IMM #28: CANZUK Expansion, The Open Borders Bait-And-Switch (FT #10)
1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada
CLICK HERE, for #1: temp workers, other migration categories. CLICK HERE, for #2: close to 1M people/year entering on visas. CLICK HERE, for #3: CANZUK, expansion and erasing the borders. CLICK HERE, for #4: population replacement programs in Canada. CLICK HERE, for #5: replacement numbers/countries since 2004. CLICK HERE, for #6: domestic abuse as pathway to PR status. CLICK HERE, for #7: the International Mobility Program. CLICK HERE, for #8: economic imm, remittances, brain drain. CLICK HERE, for #9: global remittance estimates, regulations. CLICK HERE, for #10: economic immigration when unemployment high. CLICK HERE, for #11: TD article on true migration rates. CLICK HERE, for #12: pilot amnesty-for-illegals program in Toronto. CLICK HERE, for #13: work permits, health care for illegals. CLICK HERE, for #14: getting legal residence via fraud. CLICK HERE, for #15: student/family member to PR pipeline. CLICK HERE, for #16: start up visas = buying PR/citizenship. CLICK HERE, for #17: ghost students visas for immigration. CLICK HERE, for #18: “inadmissibles” legally let in anyway. CLICK HERE, for #19: birth rates in Canada since 1991. CLICK HERE, for #20: main sources for demographic replacement. CLICK HERE, for #21: demographic changes cause voting changes. CLICK HERE, for #22: estimating temp/students staying in Canada. CLICK HERE, for #23: Municipal Nominee Program coming? CLICK HERE, for #24: Rempel lies about temp ==> PR pipeline. CLICK HERE, for #25: review of 2019 annual report to parliament. CLICK HERE, for #26: facts/figures about replacement migration. CLICK HERE, for #27: the case for full immigration moratorium.
CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention. CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan. CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974. CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.
2. Offshoring, Globalization, Free Trade
CLICK HERE, for #1: thoughts on potential free trade with China. CLICK HERE, for #2: NAFTA, lawsuits, job losses, sovereignty. CLICK HERE, for #3: looking at NAFTA’s hidden/ignored costs. CLICK HERE, for #4: Bill C-79, Trans-Pacific Partnership. CLICK HERE, for #5: why Trump abandoned the T.P.P. CLICK HERE, for #6: CANZUK erasing our sovereignty. CLICK HERE, for #7: outsourcing, other trade deals, CANZUK. CLICK HERE, for #8: professional outsourcing, wages, immigration. CLICK HERE, for #9: EPI research on social costs of free trade.
As proponents of a new and exciting geopolitical union between the four CANZUK nations (Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK), we’re very often met with one particular question: looking ahead, who else might be able to join the partnership?
It should be said that a new Commonwealth union would be welcoming of any potential members – with each being considered on a case-by-case basis – and that the CANZUK project is very much a work in progress; always receptive of fresh ideas and potential avenues to explore.
A useful way to begin is by taking a look at the CANZUK countries’ dependent territories, such as Christmas Island, the Cook Islands and Anguilla, for example, which are dependencies of Australia, New Zealand, and the UK, respectively, as well as the UK’s Crown dependencies (Guernsey, Jersey, and the Isle of Man).
Each area would naturally become full members of the new group along with the nations to which they are related. Some advocates claim that these small islands, and their generally sparse populations, are currently under-utilised, and that a CANZUK alliance would offer a tremendous opportunity for their communities to acquire a far more extensive set of rights by becoming equal partners in a union, while shaking off their somewhat colonial tint.
Widening our scope, we arrive at the Commonwealth realms. These realms are sovereign states who are members of the Commonwealth and who currently share Queen Elizabeth II as their monarch, of which, there are 16 including the CANZUK countries.
A further concern, and no doubt the most pressing, is that a union involving most or all of the current Commonwealth would be a political impossibility, with almost every country having broken off colonial ties with the British in order to achieve their independence, which says nothing for the relationships between some of the nations (India and Pakistan or Bangladesh and Pakistan, for example). Of course, it would be entirely possible for individual Commonwealth countries to make a solo membership claim.
When weighing up the potential barriers to entry that many of these Commonwealth countries have, we’re often confronted with the challenge that this new alliance is concerned only with nations that are populated by white folk. Such criticism is fairly lazy and can be easily dealt with. Firstly, as we’ve just seen, there’s absolutely no reason why these countries couldn’t join in the future, so long as efforts were directed at bringing them up to par in the ways just discussed.
The original article was deleted, but thankfully it is archived. CANZUK researcher Luke Fortmann writes about the possible expansion and states that options are “always being considered”. To be blunt, this 4 nation alliance could swell.
Also, he does acknowledge that expansion would lead to mass migration to the original 4 nations, and to their demographic replacement. But he doesn’t seem to care as long as it’s done in an orderly fashion.
We can take it to the next level, to show that multi-later organizations can be aspirational. Where you have the rule of law, GDP, respect for rights, the Common Law system, the ability to support a free market, that you’ll work more together. Then we let more and more countries in, and revolutionize opportunities with CANZUK. Please support it. Thank you.
5. Australian Senator Paterson Supports It
Senator Paterson has also let it slip that he sees expanding the CANZUK zone as quite possible as soon as it is operational. The initial 4 are just the starting point. Interestingly, he points out that CANZUK is effectively an expansion of the 1973 Trans-Tasmanian Agreement.
(3:50) Rather than drafting a new agreement entirely from scratch, Australia should advocate adding Canada and the U.K. to the [Closer Economic Relations] Agreement, with only a few major changes if required…. Like the CER, CANZUK would include the freedom of movement between the 4 Commonwealth countries.
It could act as a strong voice in favour of the rules-based liberal order, that is under attack from populist movements on both sides of the political aisle around the world. Over time, this is a group which could grow. In the past week, I’ve had many good suggestions of countries that would make logical additions to CANZUK. Getting the core building block in place, though, I think makes sense.
Again, a bait-and-switch. Promoting it as just a 4 nation pact is the selling feature. Goal is to expand it once it’s fully operational.
6. Free Movement Is Primary Goal
Steve Paiken points out that Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the U.K. happen to be majority white “for now”. Great emphasis. Knowing that it will change pretty soon. The people in the video make it clear they don’t care about demographic change.
7. ExtraNewsFeed Article On CANZUK
That leads into the benefit for the group in terms of geopolitics. Forming a close economic alliance with the EU would be easier for the bloc, and the two unions combined would have a population of 600 million people, around an eleventh of the world’s population. The combined economies of the two blocs would represent over a quarter of world GDP, at around $23 trillion.
Throw the US in as a partner, and this Western/Anglophone bloc is now worth half of the world’s economy and hosts an eighth of its people.
Some have mooted that the US or some African Anglophone countries might also join such a union, although this would certainly complicate trade matters and the idea of free movement. Perhaps a second “outer ring” union, with a pathway to full membership contingent on democratisation and economic development, could be created for other Anglophone countries.
That’s right. The article promoting CANZUK suggests creating a “secondary” level of nations, with a pathway to eventual full partnership.
8. CANZUK.org On Expanding The Zone
So, each of the CANZUK nations have focused on their local geographic regions with their trade deals, for reasons of proximity and ease of transport. But there would seem to be a huge opportunity here – for collaboration in free trade deals with each other’s home regions. For example, Australia and New Zealand already have free trade deals with China – Canada and the UK could hitch a ride onto these existing channels. And all four nations are interested in a trade deal with India – why not combine efforts?
These would have small effects to start with; but when combined over three regions – Asia-Pacific, North America and Europe, the effects would accumulate. Essentially, trade deals which would be too marginal to be worth pursuing on an individual national basis (for example, Australia-Norway) could be wrapped into a CANZUK framework. In this case, the UK would be the lead partner, opening their region to the other CANZUK partners.
Exactly how this would work remains to be seen. You could have a single CANZUK trade delegation, working together to land bigger deals, or a piecemeal approach, where the region lead partner(s) initiates the approach, bringing the others along for the ride as negotiations proceed.
While the talk of expansion appears to be in the context of trade, it would lead to economic harm, given how places like India and China can simply underbid local companies and put them out of work. And who’s to say it “won’t” lead to free movement at some point?
9. UK CANZUK On Expanding The Zone
I’m an advocate of creating a new geopolitical partnership between Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the UK (CANZUK). This would begin with a free trade agreement, an agreement for free movement to live and work, and a defence and security partnership. If that were seen to function well, we might move on to establish an ever closer union principle, and create some formal mechanisms for caucusing our views in global debates and enhancing mutual recognition of regulation and coordinating in other relevant ways. The aim would not be to create a new integrated superstate (certainly not at first, and probably not for many decades or centuries, if at all) but, rather, a geopolitical partnership, akin to the European Economic Community or Warsaw Pact partnerships of the 1970s.
However, a more natural way to proceed would surely be to get CANZUK established and if those initial countries worked well together for a few decades, we could then consider adding the Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua and St Kitts, perhaps after some providing some assistance to raise their GDPs per capita a little closer to ours.
Overall, then, it would be best to begin with the narrower set of countries that are most compatible. That will be challenge enough to start with. That does not mean that in some decades time we should not consider adding countries with similar constitutions, such as The Bahamas or Barbados, if they can raise their GDP per capita and reduce their murder rates. But decisions on that question are, at this stage, many decades away.
Yet another piece reiterating that the current list (Canada, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom), are not the end result. Many more countries could be added at some point.
From a socio-economic standpoint, it is clear that integrating other Commonwealth nations within a facilitated migration initiative at this time would not work. At present, additional countries (such as South Africa, India, Jamaica and Pakistan, to name a few) do not meet the economic criteria that is essential for facilitated migration to succeed, as the benefits of reciprocal migration can only be guaranteed by Commonwealth countries that are very similar in terms of socio-economic characteristics.
There is no reason why additional countries within the Commonwealth would not be able to eventually join a facilitated migration initiative, but for the foreseeable future, the CANZUK countries are so similar in terms of social, economic, cultural and historical factors, it would be folly not to promote reciprocal migration, free trade and foreign policy among these countries and observe the benefits that such arrangements would bring
Read between the lines (page 9 of the report). Expanding CANZUK beyond the original 4 members doesn’t seem feasible, but doesn’t mean that it can’t or won’t happen at some point.
11. CANZUK Bait-And-Switch
It is sold to the public as a free trade and free movement (visa free) pact between 4 very similar countries. While this may not sound too bad in principle, fact is that expanding it to other countries is also being talked about. What people are being sold on is not the entire story.
Of course, there are other references available to CANZUK expansion, but hopefully the point has already been made here.