work permit, an asylum seeker must first have their initial eligibility interview, have their claim referred to the IRB, and undergo an immigration medical examination.
.
To also help ease pressures, IRCC has begun to fast-track all work permit applications across Canada from asylum claimants with a commitment to process these within 30 days. In most cases, asylum claimants become eligible for interim federal health program, IFHP, coverage only after an officer has determined that their claim is eligible to be heard before the IRB. IFHP coverage is now available to asylum seekers who enter Canada between ports of entry in Lacolle, and are being processed on or after June 1, for those who have not yet had an eligibility interview.
.
To date, more than 5,600 persons have been issued this interim federal health program coverage under this special provision.
In closing, Chairs, IRCC, with the CBSA and all other partners in the federal family, continue to address irregular migration in accordance with Canadian and international law and in keeping with our values of an open and welcoming country.

A/Commr Joanne Crampton:
In terms of someone crossing the border between the ports of entry, the RCMP would intercept the person or persons. We then advise them that they are breaking the law under the Customs Act by crossing the border between ports of entry. The persons are then detained. Their possessions are searched to ensure there is no contraband or other illegal items. Their person is searched, because they are under arrest under the Customs Act. We then verify their identification. We do background checks and local indices checks, as well as international indices checks. If there is no noted criminality or concerns for national security and, once we have interviewed them and had a lengthy discussion as to where they came from and what their intentions are, if nothing negative comes as a result of that, we pass the individual over to Canada Border Services for further processing.

Mr. Jacques Cloutier:
At this point, for the CBSA, we receive the individual from the RCMP, as well as the information collected by the RCMP. We proceed with fingerprinting, taking of biometric information, and a cursory interview to elicit additional information. We verify identity. In those cases where we are satisfied that there are no immigration-related issues from an admissibility perspective, these individuals would be released on the terms and conditions and given an appointment to complete their eligibility interview. In cases where issues are discovered, several actions are taken immediately, including completing the interview for eligibility in its entirety, or proceeding with detention if the person is deemed to pose a risk to the public.

To be clear, the police are not detaining people illegally crossing the border for any length of time. Once identity (or who they allege to be) is determined, then they are released into Canada on a promise to appear.

Ms. Jenny Kwan:
If I may interrupt, I'll ask if you can share this information with the committee then. Has the federal government provided any additional resources to provinces with these asylum seekers, not just for the housing component but also to support the asylum seekers as they wait for their claims to be processed?
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
The federal government does not provide direct support to provinces for asylum seekers awaiting their claims. The support comes at the permanent resident granting determination process, afterwards. That being said, we have taken various measures to help the provinces and to help asylum seekers by expediting across Canada all work permit applications and trying to—
.
Ms. Jenny Kwan:
If I may interrupt then, how many work permit applications have been processed and approved?
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
About six or seven weeks ago, we had over 6,000 work permit applications for all asylum seekers across Canada in our inventory. That is now almost eliminated, and we are processing in under 30 days any new asylum seeker's work permit that is coming in from across Canada. We are doing those in well under 30 days. The idea is to help people get into the work force quicker.

Exactly, Very few if them will ever be forced to leave Canada. This is about putting them to work as cheap labour. Funny how the "conservatives" seem less apprehensive about illegals in this context.

Mr. Michael MacDonald:
The key to this from our perspective is allowing all asylum claimants to get their work permit faster and be able to enter the workforce if they have to.
.
At the same time, we work with community organizations as part of our regular outreach, and we do that across Canada so partnerships and getting that work permit is the key.

5. October 3, 2017 "Evidence"

After a claim is made, individuals may also apply for social assistance, which is the responsibility of provinces and territories. To help ease pressure on the social assistance budgets of provincial governments, IRCC has been fast-tracking work permit applications for all asylum claimants across Canada with a 30-day service standard.
.
In recent weeks, the government has also taken a number of steps to inform people in Canada and the United States of the facts regarding the asylum process here in Canada and to dispel false information. We are spreading the word that temporary protected status in the United States does not automatically entitle anyone to any status in our country. Some asylum claimants have believed this.

This is a bit of a review from the last meeting.

Two, many of the claimants who appear before the board are vulnerable and suffer from mental health issues, such as post-traumatic stress disorder, as a result of the trauma suffered in their homeland. So far in 2017, 93% of claimants required the assistance of an interpreter. We have the capacity to provide this service in 240 languages and dialects.
.
Three, in addition, the RPD members must be up to date on the developments of the law and must be experts on the country conditions of 126 countries so far in 2017, most of which are constantly in flux.

Wow, 93% of those coming in have such a poor grasp of English and French that they need an interpreter. Sure, we'll be able to put them to work in no time.

It is in that context that the Refugee Protection Division developed its approach to respond to the influx of refugee claimants crossing the Quebec border. The fact that many of those refugee claimants are living in temporary tents and do not have work permits has created a number of problems, both for the refugee claimants and for the Refugee Protection Division's processing of refugee claims.
.
First, since a large number of those refugee claimants were in a very precarious situation in Canada, fairness required that the Refugee Protection Division use all means available to process the refugee claims quickly. That means we have to prioritize the processing of as many cases as possible, to the extent that our resources permit, while meeting our overall mandate. Therefore, on August 11, we immediately created a response team, which will be active from September until the end of November.

Mr. Marwan Tabbara (Kitchener South—Hespeler, Lib.):
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you to the witnesses for appearing before us today.
.
I want to talk about the work permits. You were here before to testify, Mr. MacDonald, and you discussed work permit applications as one of the measures that the government is taking to respond to the influx of asylum seekers in Quebec. I just want to read out something to you. The Canadian workers to retiree ratio today is 4:1, and by 2035 it will be 2:1.
.
Can you say that there's a correlation, knowing that we have an aging population, with our admitting a lot of work permits, because this is great for our economy and we need this to fuel our economy? We know the numbers of our aging population and we want to fill those gaps.
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
I suspect there will be in a downstream effort if one were to draw that comparison. However, the most important point of the asylum seekers' experience at this stage, their journey towards possibly being accepted and then into settlement, is to get them as established as quickly as possible to help their settlement into Canadian society. That is the real goal of the work permit for today, in the present.

Here we get some more blunt honesty. The real reason we are letting so many people in with bogus "asylum" claims is because we are looking for a replacement work force. And while the overwhelming majority of these cases are fake, certainly we will be able to accommodate these new "Canadians".

Mr. Randeep Sarai (Surrey Centre, Lib.):
Thank you.
This question is to IRCC.
How many work permits have been issued to foreign national claimants who arrived at irregular points of entry this year?
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
The data I have is not quite broken down like that, but I will give you some data that is very helpful nonetheless. Prior to August 24, which was when the minister made the decision to issue work permits, we had issued 5,913 of those permits. Since August 24, we have issued 3,902. Further along, I think a very important point, which again references what I mentioned last week, is that we committed to process work permits, post-August 24, in under 30 days. Our average processing time is 13 days.
.
Mr. Randeep Sarai:
Can you describe how many or what percentage of refugee claimants are finding gainful employment? Are you tracking that? Are you able to track that with this particular cohort versus the other refugees who come through ports of entry?
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
No, we don't track finding gainful employment. They're open work permits, so people can obviously find employment and then move to other employment. The natural course of people in their settlement process is finding employment and going forward.
.
Mr. Randeep Sarai:
I can rephrase that. How many are you finding who are getting employment versus going on social assistance? That's probably what I'm trying to get at.
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
Unfortunately, our department does not track that level of detail more or less at the municipal level, people finding employment in their home communities.
.
Mr. Michael MacDonald:
There are two parts to my response.
First, you are correct in your statement that the government-assisted refugee overseas selection has nothing to do with this and the work permits that are processed. We do know for the Lacolle movement that the Government of Quebec is very quickly moving to help people get their social assistance cheques while many of them are still in the interim lodging sites. If you don't have a work permit, one would assume in the Lacolle movement you're on social assistance and vice versa.

Serious question here: is issuing these open work permits a way of relieving the financial burden, or was this always the goal (let fake refugees in as a form of cheap labour)?

6. October 5, 2017 "Evidence"

We figured out a way to fast-track work permit applications from asylum claimants across Canada in order to alleviate the pressure on the social assistance budgets of provincial governments. This is an issue that was raised by the Government of Quebec, and we moved quickly to establish a new 30-day service standard for work permit applications so that asylum seekers may support themselves and become self-sufficient while they await the final decision on their claims. This minimizes the impact they have on provincial social assistance programs.
.
Similarly, we have built in flexibility to ensure that asylum seekers are covered under the interim federal health program immediately after background checks are completed, but while they are awaiting their initial hearing. This is important because we want to ensure that public health is protected, that asylum seekers have access to basic care, and that there is no undue burden on hospital emergency rooms and provincial health care budgets.

Sure, people who have no secure status in Canada (93% speak limited English of French), and no real means or skills will suddenly go find jobs. And who will support such precarious employees?

7. May 3, 2018, 2017 "Evidence"

Hon. Michelle Rempel:
Thank you.
Mr. MacDonald, you just mentioned that we would welcome the DACA cohort through an economic immigration stream, as they are skilled. Who is “we”?
.
Mr. Mike MacDonald:
I think Canada overall and the labour market needs within Canada is the “we” when you look at a high-skilled labour market that could be there, which would benefit the country.
.
Hon. Michelle Rempel:
Have you or has anybody in your department brought up a proposal for an economic stream regarding the DACA migration class to the minister?
.
Mr. Mike MacDonald:
I'm not aware of any analysis specifically on the DACA cohort, other than what you see in the media.

8. May 29, 2018, 2017 "Evidence"

Hon. Ahmed Hussen:
Thank you very much.
.
My visit to Nigeria was very productive. I visited the capital city of Abuja, as well as the commercial capital city of Lagos. In Abuja I met the permanent secretary of the Ministry of Interior, and on the same day I met the Minister of Foreign Affairs for Nigeria. I was able to indicate to both officials what we were facing. I made it very clear that, overall, the number of Nigerians coming regularly to Canada is actually high. There are a lot of visitors and tourists as well as international students and people who come through the express entry system, as well as the provincial nominee program.
.
In fact, the number that is coming irregularly is smaller than the regular numbers. However, it is an issue, and I emphasized to them the need for that government to co-operate closely with Canada on the issue of reiterating the message that we are always making, which is that we welcome newcomers, but we want people to come through regular migration.
.
The second request I had of the Nigerian government was that they should work closely with us to expedite the issuing of travel documents for Nigerian nationals who have exhausted the procedures and are set to be removed from Canada. On both of those requests, the Nigerian government officials I met, including the foreign minister, were clearly supportive and indicated very clearly that they will work with us on both those issues.
.
Very quickly, I also met representatives of various media outlets in Nigeria to, again, make the point that we value the contributions that Nigerian Canadians have made to our country, but that irregular migration is an issue. I also met civil society organizations who were very kind to let me know some of the challenges, some of the misinformation that was being fed to some of these officials.

So why exactly are we allowing Nigerian "refugee claimants" into Canada? They clearly aren't in danger, so this is all a total scam.

Hon. Michelle Rempel (Calgary Nose Hill, CPC):
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On May 23, in the Stanstead Journal, the Minister of International Development and La Francophonie was quoted as saying, “We had [a lot of] calls from local businesses last year telling us they would gladly go pick them up there and hire them,” since Canada is short on manpower and the influx of people entering illegally through Roxham Road is welcomed by a lot of people.
Do the ministers share the opinion of their colleague?
.
Hon. Ahmed Hussen:
The fact of the matter is that the issue of issuing work permits to asylum seekers was something that was brought to us through the intergovernmental task force on irregular migration. It was brought forward by the Province of Quebec. They felt that it was important for the federal government to help the Province of Quebec and other provinces expedite the issuing of work permits so that asylum seekers can support themselves as opposed to relying on provincial social services, and we've done that.
.
Hon. Michelle Rempel:
The sentiment the Minister of International Development expressed is that it's a good thing that people are illegally entering the country, and that this was a way to meet Canada's labour needs. Is that now Canada's policy?
.
Hon. Ahmed Hussen:
The provinces have indicated their preference for asylum seekers to support themselves while they await their hearings, to work, and for us to assist them in expediting the issuing of work permits, which we have done, from three months to three weeks—

Hon. Michelle Rempel:
Just in the interest of time, I'd like a yes or no answer. Does the minister want to stop the vast influx of people illegally crossing the border at Roxham Road from the United States?
.
Hon. Ahmed Hussen:
Yes.

Rempel seems to have done a 180. Now she seems to have a problem with people entering illegally, even if they are of economic value. And how valuable can they be, if 93% of people need an interpreter when they arrived in Canada?

9. Is Cheap Labour The Real Goal?

139. Immigration by Temporary Workers The Conservative Party recognizes that temporary workers can be a valuable source of potential immigrants because of their work experience in Canada. We believe the government should:
i. continue development of pilot projects designed to address serious skills shortages in specific sectors and regions of the country, and that attract temporary workers to Canada;
ii. examine ways to facilitate the transition of foreign workers from temporary to permanent status; and

AS has been shown before, Article 139 of the CPC Policy Declaration is to create new immigration pilot programs, and, to transition TEMPORARY workers into PERMANENT residents.

10. How Many Are Really Working?

Consider this StatsCan report from 2001. Table 4 includes employment rates. Just 21% of "refugees" in the 15-24 year group were employed years later. The 25-44 group was marginally better, at 25%.

So, a lot of welfare cases, bringing their foreign cultures and often incompatible views with them. But hey, diversity is our strength.

Public Policy #9: The Case For A Moratorium On Immigration

It is easy to target illegal entries into the country. Without borders, and enforcement of those borders, the nation ceases to exist. Everyone should be against illegal entries, sanctuary cities, voting rights and access to social services for those in the country illegally.

That being said, the mass LEGAL immigration is actually a much larger problem.

People excluded from Canada for various reasons (such as criminality, serious criminality, organized criminality, non-compliance, terrorism or human rights violations) should stay excluded. Global News reported on a program which brought in 3,000 people since 2010 under Rule 25.1 of IRPA, but omitted another 186,000 “inadmissibles” allowed in under Rule 24(1) of IRPA from 2002 to 2017. Considering we don’t even track people leaving the country, it’s hard to say where they are.

In recent years, we have been taking in a million people LEGALLY into Canada. In 2017, for instance, we had 950,000 people enter through regular immigration channels, refugee claims, and various temporary programs. This does not include visitors or illegals.

To start off with: our governments lie about the total number of people entering annually. Categories such as student visas (students and their families), temporary foreign workers, & International Mobility Program bring in hordes of people — are not temporary. These groups generally have access to a permanent residency pathway, and other ways to stay longer. There are several pilot programs underway on top of these, including a small amnesty-for-illegals program in Toronto. Heck, we even expedite work permits for fake refugees sneaking in from the U.S.

Even if these temporary workers were to go home (and many don’t), there is the topic of remittances. According to the World Bank, hundreds of billions of dollars are sent from the West annually. How does it help our economy when money is pulled from it?

Perhaps we can replace the money lost via remittances with money from selling investor visas, regardless of how well the business does.

Bringing in large numbers of people as cheap labour results in our own citizens having to compete against foreign, often subsidized labour. It does a huge disservice to those who really need the help.

Importing students at this scale means that Canadian graduates are forced to compete against others for a limited number of jobs. This is includes professional and skilled programs. How does it benefit Canadian graduates to have their prospects cut out like that? Does the downward pressure on wages help? How does it benefit other nations when their talent leaves is a sort of brain-drain?

It doesn’t seem to matter if the “students” are really students.

Considering all the fuss about environmentalism and climate change, answer one question. How does mass immigration remove or minimize stresses to the eco-system? How does clearing new areas for farming and housing avert this climate emergency that we are supposedly in?

The overwhelming majority of immigration coming into Canada over the last several decades is of 3rd World, non-European migrants (80 to 90%). A quick glance at the top 10 “source” countries tells the same story year after year: (a) China; (b) India; (c) the Philippines; and (d) an awful lot of Muslims. Multicultis and Civic Nationalists — which are the same thing — tell us that people who have nothing in common with each other can form a cohesive society based on abstract “values”. It’s nonsense. While other groups want to retain their identity, why are Europeans considered bigots for attempting the same?

The result is predictable: enclaves forming in the major cities, such as Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, Edmonton and Vancouver. In reality, multiculturalism is a lie that never works out as planned. Balkanization is not diversity. Furthermore, it is not a lack of screening, but the deliberate efforts to forcibly remake Canada.

The breakdown of social cohesion is obvious. And anyone who has read Robert Putnam’s study will see why.

At the heart of this is the replacement agenda going on in Western nations. Canada, for example, was 96% European, according to the 1971 census. It was 72% based on the 2016 census, and still falling. Europeans will be a minority in the next decade unless something drastic happens.

This is about preserving the foundation of European nations and ones formed in that image. Replacing the population replaces the culture and the history. It doesn’t matter to me whether it is replacement by Muslims, or by high IQ, high skill Asians. I still don’t want it, and nor should others. Call it tribalism, but Westerners should be allowed to protect their identities too.

We also now have a program for survivors of domestic abuse to apply for temporary, or even permanent residence. Guess that’s what happens with importing violent cultures.

It never seems to dawn on “conservatives” that bringing in large numbers of people from left-leaning nations means political suicide. Demographic shifts will make their ideology completely unelectable. Their only concerns seem to be: (a) come legally; (b) be economically productive; and (c) don’t be a terrorist. But beyond that, conservatives have no will to preserve their people, culture, heritage, and traditions.

While the solution may seem to be to import more Europeans, they cannot be spared as THEY are being replaced in their homelands as well. Europe is being flooded with Middle Eastern and African “refugees” and migrants. We cannot help ourselves at the Europeans’ expense. Still, we must resist the replacement here.

For these reasons, and other facts and figures, I support a moratorium on immigration into Canada. With a more complete picture of the actual situation in Canada, many more people should agree.

Students And Temporary Workers: How Many Actually Stay?

(StatsCan on % int’l students becoming permanent residents)

(StatsCan findings: close to 30% eventually become PR)

(StatsCan: latest cohort TFW/IMP transitioning at higher rates)

(StatsCan on int’l students, earnings growth)

(Federal Gov’t education strategy 2019-2024)

(Status of “Temporary” Foreign Workers transitioning to PR)

(Program launched in July 2019: PR-Path for illegals)

1. Important Links

https://canucklaw.ca/facts-figures-the-ugly-truth-about-replacement-migration-in-canada/

CLICK HERE, for StatsCan, info on Int’l students ==> PR.
http://archive.is/wip/B1ikY
CLICK HERE, for StatsCan, immigration, earnings.
http://archive.is/wip/s4x6I
CLICK HERE, for Federal education strategy 2019-2024.
http://archive.is/wip/NbQof
CLICK HERE, for StatsCan: status when obtaining PR.
http://archive.is/wip/O8GB0
CLICK HERE, for StatsCan, more on transition rates.
http://archive.is/wip/oc9vW

CLICK HERE, for CTV, Gov’t to start collecting exit info.
http://archive.is/wip/feDOA
CLICK HERE, for CBSA policies on exiting Canada.
http://archive.is/wip/krWR3
CLICK HERE, for CBSA cancelling old arrest warrants.
http://archive.is/4jQA9
CLICK HERE, for amnesty for illegals announced.
http://archive.is/e6OYZ
CLICK HERE, for Canadian Labour Congress on illegals.
http://archive.is/s3pq6
CLICK HERE, for 41,000 illegals gone missing.
http://archive.is/bayYs
CLICK HERE, for an estimate of total illegals.
http://archive.is/wip/Xk9l4

Annual Immigration Reports To Parliament
(a) 2004 Annual Report to Parliament
(b) 2005 Annual Report to Parliament
(c) 2006 Annual Report to Parliament
(d) 2007 Annual Report to Parliament
(e) 2008 Annual Report to Parliament
(f) 2009 Annual Report to Parliament
(g) 2010 Annual Report to Parliament
(h) 2011 Annual Report to Parliament
(i) 2012 Annual Report to Parliament
(j) 2013 Annual Report to Parliament
(k) 2014 Annual Report to Parliament
(l) 2015 Annual Report to Parliament
(m) 2016 Annual Report to Parliament
(n) 2017 Annual Report to Parliament
(o) 2018 Annual Report to Parliament
(p) Archived listings of Reports

2. Context For This Article

The topic of “temporary” mass migration to Canada is discussed here a lot. This is partly because of their size, and partly because various “temporary” programs actually lead to Permanent Resident status.

Three groups which receive regular attention are these:
(a) Temporary Foreign Worker Program;
(b) International Mobility Program;
(c) Student Visas

Now, it has been asked several times: how many of these people actually do stay? Of course, this is a logical follow-up question. Obviously, not everyone will stay after their work of schooling ends.

However, it’s not so easy to answer. Yes, we have data suggesting that approximately one quarter or more (25-30%) do attain PR status. That is pretty straightforward information to get a hold of.

But after that, things are much less clear. Until 2016, Canada did not track people leaving the country (only entering). Even today it does not cover everyone. This is unlike nearly every other developed nation, which tracks both entry and exits across borders. Also, the Federal Government does not make easily available (if it even knows), how many people apply for other visas or programs. Worse, it has been discovered that the CBSA deletes older arrest warrants. Additionally, there is little reliable information accessible on how many people are working illegally, or receiving public benefits illegally.

Back to the question of: “How many people stay?”
My answer: At least 25-30%. Probably a lot more.

3. People Leaving Canada Aren’t Tracked

In 2016, the Federal Government announced plans to start collecting exit information from people leaving the country. This really is common sense. While we (theoretically) know how many people, who, and when, are ENTERING Canada, until now they Government doesn’t track who is LEAVING. Perhaps we just take it on face that everyone leaves when they should.

And one of the major benefits stated is to help reduce immigration fraud. If a person is “counting time” towards living in Canada, but doesn’t actually live here, then the Immigration Ministry should know about it.

When this does get implemented, then a gaping hole in Canadian border security should be fixed, right? Maybe not.

Canada collects basic biographic information on travellers who enter and leave the country by land to ensure complete travel history information is available, thereby strengthening the management of our border.

Biographic entry information is routinely collected directly from all travellers entering Canada upon presentation to a CBSA officer at a port of entry as part of the primary inspection process. Canada also collects exit information in the land mode. Canada receives biographic entry information from the United States (U.S.) on all travellers who enter the U.S. through a land border crossing, thereby enabling the creation of a Canadian exit record.

Regulatory amendments for the air mode are expected to come into force in Summer 2020. Once fully implemented in the air mode, Canada will collect basic exit information directly from air carriers through passenger manifests. Exit information collected in the air mode will not be shared with the U.S.

The collection of exit information enhances the CBSA’s ability to manage border security by closing the loop on an individual’s travel history. This allows the CBSA to focus efforts and resources towards unknown or higher risk travellers.

This still isn’t fully implemented, and won’t be until at least 2020. That’s right, these changes were announced in 2016, and over three years later, are not fully implemented. Guess the potential fraud and security risks aren’t that great.

Right now, departures by air are not recorded by CBSA. Unless someone is travelling to the United States, (and even then not always) he/she is flying in a plane. Boating isn’t really a practical solution for international travel to and from Canada.

4. CBSA Cancels Old Arrest Warrants

Currently, there are more than 48,000 active arrest warrants in Canada for people wanted on immigration violations. According to the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), the “vast majority” of these cases involve people wanted for deportation.
But these figures may not tell the whole story.

Global News has learned the CBSA cancels arrest warrants for failed refugee claimants and other people wanted for removal who it cannot find, even in cases where it is not clear whether a person has left Canada.

What’s more, the CBSA does not track how many warrants it cancels in cases where a person’s whereabouts are unknown.
.
Because the CBSA only recently started tracking people when they exit the country by land — and still doesn’t track people who leave by air — there’s no way for the government or CBSA to say for sure how many people have overstayed their welcome.

Back in the early 2000s, when he worked at the agency that would later become the CBSA, Sundberg says he was assigned to a team in Lethbridge, Alta., tasked with “culling” old warrants for people facing deportation whose cases had been in the system for at least five years.

The protocol for cancelling a warrant, Sundberg said, involved calling known associates of the wanted person, doing internet searches and checking criminal and entry records in other countries to see if someone wanted for arrest had left Canada voluntarily.

The Canada Border Services Agency apparently cancels warrants for people wanted for immigration violations, if the warrants are old.

Moreover, there appears to be no tracking of how many warrants get cancelled either. Just a hunch, but it probably looks bad in the CBSA’s eyes if they have a lot of outstanding warrants. Makes them look slow and unproductive. Alternatively, this could be a deliberate attempt to make sure that people in the country illegally and/or committing other crimes won’t be deported.

5. Scale Of Illegal Aliens Unknown

The Toronto Star reported in 2008 that 41,000 illegals in Canada had been lost track of.

The Toronto Sun reported in 2017 that there somewhere between 200,000 to 500,000 illegal workers in Canada. Not illegals altogether, just illegals working.

Although the focus of this article is not on illegals, or people overstaying their visas, there is an important point to be made here: we don’t really have a clue how many people do stay.

6. Amnesty Program Started July 2019

Ottawa, July 5, 2019 – Canada has launched a new temporary initiative to create a pathway to permanent residency for up to 500 out-of-status workers in the construction industry in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). These construction workers have come to Canada and made contributions to its economy and currently have limited means to regularize their status.

Over many years, even decades, some workers who have come to Canada with valid temporary resident status, and who have filled labour shortages in the construction industry, have fallen out of status. Previous changes, such as “four in, four out”, have resulted in some workers losing their status. These workers have continued to address significant labour shortages in the construction industry, while also contributing to the economy and their communities. Without valid immigration status, these workers and their families have lived in fear and been left feeling very vulnerable. The presence of out-of-status workers in a significant industry leads to depressed wages for Canadians and makes workers vulnerable to employer exploitation and abuse.

The Canadian Government announced in July 2019 a pilot program to give 500 illegals (and their families) a pathway to permanent residence in Canada if they were to work in construction. Yes, we are talking about an actual amnesty program that will lead to PR, and eventual citizenship.

The Canadian Labour Congress supports this initiative. Why wouldn’t they? It will result in an inflation of workers, and allow employers to push down wages. It really is about more cheap labour.

This program is stated to target 500 people (and their immediate family members). But we should not be naïve. Once this is launched, the next question will be how to upscale it.

7. Government Making Illegal Entries Easier

This article isn’t really about illegal entry into Canada (see the Federal Court cases for more). Nonetheless, a major act of hypocrisy must be pointed out.

The Federal Government makes the absurd statements that the Canada/U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement is necessary to protect Canadian borders, but also claims that citizens have no standing to make a claim to close the loophole.

Yes, the agreement must be enforced at all border crossings, but if someone were to GO AROUND those checkpoints, then it is direct entry into Canada.

To summarize where we are right now in the article:
(a) About 25% of students/temps become permanent residents, and
(b) Canada doesn’t track people exiting the country
(c) CBSA cancels old arrest warrants
(d) Number of illegals in Canada is unknown
(e) Amnesty for illegals is starting up
(f) The Canadian Government wants to keep S3CA loophole open

Now that we have covered how the Canadian borders are at best dysfunctional, let’s take a dive into the research into just how many people are staying in Canada (legally). At least this will be considerably more definitive

8. Annual Reports To Parliament

Unlike permanent residents, temporary residents are in Canada for a limited time. This group consists of students, foreign workers and visitors, including tourists. Temporary residents contribute to Canada’s economic growth and to the vitality of our educational institutions.

Before coming to Canada, applicants must obtain a temporary resident visa, unless they are coming from a country that is exempt under the IRP Regulations. Visa officers consider a number of factors when evaluating temporary residents’ visa applications. For example, they can verify whether the visitor is in good health, has a criminal record, is a security threat to Canada, holds a valid passport or travel document, has enough money to live on while in Canada, and will leave voluntarily at the end of his or her stay in Canada. The visa officer evaluates the situation before deciding whether the applicant is a genuine visitor or if he or she might stay in Canada illegally. To that end, the visa officer studies the applicant’s reason for the visit, his or her employment, family situation, and the general economic and political stability of his or her country of origin.

(Page 22 of 2004 Report to Parliament)

Foreign Students
In recognition of the social and economic benefits that foreign students bring to Canada, the federal government has committed to making our country a destination of choice for talented foreign students. To obtain a study permit, candidates must submit an application to study in Canada. Applications must be submitted to and approved by a visa office outside Canada. The permit indicates the level of study and the intended duration of the visit. In general, foreign students must present an acceptance letter from the institution they want to attend, prove that they have sufficient money to pay their tuition fees and living expenses, satisfy the visa officer that they intend to return to their country of origin at the end of their studies and undergo a medical examination.

(Page 23 of 2004 Report to Parliament)

Worth noting that for “temporary” workers and students, the reports emphasize that these are to be temporary, and that the resident is expected to return to the home country afterwards. Remaining in Canada is not to be the goal.

One other point is that the 2004 report makes no mention of any temporary worker or student/graduate transitioning to permanent resident.

The 2005 report (page 29) reiterates that these temporary workers and students are expected to leave once their designated time is up. It is also stated that changes were made so student visas would be for the full duration of the program.

Pilot projects initiated in 2003 (in Alberta, New Brunswick and Manitoba) to test these program changes proved to be highly popular with international students, educational stakeholders and provinces. In 2004–2005, CIC signed agreements with Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia, and Newfoundland and Labrador to allow international students to work in Canada for a second year after graduation. An agreement was also reached with Quebec to allow students outside Montréal and Québec City to work off campus.

The 2005 report (page 31) talks about a rule change that allows some graduate to work in Canada for 2 years now after graduation. I’m confused. I thought the point was that these students were to return home after graduation, not work in Canada afterwards.

On April 18, 2005, the Minister announced initiatives to address some key issues facing international students. These included the expansion of the pilot projects mentioned previously that aim to better attract, integrate and retain international students in regions of the country in partnership with the provinces and educational institutions. The first pilot project will allow international students at public post-secondary institutions to work off campus while completing their studies so that they can experience the Canadian labour market and gain a greater understanding of Canadian society. The second pilot project will allow students to work in Canada for two years after their graduation, rather than one year. To help spread the benefits of immigration to more of Canada’s regions, this second initiative will apply outside Toronto, Montréal and Vancouver. The Government of Canada is investing $10 million a year for five years to support these new initiatives.

These students are supposed to be in Canada “temporarily”, but the Government makes rule changes so they can work in Canada afterwards. Almost like they can become permanent residents.

The limit on the number of provincial nominations was removed to give Saskatchewan greater flexibility in operating its immigration program.

The 2006 report (page 10) explains how Saskatchewan took off the cap of its Provincial Nominee Program.

CIC also launched a national initiative in April 2006 that allows foreign students enrolled full-time in post-secondary programs to seek employment off-campus.

The 2006 report (page 11) states that students enrolled full time in college or university programs are now allowed to work off campus.

Foreign Students
Foreign students bring with them new ideas and cultures that enrich the learning environment within Canadian educational institutions. Foreign students who enter Canada on temporary visas may also be an important source of future immigrants in the skilled worker category since they are well prepared for the Canadian labour market.

The 2006 report (page 23) states that students can be a valuable source of future immigrants. But I thought these “temporary” residents were going home after graduation.

Working with Human Resources and Social Development Canada (HRSDC), Service Canada, and the provinces and territories, we implemented a series of administrative improvements to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program. As announced in Budget 2007, we are developing ways to make it easier, faster and less costly for employers to access the workers that they need, while also introducing measures to ensure that employers comply with program terms and conditions. We are also developing the Canadian Experience Class, a new avenue to immigration that will, under certain conditions, permit foreign students with Canadian credentials and work experience, as well as skilled temporary foreign workers who are already in Canada, to apply for permanent residence.

The 2007 report (page 4) states 2 things.
First: new measures will be enacted to bring in cheap, foreign labour even faster and more cheaply.
Second: we’ll make temporary workers and students eligible for permanent residence.

As well, the Plan includes the introduction of the Canadian Experience Class, a new avenue to immigration that will permit, under certain conditions, temporary workers and foreign students with a Canadian credential to apply for permanent residence.

The 2007 report (page 9) reiterates the plan to make students and temporary workers eligible for permanent residence.

First-ever framework agreements were signed with Alberta on May 4, 2007, and with Nova Scotia on September 19, 2007. To meet the growing demand for labour, the limit on the number of immigrants that can be nominated through the PNP was removed, and the intention to develop annexes to facilitate the entry of temporary foreign workers was announced. In addition, a renewed PNP agreement with Newfoundland and Labrador, which came into force in November 2006, removed the limit on the number of provincial nominees.

The 2007 report (page 10) tells how Nova Scotia and Newfoundland and Labrador had their Provincial Nominee Program caps removed. Saskatchewan did so the year earlier.

Other initiatives in 2006 included policy and planning work to develop options for facilitating the transition from temporary to permanent status. This culminated in the announcement in Budget 2007 of a proposed new avenue to immigration by permitting, under certain conditions, foreign students with Canadian credentials and skilled work experience, and skilled temporary foreign workers who are already in Canada to apply for permanent residence. This will allow qualified individuals with Canadian skilled work experience, or with a combination of Canadian work and studies, to make the transition to permanent status. The program is expected to lead to improved economic outcomes for newcomers in this class.

The 2007 report (page 13) repeats the intention to make students and temporary workers eligible for permanent residence. It’s a common misperception that they will be going home afterwards.

We introduced the Canadian Experience Class, which offers qualifying temporary foreign workers and international students with Canadian work experience the possibility to stay in Canada permanently. This program will make our immigration system more responsive to Canada’s labour market by helping retain those temporary foreign workers and international students who have demonstrated their ability to succeed in Canada.

The 2008 report (page 5) repeats the pledge from the last report to make it easier for temporary foreign workers and students to transition into permanent residents.

As well, the Post-Graduation Work Permit Program was significantly improved by extending work permits from one to up to two years for international students who have graduated from public post-secondary institutions and certain private institutions located in regions outside of Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver. The aim is to help spread the benefits of immigration to more of Canada’s regions. During 2006–2007, a total of 1,388 students received two-year work permits. More broadly, the total number of students who received post-graduation work permits increased from 7,354 in 2005–2006 to 9,121 in 2006–2007. In 2007–2008, the number of post-graduation work permits issued increased to 10,933.

The 2008 report (page 28) talks of expanding the Post Graduate Work Permit Program from 1 year to 2, and of issuing more permits altogether. The goal is to “spread the benefits of immigration” as they call it.

There are many other passages in these reports obviously, that support the claim that “temporary” workers and students aren’t really temporary. However, the point has been made, so let’s move on to how many temps and students are transitioning to permanent residents. In these first 5 reports, there is no mention of any of it.

9. Transitioning To Permanent Residents

Intake of: (a) TFWP; (b) Int’l Mobility; (c) Students from 2015 to 2017

Transitions from Temporary Foreign Worker or International Student Status to Permanent Residence (from 2018 report, covering 2015 to 2017)

Not only are the numbers of students and “temporary” workers increasing, but they are obtaining permanent resident status in higher numbers.

The Provincial Nominee Program, which grants permanent residence, is a very common choice among post secondary school graduates.

Now, all of the above data comes from the 2018 Annual Report to Parliament on Immigration, and covers the years 2015 through 2017. But what about the longer term implications? In the big picture, how many students and temps are getting PR?

10. StatsCan Research On Transitioning Rates

Transition to permanent resident status
International students likely come to Canada for various reasons. Some may intend to return to their home country once they have acquired their Canadian qualifications, while others may intend to remain in Canada for a period of time to obtain work experience in an advanced economy. Still others may hope to become landed immigrants and remain in Canada permanently.

It is possible to estimate the proportion of international students who become permanent residents by calculating a cumulative transition rate. The cumulative rate, which can be calculated for any cohort, is the share of international students who become landed immigrants a number of years after obtaining their first study permit.

For example, among international students who obtained their first study permit between 1995 and 1999, about 15% became permanent residents in the five years that followed. When the period of observation is extended to the first 10 years after the study permit was received, that proportion rises to 20%, and then to 22% by the fifteenth year (Chart 1).

Of the international students in the early 1990s (1990 to 1994), late 1990s (1995 to 1999) and early 2000s (2000 to 2004) cohorts, those in the early 1990s cohort were the most likely to subsequently become permanent residents in Canada. Over the 10 years after they received their first student permit, 27% of the early 1990s cohort became permanent residents, while this was the case for 20% and 25% of individuals in the late 1990s and early 2000s cohorts, respectively. The transition rates of international students in the late 2000s cohorts looked like those of the early 2000s cohorts over the first 5 years after receiving a study permit, but additional data must be accumulated to see whether this trajectory continues over the longer term.

In addition to varying across cohorts, rates of transition into permanent residence also vary across sociodemographic characteristics such as sex, age, level of study and source country. Again, transition rates by characteristic are examined at the tenth year after the first study permit is received (Table 2).

India and China are the top 2 source nations for student visas to Canada. This should be obvious to anyone who visits a college or university.

The research conducted by Yuqian Lu and Feng Hou is too lengthy to go over entirely here, but it is very interesting. Long term, is suggests that roughly a quart of international students will eventually become permanent residents of Canada.

An interesting fact noted: 49% of people who obtained a post-graduate degree (a Master’s) obtained PR status. It has to do with the added points in the immigrtion system.

11. When Exactly Did This Start?

But wait a minute. The above research by Yuqian Lu and Feng Hou cover international students that have transitioned to permanent residents since 1990. However, the Annual Reports to Parliament on Immigration spoke of this new option in 2006/2007. (See below)

That is a screenshot from the 2007 report. It refers to this transition to permanent residence as something to happen in the future.

The transitions to PR have been happening under the Provincial Nominee Programs primarily. The announcement in the annual reports must have just been to boost the numbers, by adding other categories.

12. Transition Rates Increasing For Temps

The 2005-2009 cohort, is the most recent one available from this StatsCan research, and could easily hit 25-30%, if the same pattern is demonstrated. This graphing attempts to demonstrate collect trends of transitioning to permanent residence after a given time.

Bear in mind, that new programs are available can boost this and future cohorts higher.

13. Most “Temp” Workers Had Current Status

Another StatsCan research piece documents the status of so-called “temporary” workers who held visas at or before the time that they transitioned to permanent residence.

It is broken into two periods: 1990 to 1999, and 2000 to 2009. Although it does not give the totals, as a percentage, around 87% of people who transitioned to permanent residence had current status.

Although the International Mobility Program existed well before the 2013 TFW scandal, participants were still able to become PR.

14. Students/Temps: 25-30% Will Get PR

Based on the information provided by StatsCan, it is safe to say that 25-30% of students and temporary workers will eventually get their Permanent Resident status. Transitions do start out at a fast rate, and understandably peter out. This is based on research done by some StatsCan researchers.

Now, a few caveats must be talked about here to make the picture more complete. This is not the end of the story.

First, rule changes by successive Federal Governments have expanded the number of programs, and eased the restrictions and numbers available. It stands to reason that rates will increase from what has been shown before. The information given about previous years may be obsolete.

Second, this information does not take into account people who have remained in the country but not transitioned to Permanent Resident status. While the common belief is that students will return home after their schooling is done, or workers will return home after their work term ends, that is simply not the case. Even StatsCan admits that people from lower GDP countries are more likely to stay given the higher standard of living in Canada.

Third, these findings do not consider people now living illegally in Canada. Inexplicably, we still have no real exit tracking system. As such, the Federal Government, or at least the Immigration Ministry, doesn’t know who is leaving Canada and when.

Fourth, this is all predicated on the assumption that the Government puts out truthful and accurate findings. This type of “backdoor immigration” system is not popular with the public, so minimizing the scale of it isn’t much of a stretch.

In short, 25-30% of temporary workers and students (officially) will stay in Canada. But take that conclusion with a grain of salt. It may be much, much higher.

TSCE #7: UN Research Into Smuggling and “Irregulars” (Cont’d)

(UN Office on Drugs and Crime)

(There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)

(UN abhors smuggling, but fake refugees get a pass)

(UN High Commission on Refugees)

(UN insists terrorists be allowed to return home)

1. Important Links

(Other articles on trafficking, smuggling, child exploitation)
https://canucklaw.ca/tsce-9-other-accounts-worth-following/

CLICK HERE, for UNODC on smuggling migrants.
CLICK HERE, for a UN guide in circumventing the Canada/U.S. Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for UN guide: details on S3CA loopholes.
CLICK HERE, for UN insisting terrorists be repatriated.
CLICK HERE, for the UN supporting illegal mass invasion (caravans) into the U.S., despite knowing it is unwanted and illegal.
CLICK HERE, for the UN Global Migration Compact.

2. Context For This Article

This is a continuation to the last article, and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime. While the basics were laid out before, there is so much more detail to be included. In fact, the UN has done a surprising amount of research on this topic.

Yet they seem to have learned nothing from this research, or the results are being deliberately ignored.

To reiterate from last time: it is extremely hypocritical for the UN to claim that they are AGAINST smuggling and trafficking of people, yet SUPPORT mass illegal entries (which they minimize as “irregular”).

The connection between “irregulars” (or illegal aliens) and smuggling is straight forward. Human smugglers are the people who facilitate and coordinate these mass movements of people. They directly cause these “irregulars”, which the UN demands Western nations provide for. However, the UN, and other groups condemn the smuggling that is at the heart of it. The illegal aliens themselves are willing participants.

The difference between traffickers and smugglers is one of consent. Smugglers take people against their will. While victims of trafficking are not to blame for their situation, they are not legal immigrants either. And calling them “irregulars” deliberately blurs the line here.

A cynic may wonder if the UN is speaking out both sides of its mouth: demanding that Western nations take hoards of people from the 3rd World, all while pretending to reject the smuggling that at least facilitates this mass invasion.

Now let’s get right into the rest of this review.

3. Direct Connection Between Smuggling/Illegals

2.1 Smuggling of migrants and the concepts of irregular migration and trafficking in persons
2.1.1 Irregular migration
The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.

In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents.

Yes, this has been brought up before, but it is designed to hammer the point home. Smuggling of people across borders is directly connected to the “irregular migration” that occurs at the end. It is the end result of these actions which show no respect for national borders or sovereignty. The UN review is rather blunt on the subject.

4. Smuggling As A Business Model

2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’”

Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
legitimate and illegitimate sides
. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.

The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.

In some sense, this is quite obvious. Of course smuggling and trafficking are businesses, where the commodity being shipped is the people.

However, the solution seems almost designed to fail. Let’s focus on the institutions themselves and not the migrants?! If the migrants want what they view as a “better life” in Western nations, the demand will remain high. And as long as there is a demand, with customers willing to pay, then there will be people willing to take the risks.

The migration business theory seems still to be dominant in the literature analysing smuggling trends in North America, South-east Asia and the Pacific region, where smugglers are portrayed as “migration merchants”, while the smuggled migrants are considered clients paying for a service. However, it seems that academic views have evolved recently, with a greater number of authors, such as Zhang and Herman, looking at the role of family members and social networks in the smuggling process. While still endorsing the “migration business” theory, authors such as Doomernik and Kyle call for a more nuanced approach, as the empirical reality includes a mix of people with both altruistic and profit-making goals. empirical research led by Van liempt and Doomernik in the Netherlands in 2003 and 2004 looked at how smugglers of migrants may depict themselves as serving migrants rather than as profit-makers, despite the fees involved. equally, migrants may not use the word “smugglers” when they talk about the person who “helped” them. According to Aranowitz, the “mother of All Snakeheads”—a major Chinese smuggler is probably the symbol of the dual reality of smuggling of migrants, as she was a revered figure in New York’s Chinatown and considered a saint for “reuniting families”.

While this is interesting on some level, it does not change the basic reality. Helping to get people illegally into other countries is smuggling, regardless of whether it is driven by profit or humanitarian reasons.

5. Data From Interviews

3.2 Qualitative methodologies
3.2.1 Interviews with smuggled migrants
Methodological issues
Qualitative information can be extracted from various sources. For example, it can be the outcome of fact-finding missions carried out by researchers in source, transit and/or destination countries, involving interviews with actors in and witnesses of the smuggling process (migrants, migrants’ relatives and smugglers). The collection of direct information seems to be the most problematic, and research projects often require a combination of sources, such as interviews and police and court files.

Researchers may face difficulties in interviewing smuggled migrants and persons directly involved in the smuggling process. According to Düvell, Triandafyllidou and Vollmer, migrants are reluctant to participate, as they fear retaliation from smugglers and are also afraid that the information provided might be used against them and lead to deportation. Collyer, however, insists on the difficulties of getting a representative sample and of carrying out a proper interview, given the interviewees’ living conditions. Owing to these constraints, the interview technique varies greatly: while some researchers carry out observation in police stations or shelters, others conduct interviews on the basis of a standard questionnaire. Some academics use a mix of interviews and observations.

According to Heckmann, smuggled persons tend to cooperate in interviews when basic conditions are met, such as respect for anonymity, or when the interviewer is a person who comes from the same community as the smuggled person. Smuggled migrants may want to speak out of frustration with the smugglers or, after having achieved safe status, for political reasons. According to Bilecen, command of the migrant’s native language seems to be an imperative asset, together with being from the same community. Given the reluctance of smuggled migrants and smugglers, some authors have used tricks such as enrolling as social workers at the reception centre of Sangatte (France) or pretending to be irregular migrants.

Pretending to be a social worker or a fellow illegal is actually an interesting tactic. True, it is deception. But the entire presence and transport of these smuggled illegal aliens is based on deception, so it can be viewed as fighting fire with fire.

Of course getting direct information can be tricky. The entire point of these smuggling operations is …. wait for it …. to smuggle people. Giving direct and honest information can lead to their deportation, and to possible criminal charges as well.

Sure, speaking the same language can go a long way. Anyone familiar with police interrogations will tell you that having a connection with a suspect will help you get information.

3.2.2 Interviews with smugglers
There is a lack of research focusing on the smugglers’ perspectives that would allow insight into the subjective dimension of the phenomenon. According to Neske, this gap is understandable since smugglers are not interested in exposing themselves to publicity or law enforcement.

Yes, this is pretty obvious.

Now, let’s address some estimates about the size and scale of human smuggling and trafficking across borders.

6. Scope Of Int’l Smuggling

4. The scope of smuggling of migrants
Bearing in mind the methodological limitations on estimating the movement of smuggled migrants in the broader context of irregular migration, this chapter will outline quantitative information about the extent of smuggling of migrants with a focus on sub-regions and key countries. This information is scattered and/or imprecise for two reasons. Firstly, reports often mix up statistics on and refer interchangeably to irregular migration, trafficking in persons and smuggling of migrants. Secondly, quantitative assessments are limited mainly to smuggling towards industrialized Western countries, while intraregional movements in the southern hemisphere are largely ignored.

This chapter then looks at the current state of knowledge regarding smuggling routes. The literature reviewed reveals a dual perspective. On the one hand, the “traditional” view holds that all smuggling trends are converging towards the industrialized Western States. This perspective is dominant in the literature published in the early 1990s. On the other hand, more recent research shows that smuggling routes are far more diverse and that Western-centric views may not accurately represent the complex dynamics of smuggling of migrants. In any case, the routes outlined below provide only an overview of smuggling routes as described in the literature. Further details about the organization of sea, air and land movements are provided in chapter 9.

The report says that “irregular migrants” (who are really illegal aliens) get mixed up with people who are smuggled and trafficked. It seems that the authors are the ones contributing to this problem. They repeatedly try to make a distinction where none exists.

Part of the assumption that illegals head to Western nations is the fact that they have the best social programs. They also have lawyers and others who work hard to circumvent national laws. Heading to the West offers the best rate of return in most cases.

It will be interesting to read onward and see where these additional routes are. True, there is the belief that smuggling and trafficking heads mostly here.

The report spends some time giving estimates of the number of illegals in various regions. However, it is clear that these are estimates (often conflicting estimates) and that they have few real answers.

7. Profile Of Smuggled Migrants

5.1 General profile of smuggled migrants
5.1.1 Social and educational background
According to figures in the IOM World Migration Report 2008, the vast majority of migrants around the world are young people, including a great proportion of underage persons. many developing countries have very young populations: in most African countries and many in Asia, about half of the population is under the age of 14. As stressed by Doomernik and Kyle, such countries encourage their young people to emigrate since they are facing severe underemployment and unemployment. Some authors have considered the role of State authorities—in particular in the Philippines and Spain—in migrant-exporting schemes. Although there are no consolidated global figures on the age pyramid of smuggled migrants, the figures shown by regional research tend to confirm that smuggled migrants are usually recruited from the young population.

There are diverging views about the social and educational backgrounds of smuggled migrants. According to authors such as Aronowitz, smuggled persons are usually the most disadvantaged in their own countries, with poor job skills or little chance of successful employment at home. They are often women and children, as shown by the smuggling and trafficking patterns in countries in eastern and Central Europe and West Africa. According to IOM, research on the profile of persons using the service of smugglers in Central Asia would present similar characteristics.

We are getting some honesty here, and it undermines a major narrative of the asylum pushers. A large amount of people claiming to be refugees fleeing persecution are actually economic migrants seeking a better life. While it is understandable that people want to make better lives for themselves, it does not translate into a “right” to migrate.

8. Profile Of Smugglers Themselves

6. Profiles of smugglers of migrants
The main objective of this chapter is to look at the social background of smugglers of migrants and their motivations. It will highlight the similarities and differences in the profiles of smugglers in different parts of the world. Because of the lack of information and the diversity of situations, the present review refrains from drawing general conclusions about the social and educational background of the persons involved in migrant-smuggling activities. Regional profiles of smugglers will be established according to analyses of law enforcement activities or information gathered directly from smugglers. Complementary information is provided in chapter 9.

6.3 Conclusions
There is a striking lack of information regarding the profile of smugglers. Scholars’ views can be divided into a criminological and a sociological perspective. The information about the smugglers is based mainly on police and court records and, to a lesser extent, on interviews with migrants. Some recent research includes a psychological perspective, including interviews with the smugglers about their motivations and background. Research based on interviews with smugglers should be further developed, as it provides subjective insight into the migrant-smuggling phenomenon

There are a lot of generalities in this. But a few conclusions from the chapter:

(a) Smugglers never give the full truth about their operations, as it would lead to the authorities easily disrupting them.
(b) Greatest trust happens when smuggler and their “migrants” come from the same communities and speak the same language.
(c) Some do it purely for money, and others are driven — at least partly — by altruistic reasons. It seems to act as a self-rationalization.

9. Organizational Details Of Smuggling

8. Organizational structures of smuggling networks
This chapter considers typologies of organizational structures and actors involved in
migrant-smuggling activities and highlight similarities and differences in the organizational
structures of smuggling networks in different parts of the world
. It then looks into details of how smugglers are organized in different parts of the world and reviews information about factors that influence the way smugglers are organized and elements that guide their evolution. Finally, it reviews information available to determine whether migrant-smuggling markets are increasingly dominated by transnational organizations.

8.1 General analysis of organizational structures of smuggling networks
8.1.1 Typology of structures
From a general standpoint, the literature has taken a great interest in the organizational structure of smuggling networks. Intergovernmental organizations and national administrations have published or sponsored research on this issue in order to increase the capacity to investigate and prosecute smuggling-related offences. The literature reviewed shows that smuggling of migrants can take many organizational forms, as indicated by the great diversity of concepts used to describe it. According to Heckmann, the methodology presented in the literature on smuggling of migrants is rather weak and often uses vague and ad hoc concepts, such as “the smuggling industry”, “migrant merchants”, “mom and pop smugglers” and “organized crime”.

8.3 Conclusions
Sources reviewed reveal a great disparity in the quantity and the quality of information about the organization of smuggling networks. Few regions have been researched, and there is often a critical lack of comprehensive and up-to-date research available. Specific research has not been carried out in North and West African countries; and investigative and judicial data from european sources have been used. Further research should be developed in order to get a more comprehensive understanding of the organization of smuggling networks around the world.

Some useful information is contained in the chapter.

While there are areas that are under researched, it may be that the methods used are similar to those that are more documented in other nations. After all, how many techniques can there be that are totally novel?

10. Human & Social Costs

10.1 Human costs
The literature reviewed is highly critical of the law enforcement strategy currently deployed at the maritime borders of EU, which is deemed to be both inefficient in preventing irregular migration and inhumane towards the migrants. According to Spijkerboer, increased border controls have led to the loss of more lives, and further tightening of external EU borders will intensify this trend. Heckmann stresses that improved border control measures have contributed to establishing a low-cost segment of the market, in which smugglers endanger the health and lives of the smuggled migrants. This opinion is shared by authors such as Carling, monzini, eylemer and Şemşit, to name but a few.

10.2 Social costs The literature reviewed provides little information on the social costs of smuggling of migrants, except in respect of Africa. The high failure rate of internal journeys in Africa seems to indicate that, in many situations, migration can drain local resources and leave the country of origin and the communities of co-nationals abroad even more impoverished than before. most migrants depart with the savings of their family and loans from friends, making their migration a long-term investment. If they find themselves in difficulty during the trip, they ask for more money and often have it transferred in order to pay for later stages of the journey. The sums, for the country of origin, are often very high and dry up the family economy for years. Therefore, according to Beneduce, in recent decades the geography of migration has changed, and the geography of humanitarian problems recently associated with irregular migration (poverty, exploitation, segregation and abuse) is changing as well. many of the migrants or asylum-seekers caught between the economic demands of the smugglers and a permanent fear of being arrested and deported by the authorities, are impoverished and become “stranded”.

This is one of the main arguments against immigration in general. What happens to those other nations when the wealthy and able people leave? What happens when their family wealth is drained?

As for the costs, one piece of the puzzle is left out: what about those 1st world nations who are now forced to cope with large numbers of “refugees” or “irregular migrants” who have been smuggled in? The nations never invited them, and the people never gave any democratic mandate.

11. Final Thoughts On Report

Let’s start with the obvious question: for all the research that has been done, why doesn’t the UN do more to prevent illegal crossings? Instead, they do all they can to facilitate mass, illegal invasions and force host nations to cope.

Another thing to address: prosecuting or punishing smugglers is to be expected, but why should these migrants get a pass? If they are willingly participating, then they are accomplices. It is selfish to effectively reward such a system.

Why does the UN keep repeating the “refugee” lie, when its own research concludes that it is mainly economic migrants looking for better opportunity? The UN appears to be willingly complicit in this industry.

How would agreements like the UN Global Migration Compact impact this issue? Is the UN oblivious, or this a deliberate attempt to make human smuggling easier? Remember what is in it:

(Objective 4) Ensure migrants have identity papers
(Objective 5) Enhance pathways for migration
(Objective 11) Manage borders in “integrated” manner
(Objective 13) Detention only as a last resort
(Objective 15) Provide basic services for all migrants
(Objective 17) Educating media, censorship
(Objective 20) Make remittances easier/cheaper to send
(Objective 22) Forced to pay out pensions, social benefits

This UN treaty only makes it easier to smuggle people into countries like Canada. After all, if we are required to provide social benefits, can’t lock them up, and can’t even criticize it, then what will discourage it?

TSCE #6: UN Blurs The Line Between Smuggling & “Irregular” Migrants

(UN Office on Drugs and Crime)

(There is a connection between smuggling and “irregular migration”)

(UN High Commission on Refugees)

(UN insists terrorists be allowed to return home)

1. Important Links

(Other articles on trafficking, smuggling, child exploitation)
https://canucklaw.ca/tsce-9-other-accounts-worth-following/

CLICK HERE, for UNODC on smuggling migrants.
CLICK HERE, for a UN guide in circumventing the Canada/U.S. Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for UN guide: details on S3CA loopholes.
CLICK HERE, for UN insisting terrorists be repatriated.
CLICK HERE, for the UN supporting illegal mass invasion (caravans) into the U.S., despite knowing it is unwanted and illegal.

2. UN Review On Smuggling Migrants

(Page 11)
1. Introduction
The purpose of this thematic review is to survey existing sources and research papers on smuggling of migrants and to provide a gap analysis of existing knowledge from a global perspective. Indeed, despite the fact that smuggling of migrants has attracted great media and political attention over the last two decades, there has not been any comprehensive analysis of the state of expert knowledge. Great confusion still prevails about what smuggling of migrants is within the global context of irregular migration.

To be honest, I wonder that myself. “Irregular migrants”, which are really illegal aliens, are being who have entered a country illegally, or who entered legally, but remained when their status changed. This could simply be trying to make a distinction where none exists.

Article 6 of the Smuggling of migrants Protocol, requires States to criminalize both smuggling of migrants and enabling a person to remain in a country illegally in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a financial or other material benefit, as well as to establish as aggravating circumstances acts that endanger the lives or safety or entail inhuman or degrading treatment of migrants. By virtue of article 5, migrants are not liable to criminal prosecution for the fact of having been smuggled. It is therefore understood that the Protocol aims to target smugglers, not the people being smuggled

So, are we to give a pass to the people being smuggled and only focus on the smugglers? What happens if the people being smuggled are a willing part of it?

From a sociological perspective, smuggling of migrants may then include every act on a continuum between altruism and organized crime. Doomernik defines smuggling of migrants as “every act whereby an immigrant is assisted in crossing international borders whereby this crossing is not endorsed by the government of the receiving state, neither implicitly nor explicitly”.

(Page 12)
To the extent that the literature available allows a distinction to be made, the issues of irregular migration and trafficking in persons are deliberately not covered per se by this thematic review, despite the fact that these phenomena are closely connected with smuggling of migrants in practice.

They are not immigrants, but aliens.

Again, it seems to be searching for a difference where none exists. Illegal aliens (or “irregular migrants” in UN duck-speak) are people who enter other countries illegally. People who knowingly aid these illegal aliens are people smugglers. The UN engages in this mangling of the language in order to attempt to separate the two.

(Page 15)
2.1.1 Irregular migration
The relationship between irregular migration and smuggling of migrants has been discussed in the literature, with most authors acknowledging the crucial role of smuggling of migrants in facilitating irregular migration.

The legal definition of smuggling of migrants finds wide acceptance among the academic community, which usually refers to articles 3 and 6 of the Smuggling of migrants Protocol. Contrary to the concept of smuggling, the notion of irregular migration does not have a universally accepted definition; however, most academics and experts refer to the definition provided by IOM, which highlights that the most common forms of irregular migration are illegal entry, overstaying and unauthorized work.

In looking at the relationship between the two concepts, Friedrich Heckmann stresses that smuggling of migrants plays a crucial role in facilitating irregular migration, as smugglers may provide a wide range of services, from physical transportation and illegal crossing of a border to the procurement of false documents

Finally, we are getting some real honesty. Smuggling helps to facilitate so called “irregular migrants”, who are really illegal aliens. Smugglers transport these aliens, and often obtain false documents for them.

Why doesn’t irregular migration have a universally accepted definition? Is it done deliberately to obscure what is going on?

(Page 15)
2.1.2 Trafficking in persons
Smuggling of migrants must also be differentiated from the concept of trafficking in persons, defined under article 3 of the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children, supplementing the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Trafficking in Persons Protocol) as: The recruitment, transportation, transfer, harbouring or receipt of persons, by means of the threat or use of force or other forms of coercion, of abduction, of fraud, of deception, of the abuse of power or of a position of vulnerability or of the giving or receiving of payments or benefits to achieve the consent of a person having control over another person, for the purpose of exploitation. exploitation shall include, at a minimum, the exploitation of the prostitution of others or other forms of sexual exploitation, forced labour or services, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude or the removal of organs

This is actually true. There is a difference between voluntarily arranging to come to another nation illegally, and being forced or coerced into doing so. This is a valid distinction.

(Page 18)
2.2 Conceptualization of smuggling of migrants
2.2.1 Smuggling as an illegal migration business
The conceptualization of smuggling as a migration business was formally developed by Salt and Stein in 1997, even if one may find reference to this theory in earlier literature. This new interpretation of the smuggling phenomenon had a great influence on academic circles, and the concept was then borrowed by many academics. In a critical analysis of this concept, Herman stresses that the focus of expert discussions then revolved around the notion of a migration industry and its professionalization, in which migrants are seen as “products” and “people who aid migrants are called ‘smugglers’, and are portrayed as illegal ‘entrepreneurs’

Salt and Stein suggested treating international migration as a global business that has both
legitimate and illegitimate sides
. The migration business is conceived as a system of institutionalized networks with complex profit and loss accounts, including a set of institutions, agents and individuals each of which stands to make a commercial gain.

The model conceives trafficking and smuggling as an intermediary part of the global migration business facilitating movement of people between origin and destination countries. The model is divided into three stages: the mobilization and recruitment of migrants; their movement en route; and their insertion and integration into labour markets and host societies in destination countries. Salt and Stein conclude their theory by citing the need to look at immigration controls in a new way, placing sharper focus on the institutions and vested interests involved rather than on the migrants themselves.

Aranowitz puts forward a similar view and claims that smuggling could not have grown to such proportions if it were not supported by powerful market forces. Furthermore, Aranowitz argues that smugglers exhibit entrepreneur-like behaviour and circumvent legal requirements through corruption, deceit and threats. They specialize either in smuggling or in trafficking services, and the profit generated varies accordingly.

This is surprisingly well written. Smuggling and trafficking are businesses, and the people are the commodity. That being said, if the people are consenting to being smuggled, they are accomplices and not victims.

(Page 21)
The network theory also departs from the migration business theory by looking at the migrant as an actor in the migration process and not merely as an object, as in the organized crime theory. Van liempt and Doomernik have questioned the assumption that smuggled migrants are recruited by criminals and have little to say within the migration process. In their view, the relationship between the smugglers and the smuggled is more complex.

Looking at migrants as actors in the migration process, de Haas also insists on the need to depart from prejudiced views against smuggled migrants. According to him, rather than a desperate response to destitution, migration is generally a conscious choice made by relatively well-off
individuals to enhance their livelihoods
. Detailed discussions of migrants’ profiles and relationships with their smugglers are in chapters 5 and 7.

2.3 Conclusions
Sources reviewed reveal a strong interest among the academic community in analysing the
phenomenon of smuggling of migrants from a conceptual perspective. In particular, experts have debated the link between smuggling of migrants and other forms of transnational movement of persons—in particular irregular migration and trafficking in persons. Recent literature has also attempted to improve concrete understanding of smuggling of migrants through the conceptualization of the phenomenon as a migration business, a security threat or a family (network) business.

Some useful points:

Smuggling is not usually that of desperate people, but rather well-off individuals looking for a better life. The refugee system is being gamed.

Also, there is a clear link between these illegals (no they are not “irregular”) and the smuggling that facilitates this. To suggest otherwise is to blur reality.

The book is some 148 pages, and is far too long to go through in a single article, but do have a read.

3. UN Hypocrisy On People Smuggling

This cannot be overstated. It is extremely hypocritical for the UN to condemn human smuggling, while promoting and excusing so-called “irregular migration”. It is well known that many of these illegals come to the West by means of smuggling.

If smuggling itself is to be rejected by society as a whole, then why is it okay for the accomplices of these smugglers to reap the rewards that come from it?

The UN also insists that nations have an obligation to allow terrorists to return home. Needless to say this endangers the public greatly. You can’t simultaneously expect this, and for nations to have safe borders.

This same behaviour also happens on the U.S./Mexico border. In 2018, the UN facilitated large “caravans” of economic migrants with the intention of bringing them up through Central America and overwhelming the U.S. border. How does this respect national sovereignty in any way at all?

4. Organizing “Irregulars” is Smuggling

As much as the UN would like to blur the line, arranging for migrants to enter other nations without permission is smuggling.

The UN insists that all migrants (even if in these countries illegally) are entitled to basic services. As such, the UN advocates for smuggling. The only reasonable conclusion is that having all these amenities will lead to more people trying to enter illegally.

As much as they try to engage in mental gymnastics, the UN is directly involved in people smuggling. They promote policies that only ensure the smuggling (and trafficking) will continue indefinitely.

The UN document claimed that migration is a huge industry. They were absolutely right about that.

TSCE #5: UNHCR Is Party To Canada/U.S. S3CA. Consultations Mandatory

(UNHCR: United Nations High Commission on Refugees, has released another guide in how to circumvent the Canada/U.S. border)

1. Important Links

(Other articles on trafficking, smuggling, child exploitation)
https://canucklaw.ca/tsce-9-other-accounts-worth-following/

CLICK HERE, for the link from the UNHCR.
CLICK HERE, for other UN guidelines on how to exploit loophole in S3CA.

CLICK HERE, for review of abuse in Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for review of World Border Congress.
CLICK HERE, for review, suing for right to enter US illegally.
CLICK HERE, for review on “sanctuary” cities.
CLICK HERE, for true scale of illegals in U.S.: 22M?
CLICK HERE, for start up of amnesty program in Canada.
CLICK HERE, for challenge dismissed in closing loophole in S3CA.

CLICK HERE, for the UN supporting illegal entry into the US.
CLICK HERE, for link to the Canada/U.S. Safe 3rd Country Agreement.
CLICK HERE, for Government of Canada info on S3CA.

2. The Loophole Written Into S3CA

EMPHASIZING that the United States and Canada offer generous systems of refugee protection, recalling both countries’ traditions of assistance to refugees and displaced persons abroad, consistent with the principles of international solidarity that underpin the international refugee protection system, and committed to the notion that cooperation and burden-sharing with respect to refugee status claimants can be enhanced;

ARTICLE 1
In this Agreement,
“Country of Last Presence” means that country, being either Canada or the United States, in which the refugee claimant was physically present immediately prior to making a refugee status claim at a land border port of entry.

ARTICLE 4
Subject to paragraphs 2 and 3, the Party of the country of last presence shall examine, in accordance with its refugee status determination system, the refugee status claim of any person who arrives at a land border port of entry on or after the effective date of this Agreement and makes a refugee status claim.

The “land border port of entry” is clear. However, in practice it is becoming such that if you simply bypass the official border ports, you can actually take advantage of it. Poor wording, but it has become a real headache.

From the Government of Canada website, we find the following.

Where the Agreement is in effect
The Safe Third Country Agreement applies only to refugee claimants who are seeking entry to Canada from the U.S.:
-at Canada-U.S. land border crossings
-by train or
-at airports, only if the person seeking refugee protection in Canada has been refused refugee status in the U.S. and is in transit through Canada after being deported from the U.S.

This clearly was not meant to reward people for illegally crossing the border, provided they do so anywhere other than a port of entry.

3. More Loopholes In S3CA

Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they have a family member who:
-is a Canadian citizen
-is a permanent resident of Canada
-is a protected person under Canadian immigration legislation
-has made a claim for refugee status in Canada that has been accepted by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB)
-has had his or her removal order stayed on humanitarian and compassionate grounds
-holds a valid Canadian work permit
-holds a valid Canadian study permit, or
-is over 18 years old and has a claim for refugee protection that has been referred to the IRB for determination. (This claim must not have been withdrawn by the family member, declared abandoned or rejected by the IRB or found ineligible for referral to the IRB.) citizens, permanent residents, or various other statuses, you qualify for an exception to the rule. The “family members” list include: the spouse, sons, daughters, parents, legal guardians, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, aunts, uncles, nieces, and nephews.

Unaccompanied minors exception
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they are minors (under the age of 18) who:
-are not accompanied by their mother, father or legal guardian
-have neither a spouse nor a common-law partner, and
-do not have a mother, a father or a legal guardian in Canada or the United States.

Document holder exceptions
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they:
-hold a valid Canadian visa (other than a transit visa)
-hold a valid work permit
-hold a valid study permit
-hold a travel document (for permanent residents or refugees) or other valid admission document issued by Canada, or
-are not required (exempt) to get a temporary resident visa to enter Canada but require a U.S.–issued visa to enter the U.S.

Public interest exceptions
Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if:
they have been charged with or convicted of an offence that could subject them to the death penalty in the U.S. or in a third country. However, a refugee claimant is ineligible if he or she has been found inadmissible in Canada on the grounds of security, for violating human or international rights, or for serious criminality, or if the Minister finds the person to be a danger to the public.

Source is here. Okay. Are there is any cases that DON’T meet any of these exceptions?

4. UNHCR Is A Party To S3CA

CONVINCED, in keeping with advice from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and its Executive Committee, that agreements among states may enhance the international protection of refugees by promoting the orderly handling of asylum applications by the responsible party and the principle of burden-sharing;

ARTICLE 8
(1) The Parties shall develop standard operating procedures to assist with the implementation of this Agreement. These procedures shall include provisions for notification, to the country of last presence, in advance of the return of any refugee status claimant pursuant to this Agreement.
(2) These procedures shall include mechanisms for resolving differences respecting the interpretation and implementation of the terms of this Agreement. Issues which cannot be resolved through these mechanisms shall be settled through diplomatic channels.
(3) The Parties agree to review this Agreement and its implementation. The first review shall take place not later than 12 months from the date of entry into force and shall be jointly conducted by representatives of each Party. The Parties shall invite the UNHCR to participate in this review. The Parties shall cooperate with UNHCR in the monitoring of this Agreement and seek input from non-governmental organizations.

Source is here. Serious question: why have Canada and the United States signed an agreement that quite clearly gives the UN a seat at the table?

5. UN Supports Caravans Into U.S.

For a walk down memory lane, let’s review what the U.N. was up to in the Fall of 2018.

“IOM maintains its position that the human rights and basic needs of all migrants must be respected, regardless of their migratory status,” said Christopher Gascon, UN Migration’s Chief of Mission in Mexico.

In coordination with UN refugee agency UNHCR, he said “we will continue to monitor the situation of the caravan counting on field staff, the Mexican Office of Assistance for Migrants and Refugees, and partner NGOs, providing information regarding alternatives for regular and safe migration, as well as options for voluntary returns,” he added.

Counting on its Mesoamerica Program – funded by the US State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration – IOM is now also able to provide voluntary return assistance to migrants.

“The caravan phenomenon in Central America is another expression of a migration process that the region has been facing for quite some time,” Marcelo Pisani, IOM Regional Director for Central America, North America and the Caribbean explained, saying the “mixed migration flow” was driven by economic factors, family reunification, violence and the search for international protection.

“Nevertheless,” he added, “we are concerned about the stress and demands that caravans place on the humanitarian community and the asylum systems of receiving countries, which ultimately have limited resources to face this challenge or to properly care for and protect migrants.”

According to local authorities, on Monday the Mexican government admitted a second caravan of approximately 1,800 Central Americans who initially started the regularization process, but later opted to continue the trek north without seeking asylum; a third caravan of around 500 Salvadorians crossed in on Tuesday, where most requested asylum; and a fourth group of some 1,700 individuals spent Thursday night in the Guatemalan town of Tecún Umán, on the border with Mexico.

This has been covered in previous articles. The U.N. thinks nothing of coordinating and facilitating massive “caravans” of migrants to dump into the United States, and completely overwhelm their social services and border guards.

The U.N. does not respect the sovereignty of the U.S.’s Southern border. With the above published manual, it becomes clear they don’t support the Northern border either.

6. Border Security Is A Joke

Our agreement with the United States comes with so many exceptions that it is pretty much useless. And if someone doesn’t meet one of the exceptions, they can just fly to New York, and take a cab to Roxham Road. The RCMP will dutifully greet them like bellhops.

Despite the UNCHR deliberately acting to destroy Western borders, the Safe 3rd Country Agreement was drafted in such a way that they are guaranteed a seat at any reviews and modifications that come up.

Not only does the U.N. work to undermine sovereign nations, but they are sure to publish guidebooks to make it easy.

Of course, the illegal aliens entering Canada through underhanded means is nothing compared to the vast LEGAL immigration which is effectively population replacement.

Previously a Federal Court Prothonotary ruled that a citizen has no public or private standing to demand the Court take action against the government. That is being appealed.

The Western World is facing some serious challenges, to put it very mildly. Our politicians, media, and courts are stacked against us.

Canada: Pathway To Permanent Residence For Illegals & Their Families

(Program launched in July: PR-Path for illegals)

(Canadian Labour Congress)

(Canadian Border Services cancelling arrest warrants)

(Nothing new here. Temps becoming permanent residents is old news, and there are many ways to do this.

(Screenshots from 2018 Report to Parliament)

(How the CPC might address this issue)

1. Important Links

(Other articles on mass migration)
https://canucklaw.ca/facts-figures-the-ugly-truth-about-replacement-migration-in-canada/

CLICK HERE, for Canadian Gov’t website on pathway to permanent resident status for illegal aliens.
http://archive.is/e6OYZ
CLICK HERE, for the Canadian Labour Congress.
http://archive.is/s3pq6

CLICK HERE, for sanctuary cities circumventing borders.
CLICK HERE, for 22M+ illegals in U.S., amnesty programs.

2. Annual Immigration Reports To Parliament

(a) 2004 Annual Report to Parliament
(b) 2005 Annual Report to Parliament
(c) 2006 Annual Report to Parliament
(d) 2007 Annual Report to Parliament
(e) 2008 Annual Report to Parliament
(f) 2009 Annual Report to Parliament
(g) 2010 Annual Report to Parliament
(h) 2011 Annual Report to Parliament
(i) 2012 Annual Report to Parliament
(j) 2013 Annual Report to Parliament
(k) 2014 Annual Report to Parliament
(l) 2015 Annual Report to Parliament
(m) 2016 Annual Report to Parliament
(n) 2017 Annual Report to Parliament
(o) 2018 Annual Report to Parliament
(p) Archived listings of Reports

Each annual report talks about how many “temporary” workers and students come into Canada every year. But how many of them actually leave, and how many simply stay, legally or otherwise?

3. Some Context For This Review

Defenders of mass migration into Canada always defend so-called “temporary” entry into the country. These programs include:
(a) Temporary Foreign Worker Program
(b) International Mobility Program
(c) Student Visas

The main difference (on paper) between TFWP and IMP is that TFWP requires a Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA), which is a demonstration that a job exists that a Canadian cannot fulfill. By contrast, the International Mobility Program is effectively an open work permit.

While student visas are supposed to be for school, students are allowed to work up to 20 hours per week when class is in session. They are allowed unlimited hours other periods. Student visas are essentially work permits as well.

Despite what critics claim, not everyone returns home after their allotted time in Canada. Some do, certainly, but a lot don’t. Why? Because Canada’s laws make it very easy to obtain permanent residence, or to otherwise extend your stay. And not only can the main applicant stay, but family (typically spouse and children) are often included in this.

Certainly there are other programs than the 3 listed above, but they are 3 of the largest, and important to note.

4. Pathway To Permanent Residence

Ottawa, July 5, 2019 – Canada has launched a new temporary initiative to create a pathway to permanent residency for up to 500 out-of-status workers in the construction industry in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). These construction workers have come to Canada and made contributions to its economy and currently have limited means to regularize their status.

And if this “temporary” initiative is deemed to be successful, then how much will it be extended by? Guaranteed it is not 500 people.

Over many years, even decades, some workers who have come to Canada with valid temporary resident status, and who have filled labour shortages in the construction industry, have fallen out of status. Previous changes, such as “four in, four out”, have resulted in some workers losing their status. These workers have continued to address significant labour shortages in the construction industry, while also contributing to the economy and their communities. Without valid immigration status, these workers and their families have lived in fear and been left feeling very vulnerable. The presence of out-of-status workers in a significant industry leads to depressed wages for Canadians and makes workers vulnerable to employer exploitation and abuse.

Over many years and decades? So the government admits that people have been overstaying visas or work permits for decades. Why hasn’t this been addressed long ago.

Illegals living in Canada leads to depressed wages? I would actually agree, but up to a point. Yes, the extra labour available does drive down wages. However, that would still be the case even if they were “legalized”. It would still be an abundance of cheap labour.

The Temporary Public Policy for Out-of-Status Construction Workers in the Greater Toronto Area responds to the recent parliamentary report on labour shortages in the construction industry in this part of Canada and reflects observations from numerous studies about the vulnerability of out-of-status workers. In the committee’s recommendations, the Government was urged to explore solutions for workers in the construction industry with precarious or no immigration status.

This temporary initiative is a step forward to increase the protection of some of these construction workers and their families, while safeguarding Canada’s labour market and ensuring that Canada can retain the workers it needs to grow the economy and build communities.

Potential applicants will first identify themselves to the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), a national labour organization with many construction industry affiliates in the GTA. CLC officials will determine the eligibility of potential applicants and refer them to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada.

Source is here. That is exactly as it sounds. People living in the country illegally can sign up for this program, and if accepted, will be on a pathway to permanent residence.

Not that we don’t have large numbers of Canadians who are either unemployed or underemployed. Never mind that Canadians are forced to compete for jobs with people in the country illegally, who are often willing to work less. Never mind the effect of driving down wages.

Ignore the money that gets sent out of the country as remittances, money that should be staying and helping to drive Canada’s economy.

Does anyone truly believe this is a “temporary” program, or that it is going to remain at just a few hundred people? No, once it’s considered “operational”, the next step will be to scale it up.

5. PR Program For Families

Spouses/partners and dependent children can be included in the application for permanent residence.

This detail cannot be left out. This so-called temporary initiative is not just for the worker without legal status. Spouse and children are also eligible to apply under it.

6. Canadian Labour Congress

The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) is proud to be working with Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to implement a temporary initiative that will help 500 out-of-status construction workers find a pathway to permanent residence that will end the insecure nature of their employment and immigration status.

Out-of-status workers are people who have come to Canada with valid temporary residence status, but have fallen out of status for various reasons, and have found employment in the construction industry. Without status, these workers have continued to fill labour shortages, while contributing greatly to our society and economy. However, fear of detection, detainment, and deportation drives these workers and their families “underground,” often limiting their access to social programs, and making them vulnerable to employer exploitation and abuse.

The Canadian Labour Congress openly admits that people are working without being legally allowed in (or to remain) in Canada. But who cares, we need the workers.

The purpose of this initiative is to put in place a mechanism for the Government of Canada and the CLC, in the spirit of co-operation and mutual interest, to work together in the identification and referral for processing of applications for permanent residence in Canada of up to 500 out-of-status construction workers in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and their immediate family members (e.g., spouse or common-law partner, and dependent children).

Up to 100 of the 500 spaces for this public policy will be permitted for those who entered Canada as a temporary resident, but who never had authorization to work in Canada.

For some clarification, it is not 500 people INCLUDING family members. Rather, it is 500 people plus their family members.

Nice bait-and-switch here. The program is announced as a means to help WORKERS who have fallen on hard times. However, the CLC admits it will be partially open for people who were never even workers.

Also, this may be poor wording, but is immediate family limited to a spouse and children, or are those just the guidelines?

7. U.S. A Cautionary Warning

Both sanctuary cities and the estimated 22 million or more illegals have been covered here. The U.S. has had many amnesty initiatives, but since the borders are not secure, this doesn’t help the problem. It only encourages much more of it.

Problem is, since Canada doesn’t track people leaving the country (until very recently), we have no way of knowing who has left, and when.

Informal estimates are of 200,000 to 500,000 people living in the Canada, small compared to 22M or more in the United States. However, getting actual substance behind those estimates is difficult. And if this “pilot program” is considered successful, how large will it be expanded to?

8. CBSA “Cancelling” Arrest Warrants

While a separate topic, this is interesting to consider as well. Recently the Canadian Border Services Agency admitted it “cancels” arrest warrants for people it is supposed to deport, but cannot find. The article is mind-blowingly stupid beyond belief.

According to Lemire, the CBSA cancelled more than 1,300 immigration warrants in 2018. It’s unclear how many of these cancelled warrants were for people who could still be in Canada but were not found by the CBSA.

A cynic might wonder whether this is politically motivated, or whether the Border Services wants to appear less incompetent by having less “open warrants” on its books. Either way, it’s disgraceful, and undermines Canadian sovereignty.

9. Forget Deportation, Just Put Them To Work

That seems to be where we are heading. No more “divisive” deportations. Just put them to work, and hand out their new papers. Don’t worry about any of the long term costs.

As has been covered ad nauseum here, LEGAL immigration into Canada is currently at about 1 million per year. That includes people who have entered on some kind of visa, and have a pathway to permanent residence.

This program will not stop at 500 workers and their families. It will be expanded once the structure is in place. It cheapens Canadian citizenship when access to it is so easy.