(TD Canada Bank releases article on Canada’s population boom)
(Population growth in Canada)
(So-called “non-permanent” groups in Canada)
(Groups of “non-permanent” once more)
(Conservative Party of Canada on turning “temps” into PR)
1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada
Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.
CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention. CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan. CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement). CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974. CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.
Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.
CLICK HERE, for mass migration at 1M/year in Canada. CLICK HERE, for migration programs in Canada. CLICK HERE, for replacement migration since 2003/04. CLICK HERE, for domestic violence path to permanent residence. CLICK HERE, for International Mobility Program. CLICK HERE, for remittances and brain drain. CLICK HERE, for economic migration during high unemployment. CLICK HERE, for CANZUK review.
It has been covered many times on this website, but the public is being grossly mislead about the true size and scale of mass migration in Canada.
Here is an article from Toronto Dominion Bank, essentially confirming all of the facts, but otherwise justifying the practice.
5. Quotes From The Article
Students, the largest category of non-permanent residents
To better understand the drivers of this recent trend, it is useful to first identify who falls under the banner of non-permanent residents. A non-permanent resident is a non-Canadian who is legally authorized to enter and reside in Canada for temporary purposes. Statistics Canada breaks down non-permanent residents into three categories: temporary workers, refugees, and international students (Chart 2).
But as we will see “non-permanent” doesn’t really mean non-permanent. There are a great many pathways to keep people staying longer and longer.
First, temporary workers are those who have been permitted to work in Canada under two main programs: the Temporary Foreign Workers Program (TFWP) or the International Mobility Program (IMP). Applicants may also obtain work permits for other purposes, which include humanitarian and compassionate reasons.
Exactly. You can obtain different visas or work permits later.
The TFWP aims to fill gaps in the labour market that arise when there are no available Canadians to carry out responsibilities of a job. To establish this need, an employer must undergo a Labour Market Impact Assessment (LMIA). On the other hand, applicants to the IMP are not required to complete a LMIA as its purpose is to fulfill Canada’s larger economic and cultural goals. For example, the IMP serves Canada’s major trade agreements such the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and Canada’s reciprocal exchange agreements. It also awards post-graduation work permits to eligible international student graduates which allows them to gain Canadian work experience and fill labour market needs.
For some clarification: in 2014 the TFWP was broken up. Now there are two separate programs. (a) The Temporary Foreign Worker Program is supposed to a specific labour shortage fulfillment, while (b) International Mobility Program is essentially an open work permit.
Also, please note that BOTH programs generally allow for extensions. BOTH are pathways towards permanent residency, and eventual citizenship.
Chart 3 shows how net inflows of TFW have stacked up relative to other non-permanent residents over the past decade. (Given data limitations, we used IRCC source data to infer trends of the various components.) The TFW category has been dropping in recent years since reaching a peak in 2013. This development can be explained by reported abuses of the program, which prompted efforts by the federal government to tighten the qualifying criteria.
Again, these aren’t really “non-permanent”, regardless of how the program is described. There absolutely are options for many people to remain in Canada.
6. Why Are Refugees “Non-Permanent”?
Next, refugees are those who request protection upon or after arrival to Canada. This has historically been the smallest category of non-permanent residents.
Finally, the last and largest category is international students. These are people who are permitted to study in Canada in any program of their choice.
Many refugees annually become “protected persons”. Then they can remain in Canada forever. This absolutely is permanent migration for most successful people.
7. Transitioning Students Into Permanent Residents
Second, as more and more international students’ transition from non-permanent resident status to permanent resident status, they support long-term prosperity of the Canadian economy. Specifically, they help ease demographic pressures, provide a potential boost to productivity and promote diversity in Canada. Indeed, recent data suggest that not only is the share of students on study permits increasing, but so too are retention rates upon completion of PSE and temporary work permits (Chart 9). In a 2018 survey conducted by the Canadian Bureau of International Education, around 60% of respondents stated that they intended to apply for permanent resident status in Canada, up from 51% in 2015.
Why are students considered temporary? By their own admissions, according to this survey, a majority intend to apply to become permanent residents.
8. Final Thoughts
On some level, it is nice to have some confirmation about what has been written about here for a while. Namely, that mass migration into Canada is far higher than what the public thinks.
However, the article ignores several realities. What about the increasing balkanization of Canada along racial, cultural, ethnic, linguistic lines? How will we ensure compatibility of people coming? How will we do proper screening? How will be maintain the cultural makeup that formed Canada in the first place?
CLICK HERE, for TSCE #1: series intro and other listings. CLICK HERE, for TSCE #2: suing for the right to illegally enter U.S. CLICK HERE, for TSCE #3: the U.N.’s hypocrisy on sexual abuse. CLICK HERE, for TSCE #4: fake refugees gaming the system.
2. Important Links
CLICK HERE, for piece on Safe 3rd Country Agreement. CLICK HERE, for a previous piece on sanctuary cities. CLICK HERE, for a previous piece on Islamic blasphemy laws upheld by ECHR. CLICK HERE, for previous piece on New York Declaration of 2016. CLICK HERE, for previous piece on Global Migration Compact.
CLICK HERE, for the UN admitting it has an agenda to promote the “caravans” into the US. CLICK HERE, for a Fox article on Bill for new DNA testing on so called “family units” seeking asylum at U.S./Mexico border. CLICK HERE, for HILL article on lawsuit to allow illegal immigration. CLICK HERE, for the Canada/US Safe 3rd Country Agreement. CLICK HERE, for CBC article on Roxham Road crossings. CLICK HERE, for Epoch Times article on ICE Director Homan’s comments about sanctuary cities. CLICK HERE, for an article on Sweden conducting “age tests”. CLICK HERE, for France’s “bone tests” ruled constitutional. CLICK HERE, for France’s bone test ruling itself. CLICK HERE, for Atlantic article, ECHR upholds blasphemy conviction. CLICK HERE, for child marriage case in Germany. CLICK HERE, for NXIVM cult, Allison Mack case. CLICK HERE, for a Trudeau friend sentenced for child porn.
3. Context For This Article
Pardon the rather scattershot nature of this piece. It will cover a range of different topics all within the context of human trafficking and child exploitation. Links provided, and so will be relevant screenshots.
There will be follow up articles to come
4. Child Trafficking Across US/Mexico Border
(The UN is partially responsible for efforts to overrun the US/Mexico border)
(The UN demands the “rights” of all migrants be respected, regardless of their status. This means, regardless of whether they are in the country illegally)
(Officially, the UN condemns “smuggling of migrants”)
(Children used as props for “family units”)
Senate Republicans this week introduced a bill to implement DNA testing of migrants claiming to be part of family units — a move aimed at cracking down on child trafficking along the southern border.
Sens. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., and Joni Ernst, R-Iowa., introduced the End Child Trafficking Now Act that would require DNA testing to verify relationships between adult migrants and the children they claim are part of their family. The senators say it will help prevent children from being exploited by drug traffickers and gang members.
“It is horrifying that children are becoming victims of trafficking at our southern border,” Blackburn said in a statement. “By confirming a familial connection between an alien and an accompanying minor, we can determine whether the child was brought across the border by an adult with nefarious intentions. The current crisis at our border is multifaceted and requires a holistic approach. By tackling these problems piece by piece, we will get this situation under control.”
Blackburn’s office said more than 5,500 fraudulent asylum claims have been uncovered since March by the Department of Homeland Security.
The FOX article delves straight into a disturbing topic: children are being used as shields. Adults cross with children they allege are theirs, but it is a ruse to be declared a “family unit” which will lead to an easier time staying in the U.S.
The UN and George Soros are helping to facilitate packs, or “caravans” of Central American migrants into the United States. This is despite the explicit orders of Donald Trump to stay away, and the overwhelming opposition of the American public.
Of course, there is often no way to tell what the true circumstances are. is the child being “recycled”, and used to help multiple “families”? Is there smuggling going on? Are the children being physically or sexually exploited?
5. Canada/U.S. Safe 3rd Country Agreement
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;
DESIRING to uphold asylum as an indispensable instrument of the international protection of refugees, and resolved to strengthen the integrity of that institution and the public support on which it depends;
NOTING that refugee status claimants may arrive at the Canadian or United States land border directly from the other Party, territory where they could have found effective protection;
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;
There is a loophole, in that the agreement covers official ports of entry. It has been taken to mean, however, that simply bypassing those ports and crossing elsewhere means an expedited entry into Canada.
This has been covered in other articles. The point being that both Canada and the United States are safe countries, and offer generous protections to people seeking asylum. It circumvents the intent of the agreement to go “asylum shopping” and hop around. Legitimate refugees should attempt to seek asylum in the first safe country they get to.
The U.S., as noted, is a safe country. People attempting to cross into Canada illegally should immediately be turned back. Simply passing through is not an excuse. Fearing being deported (if in the U.S. illegally) is also not a valid fear of persecution.
Instead, not only has the Federal Government not done anything, they have fought outside efforts to close the loophole. More on that in another article.
6. Sanctuary Cities Mask Child Trafficking
(Thomas Homan, Acting Director of I.C.E.)
“So we can’t arrest them in the jail, we can’t arrest them at their homes because they won’t open their doors and cooperate with us because they’ve been trained not to—what option does that leave us?” Homan said. “And when you’re in New York City, Los Angeles, or Chicago, chances are, when you pull that car over, you’re within a block or two of a school, or a church, or a hospital.”
Homan said sanctuary cities entice more illegal aliens to enter the United States and hide out in those cities. “Sanctuary cities are alien smugglers’ best friend. You don’t think the alien smuggling organizations are using that as an enticement?”
Homan said the United States spends billions of dollars a year on border security, detention, immigration courts, attorneys, and appeals courts.
So called “sanctuary cities” are Municipalities that have decided not to cooperate with Federal officials in removing illegal aliens. People without legal status are allowed access to public services such as health care, education, library privileges, and other social services. Of course, these are services that taxpaying citizens have been contributing to.
Worth noting: many jurisdictions that have such policies are done so without any democratic mandate from the people. Objectors may be gaslighted as being racist or far-right.
In the above article, I.C.E. Director Homan raises another interesting point. Sanctuary cities are perfect targets for human smuggling. And why wouldn’t they be? police officials have been instructed not to enforce the law.
In these instances, sanctuary laws are not helping children. Instead, they are being used to provide cover to predators engaging in smuggling. Curiously, Liberals will never get into this side of it.
7. Flooding Europe With Fake Refugees
(Mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, by “refugees”.)
In 2015, German Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to open Germany’s, and by extension Europe’s borders to the world. Over 1 million people came in just the first year.
Note: she was never elected to do this, nor did she ever attempt to seek a democratic mandate. Many “refugees” repaid the kindness with acts of violence and sexual assaults towards the German people, particularly the women.
Loads of this information is readily available online, so this will be skipped over for this article.
8. Pretending To Be “Child” “Refugees”
Jamal, who arrived in Sweden in August with his 16-year-old brother, isn’t the only one who noticed some rather seasoned-looking men among the 1,000-2,000 unaccompanied minors who were arriving in Sweden each week over the summer and fall. Now, in the midst of a fierce debate over asylum policy that saw Sweden backtrack on its generous open-door position late last year, Swedes are also weighing how to treat migrants who claim to be children but lack identification.
The government and the country’s Migration Agency have long been reluctant to medically test unaccompanied minors’ ages as a standard procedure. “The government has been hoping that silence about age cheating will solve the issue,” said Johansson. But now as part of the recent reversal of its open-door asylum policy, the government is considering making age-determination tests standard practice for unaccompanied minors. The test, which involves dental and wrist-bone X-rays, can usually determine a young person’s age within a one-year margin. A Justice Ministry spokesman told Foreign Policy that a proposal is expected within the next six months.
There are also videos available on the subject. The Swedes are right though. There needs to be a crackdown.
Why pretend to be a child? A few reasons. First, children are virtually impossible to deport. This means that a minor who arrives in a Western nation (whether the child claim is genuine or not) is essentially guaranteed to remain there. Another reason is that there are more financial benefits available to children, which adults would not have access to.
9. France’s Bone Scans Ruled Legal”
THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL DECIDED THAT:
l. Article 388 of the Civil Code, in its formulation resulting from the aforementioned Act of 14 March 2016, stipulates:
“A minor is an individual of either sex who has not yet reached the full age of eighteen years.
“Radiological bone scans used to determine age in the absence of valid identification documents and when the alleged age does not seem to correspond, can only be carried out by decision of the judicial authority and with the consent of the party concerned.
“The conclusions of these scans, that must specify their margin of error, cannot by themselves be used to determine if the party concerned is a minor. Any doubt benefits the party concerned.
“In case of doubt as to whether the party concerned is a minor, age may be evaluated through a pubertal development exam of primary and secondary sexual characteristics.”
To be fair the language is a bit sticky when it comes to consent. However, it can reasonably be seen that a refugee claimant can have an application refused if they won’t give their consent.
10. Push For Child Marriage in Europe
“Religious or cultural justifications obscure the simple fact that older, perverse men are abusing young girls,” said Rainer Wendt, head of the German police union.
Monika Michell of Terre des Femmes, a women’s rights group that campaigns against child marriage, added: “A husband cannot be the legal guardian of a child bride because he is involved in a sexual relationship with her — a very obvious conflict of interest.”
The Justice Minister of Hesse, Eva Kühne-Hörmann, asked: “If underage persons — quite rightly — are not allowed to buy a beer, why should the lawmakers allow children to make such profound decisions related to marriage?”
Others said the ruling would open the floodgates of cultural conflict in Germany, as Muslims would view it as a precedent to push for the legalization of other Islamic practices, including polygamy, in the country.
This is just one instance of efforts by Muslims to have their “marriages” overseas recognized in other countries. Typically, it is of an adult man married to an adolescent or teenage girl. Muslims predictably make cries of discrimination.
However, there is a very legitimate concern for the welfare of the child. If the girl is below the age of consent, and unable to make mature decisions, why should she be getting married? Is child sexual exploitation mitigated simply by cloaking it in religion?
On the flip side, the European Court of Human Rights is making it more difficult to criticize such acts. An Austrian woman had her “religious defamation” conviction upheld, on the grounds it would upset religious peace.
Yes, don’t bother protecting children from pedophiles and exploitation. Instead, let’s prosecute people who upset the pedophiles’ feelings. Much better approach.
11. UN Global Migration Compact Enables Smuggling
This non-binding agreement was signed by Canada back in December 2018. While touted as just a “framework”, the Compact has many chilling provisions.
OBJECTIVE 17(c) Promote independent, objective and quality reporting of media outlets, including internet based information, including by sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants, in full respect for the freedom of the media
So the UN GMC has provisions to “educate” media on the terminology and issues. And it also has the power to pull the funding for media it deems offensive. This is blatant censorship and propaganda, and flies in the face of a free media.
OBJECTIVE 4: Ensure that all migrants have proof of legal identity and adequate documentation
20. We commit to fulfil the right of all individuals to a legal identity by providing all our nationals with proof of nationality and relevant documentation, allowing national and local authorities to ascertain a migrant’s legal identity upon entry, during stay, and for return, as well as to ensure effective migration procedures, efficient service provision, and improved public safety. We further commit to ensure, through appropriate measures, that migrants are issued adequate documentation and civil registry documents, such as birth, marriage and death certificates, at all stages of migration, as a means to empower migrants to effectively exercise their human rights.
This really needs to be clarified. Will the UN be working with other nations to ensure that identification papers will be available? Or will the UN just go ahead and provide their own papers to people based on who they claim to be? And why would 1st world countries want to take in large numbers of people who haven’t had proper ID before?
OBJECTIVE 5: Enhance availability and flexibility of pathways for regular migration
21. We commit to adapt options and pathways for regular migration in a manner that facilitates labour mobility and decent work reflecting demographic and labour market realities, optimizes education opportunities, upholds the right to family life, and responds to the needs of migrants in a situation of vulnerability, with a view to expanding and diversifying availability of pathways for safe, orderly and regular migration.
Translation: we are going to expand the number of pathways available to immigrate to another country. It doesn’t seem to matter that the majority of nations and people in those nations want less immigration. The U.N. believes that migration is by definition, good.
OBJECTIVE 11: Manage borders in an integrated, secure and coordinated manner
27. We commit to manage our national borders in a coordinated manner, promoting bilateral and regional cooperation, ensuring security for States, communities and migrants, and facilitating safe and regular cross-border movements of people while preventing irregular migration. We further commit to implement border management policies that respect national sovereignty, the rule of law, obligations under international law, human rights of all migrants, regardless of their migration status, and are non-discriminatory, gender-responsive and child-sensitive.
“Regardless of their migration status” is a euphemism for people who are in the country illegally. And this managing of borders sounds like control will be taken away from the host country. Who will be managing this integrated project? The UN?
OBJECTIVE 13: Use immigration detention only as a measure of last resort and work towards alternatives
29. We commit to ensure that any detention in the context of international migration follows due process, is non-arbitrary, based on law, necessity, proportionality and individual assessments, is carried out by authorized officials, and for the shortest possible period of time, irrespective of whether detention occurs at the moment of entry, in transit, or proceedings of return, and regardless of the type of place where the detention occurs. We further commit to prioritize noncustodial alternatives to detention that are in line with international law, and to take a human rights-based approach to any detention of migrants, using detention as a measure of last resort only.
Find other alternatives to custody. Presumably this also includes people in the country illegally, though that is not made clear. Does the public know that this removes any teeth the laws have to protect the citizens from crimes committed by migrants?
OBJECTIVE 15: Provide access to basic services for migrants
31. We commit to ensure that all migrants, regardless of their migration status, can exercise their human rights through safe access to basic services. We further commit to strengthen migrant inclusive service delivery systems, notwithstanding that nationals and regular migrants may be entitled to more comprehensive service provision, while ensuring that any differential treatment must be based on law, proportionate, pursue a legitimate aim, in accordance with international human rights law.
This is exactly what it sounds like. Migrants will be entitled to basic public services in another country, regardless of whether or not they are there illegally. Seems like something the host population should be deciding on (and voting on), don’t you think? Shouldn’t the public get a say in the matter at all.
12. UN GMC Immunizes Migrants For Smuggling
OBJECTIVE 9: Strengthen the transnational response to smuggling of migrants
25. We commit to intensify joint efforts to prevent and counter smuggling of migrants by strengthening capacities and international cooperation to prevent, investigate, prosecute and penalize the smuggling of migrants in order to end the impunity of smuggling networks. We further commit to ensure that migrants shall not become liable to criminal prosecution for the fact of having been the object of smuggling, notwithstanding potential prosecution for other violations of national law. We also commit to identify smuggled migrants to protect their human rights, taking into consideration the special needs of women and children, and assisting in particular those migrants subject to smuggling under aggravating circumstances, in accordance with international law.
Interesting. The UN Global Migration Compact claims in Objectives 9 and 10 to want to combat human trafficking, yet states that migrants participating will not be subject to criminal penalties. Does this mean that even those who are complicit will also be immune?
13. Smugglers Posing As UN Staff?
The UN claims that smugglers are targeting vulnerable people by posing as UN staff.
The Agency says that reliable sources and refugees have reported criminals using vests and other items with logos similar to that of UNHCR, at disembarkation points and smuggling hubs.
Genuine UNHCR staff are present at official disembarkation points in Libya, providing medical and humanitarian assistance, such as food, water and clothes, to refugees and migrants.
UNHCR is opposed to the detention of refugees and migrants, but has staff monitoring the situation at Libyan detention centres, aiding and identifying the most vulnerable.
However, the Agency insists that they do not engage in the transfer of refugees from disembarkation points to detention centres. The reports of criminals impersonating UNHCR staff come as the situation for refugees and migrants detained or living in the Libyan capital, Tripoli, has dramatically deteriorated.
Even is this story is true, the hypocrisy is ripe. The UN aids and abets “caravans” trying to overwhelm the Southern U.S. border. It gives information on how to circumvent the Safe Third Country Agreement to enter Canada. The UN helps flood Europe with African and Muslim migrants. Sure, the UN has nothing to do with smuggling people.
14. NXIVM Sex Cult, Mack, Raniere
According to the filed complaint, Raniere (who was known in the group as “The Vanguard”) oversaw the functioning of NXIVM, which operated under an archaic system: women were told the best way to advance was to become a “slave” watched over by “masters.”
They were expected to have sex with their “master” and do any and all menial chores they were ordered to do. They weren’t to tell anybody about the arrangement and risked public humiliation if they ever revealed details to any party.
According to a Global News article, Allison Mack has pleaded guilty to 2 charges and is expected to be sentenced later. The entire sex cult is now in the public eye, and more charges are expected.
15. Ray Chandler, Epstein, Pedophile Island
(Allegedly) Bill Clinton with Rachel Chandler at 14 years old
(Allegedly) Prince Andrew with Virginia Roberts at 17 years old
The question to ask in crimes or suspicious deaths is always who would benefit from this individual’s death. It was mere coincidence, of course, that a day after a federal appeals court released formerly sealed records in a defamation suit linked to accused pedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s “madam” revealing names and a Bill Clinton party on Epstein’s sexual fantasy island, Jeffrey Epstein, on suicide watch after a previous attempt, is found dead of an apparent “suicide” in a secure facility that once safely housed Mexico drug lord “El Chapo” Guzmán.
Epstein had an island which he would take underage girls and older men to. The media fittingly dubbed it “Pedophile Island”. Since the story broke, new details keep coming to light.
Luckily for many people, Jeffrey Epstein committed suicide (or was “suicided) when the Court decided to unseal documents which would have implicated other people in the conspiracy. The death is widely expected to be just another Clinton suicide. Nothing to see here, people.
16. Pedo Connected To Prime Minister
Ingvaldson was reported to have told the court “I have lost many things since being arrested in June, 2010; a marriage, a career that I loved, numerous friendships, respect in the community at large,” according to the ruling.
He was caught in 2010 during an international police sting using Facebook. At the time, RCMP said 11 members of the ring had been arrested in Canada, Australia and the U.K.
Ingvaldson had previously taught at another Vancouver private school, West Point Grey Academy, with federal Liberal leadership hopeful Justin Trudeau.
The Crown had asked for a six-month prison term and two years’ probation. For the next five years after his prison sentence he is not allowed to go to public parks, swimming pools or other areas where children under 16 are expected to be present, unless he is with another adult over 21. During that same period, he is not allowed to work or volunteer with children under 16 in a position of trust or authority.
Hardly the only pedo in Canadian political circles. He won’t be the last either.
17. Final Thoughts On Article
Yes, this could have gone on for much longer, and each topic could have been more in depth. However, this is more of an introduction to what is coming ahead. So, if the coverage seems light, that’s why.
The topic is disturbing. It’s sickening to see what people are capable of doing to each other.
But as they say, sunlight is the best disinfectant. Hopefully much more will be coming.
(Andrea Horwath ran to be Ontario Premier. She offered the entire Province of Ontario to become a “sanctuary” Province)
(Canadian Labour Congress supports sanctuary cities)
(HuffPo Author Defends Open Borders)
1. Trafficking, Smuggling, Child Exploitation
There is a lot already covered in the TSCE series. Many of the laws politicians pass absolutely ensure this obscenity will continue. Also, take a look at the Border Security topic for some extra background, and the NGOs who are supporting open borders.
NDP Leader Andrea Horwath dodged questions Tuesday about how much her campaign promise to declare Ontario a “sanctuary province” for illegal migrants and refugee claimants will cost taxpayers.
Instead, she said providing public services without asking questions about anyone’s legal status in Ontario, or co-operating with federal authorities to determine it, is the humane thing to do.
During the 2018 Provincial election campaign in Ontario, NDP Leader Andrea Horwath campaigned on (among other things), turning Ontario into a sanctuary province. She claimed providing social services to people with no legal right to be in the country was “humane”. Unsurprisingly, she refused to tell the public how much it would cost, fearing a backlash.
To be fair however, Conservative leader Doug Ford supported Toronto becoming a sanctuary city. So did his brother, Rob Ford. Both men claimed to be “populists” yet supported giving illegal aliens (with no right to be in the country), the right to remain in Toronto and receive taxpayer funded services. It also needs to be said that John Tory, the current mayor of Toronto, supports sanctuary cities as well. He used to be the leader of the Conservative Party of Ontario.
Conservatives supporting sanctuary cities in Ontario? Guess they figure the economic growth will offset the erosion of borders and identity.
4. Canadian Labour Congress Supports Sanctuary Cities, 200-500K Illegals
There are an estimated 200,000 to 500,000 non-status migrants in Canada.
Non-status migrants of course is a euphemism for illegal alien/illegal immigrant. It would be interesting to get a source for that estimate. A Toronto Sun article also quoted the 200K to 500K estimate of illegals, but did not provide a source.
Non-status Migrants in Canadian Municipalities
In Canada, non-status migrants live and work in profound and constant fear.
No kidding. They are in the country illegally.
If they are detected, detained, and deported by immigration officers, their lives and families would be uprooted and their chance to be part of our communities and country destroyed. Social isolation and ever-present fear of detection and deportation makes them an “invisible” population in our communities and can take a very heavy toll on their physical and mental health.
So, should we turn a blind eye to this law breaking just because it would greatly inconvenience the people who are doing it?
Migrants also experience increased insecurity and violence as a result of the rise of racism, Islamophobia, and anti-immigrant sentiment. Having sanctuary city designations in municipalities from coast to coast to coast will not only place Canada on the map with respect to responding to a global crisis, it will also mean that Canadian municipalities are taking an active stand against racism and xenophobia.
Rise in anti-immigrant sentiment? Yes, because they are in the country illegally. Nice job of conflating legal and illegal. For a union that claims to represent 3 million people, it’s scary how little it thinks of existing laws.
5. HuffPo Author: Borders As Undemocratic
Sanctuary cities are more than a series of flawed municipal laws and administrative directives. They represent an opportunity to strengthen communities, foster democratic participation, and reframe political organization.
“Sanctuary cities” is a loose term that applies to cities refusing to cooperate with federal authorities to enforce national immigration law. In the U.S. and Canada, so-called don’t-ask-don’t-tell policies ban municipal service agencies from asking residents for immigration status and — if they happen to find out anyway — from providing this information to federal authorities. In this way, sanctuary cities aim to provide policing, health, housing and other municipal services to the residents who lack federal citizenship or immigration status. These cities are defining membership based on who lives in their urban community, and not who can be classified as worthy based on federal status.
This is what sanctuary cities are trying to achieve: they imagine the city as a democratic space where everyone is included and can politically participate. Sanctuary cities refuse to label some residents deserving and others unwanted because of federal status. All residents — independent of national status — belong in the city.
The current fight in the U.S. over sanctuary city policies reflects a wider struggle over democracy and political inclusion, with cities mitigating the effects of failing national policies. When national leaders such as Donald Trump are challenging the core values of democracy, sanctuary cities are stepping in to defend the principles of liberty and inclusion at the local scale. Cities are proving to be the last bastion of safety for the “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”
Even for Huffington post, this is nonsense. Apparently, being in the country illegally is nothing to be concerned about. Being treated differently for being here illegally is discrimination. Sanctuary cities are a way to redress this grievance.
Donald Trump is challenging the core values of democracy? So are illegal aliens entitled to voting rights? Are they entitled to weigh in on democratic affairs, despite being in the country illegally?
Residents belong in the city, regardless of immigration status? Okay, then why bother with borders at all? Is seems that borders are discriminatory.
Obvious question: sanctuary cities are the last vestige for people yearning to breathe free, then why go to these countries at all? They don’t seem very warm and welcoming.
6. 41,000 Illegals To Be Deported Vanish
“The agency’s working inventory contains 22,000 individuals with enforceable removal orders, whose whereabouts are known to the agency. The remaining 41,000 cases are individuals with immigration warrants for removal, whose whereabouts are unknown to the agency,” her report states.
Most of those who have disappeared are believed to be failed refugee claimants. In 2003, it was estimated that there were 36,000 missing illegal immigrants.
The article explains how Auditor General Sheila Fraser in 2008 found that 41,000 out of 63,000 (about 2/3) of those with pending deportation orders have simply disappeared. Nicely done. Wonder how many of them are now hiding in sanctuary cities. Guess we’ll never know.
7. Canucks, Put This In Perspective
As bad as this seems for us Canadians, our situation doesn’t hold a candle to the situation going on in the United States.
Cities and Counties California
Alameda County
Berkley
Contra Costa County
Los Angeles County
Los Angeles
Monterey County
Napa County
Oakland
Riverside County
Sacramento County
San Bernardino County
San Diego County
San Francisco
San Francisco County
San Mateo County
Santa Ana
Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
Sonoma County
Watsonville
Colorado
Arapahoe County
Aurora
Boulder County
Denver
Denver County
Garfield County
Grand County
Jefferson County
Larimer County
Mesa County
Pitkin County
Pueblo County
Routt County
San Miguel County
Weld County
Connecticut
East Haven
Hartford
Florida
Alachua County
Clay County
Georgia
Clayton County
DeKalb County
Iowa
Benton County
Cass County
Franklin County
Fremont County
Greene County
Ida County
Iowa City
Iowa City, Johnson County
Jefferson County
Marion County
Monona County
Montgomery County
Pottawattamie County
Sioux County
Illinois
Chicago
Cook County
Kansas
Butler County
Harvey County
Louisiana
New Orleans
Massachusetts
Amherst
Boston
Cambridge
Concord
Lawrence
Newton
Northhampton
Somerville
Maryland
Baltimore
Montgomery County
Prince George’s County
Minnesota
Hennepin County
Mississippi
Jackson
Nebraska
Hall County
Sarpy County
New Jersey
Middlesex County
Newark
Ocean County
Union County
New Mexico
Bernalillo County
New Mexico County Jails
San Miguel
Nevada
Washoe County
New York
Albany
Franklin County
Ithaca
Nassau County
New York City
Omondaga County
St. Lawrence County
Wayne County
Oregon
Baker County
Clackamas County
Clatsop County
Coos County
Crook County
Curry County
Deschutes County
Douglas County
Gilliam County
Grant County
Hood River County
Jackson County
Jefferson County
Josephine County
Lane Countyn
Lincoln County
Linn County
Malheur County
Marion County
Marlon County
Multnomah County
Polk County
Sherman County
Springfield
Tillamok County
Umatilla County
Union County
Wallowa County
Wasco County
Washington County
Wheeler County
Yamhill County
Pennsylvania
Bradford County
Bucks County
Butler County
Chester County
Clarion County
Delaware County
Eerie County
Franklin County
Lebanon County
Lehigh County
Lycoming County
Montgomery County
Montour County
Perry County
Philadelphia
Pike County
Westmoreland County
Rhode Island
Providence, Rhode Island
Rhode Island Department of Corrections
Virginia
Arlington County
Chesterfield County
Fairfax County
Vermont
Burlington
Montpelier
Winooski
Washington
Chelan County
Clallam County
Clark County
Cowlitz County
Franklin County
Jefferson County
King County
Kitsap County
Pierce County
San Juan County
Skagit County
Snohomish County
Spokane County
Seattle
Thurston County
Walla Walla County
Wallowa County
Whatcom County
Yakima County
9. Various Legal Challenges
This is far from exhaustive, but here are a few court challenges regarding sanctuary cities.
A Judge has ruled that Tucson, AZ can in fact hold a referendum in making the city a sanctuary city. Opponents are considering an appeal.
A Texas law against sanctuary cities is being challenged in Federal Court. Lawyers claim a variety of constitutional issues.
A lawsuit against a Florida law against sanctuary cities is being challenged in a Federal Court lawsuit.
Efforts to block funding for sanctuary cities has been stopped by a San Francisco, CA, judge.
10. Sanctuary Cities Do End-Run On Borders
The Federal Government (regardless of country) should be the one setting its own border security policies. Certainly immigration is a topic to be openly discussed, but that is not the case here.
Sanctuary cities circumvent national governments by providing social services to people who aren’t even allowed to be the in country in the first place.
It is not “failing to be inclusive” by preventing such cities from happening. Rather, it is respecting the laws and the public.
Certainly the Canadian situation is not nearly as extreme as the American one. We have only a handful of “sanctuary cities”, at least for now. The U.S. has 7 sanctuary STATES, and countless cities and counties.
Why should Canadians care? After all, this is an American problem.
Selfishness aside, we should care. Illegal immigration is wrong, regardless of where it is happening. And what happens in the U.S. happens here. We share many of the same problems.
It should also make Canadians stop and wonder exactly how many illegal aliens are in Canada. Even beyond illegals, mass LEGAL migration also has the effect of changing the demographics, and altering elections. In fact, the ridings with the most immigration were pretty reliable Liberal voters.
It’s also worth wondering if conservatives in Canada would implement some form of amnesty for illegals already here. Even if the entire Canada/U.S. border is declared a port of entry, it does nothing to deport the illegals already here.
If any sort of amnesty were to be granted, wouldn’t that just provide more incentive to come to Canada or the U.S. by whatever means available?
3. Simpson-Mazzoli Act of 1986 (Reagan Amnesty)
The Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA), Pub.L. 99–603, 100 Stat. 3445, enacted November 6, 1986, also known as the Simpson–Mazzoli Act or the Reagan Amnesty, signed into law by Ronald Reagan on November 6, 1986, is an Act of Congress which reformed United States immigration law. The Act
-required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status;
-made it illegal to hire or recruit illegal immigrants knowingly;
–legalized certain seasonal agricultural undocumented immigrants, and;
–legalized undocumented immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine, back taxes due, and admission of guilt; candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed at least a minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language.
At the time, the Immigration and Naturalization Service estimated that about four million illegal immigrants would apply for legal status through the act and that roughly half of them would be eligible.
Ronald Reagan, who identifies as a “conservative” gave amnesty to 3 million illegals (by some estimates).
Worth noting is that Reagan had overwhelming majorities in his 1984 landslide win. He was not pressured into doing this by Democrats.
Look at the above two U.S. maps. This is what replacement migration has done. It is what amnesty for illegals has done. Several U.S. States have “turned blue” permanently.
Ronald Reagan’s amnesty policies turned California blue (and started the trend). Yet conservatives don’t seem to care that he did nothing to conserve the Republican voting base.
4. Amnesty Measures Over The Years
The Seven Amnesties Passed by Congress
1. Immigration and Reform Control Act (IRCA), 1986: A blanket amnesty for some 2.7 million illegal aliens
2. Section 245(i) Amnesty, 1994: A temporary rolling amnesty for 578,000 illegal aliens
3. Section 245(i) Extension Amnesty, 1997: An extension of the rolling amnesty created in 1994
4. Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act (NACARA) Amnesty, 1997: An amnesty for close to one million illegal aliens from Central America
5. Haitian Refugee Immigration Fairness Act Amnesty (HRIFA), 1998: An amnesty for 125,000 illegal aliens from Haiti
6. Late Amnesty, 2000: An amnesty for some illegal aliens who claim they should have been amnestied under the 1986 IRCA amnesty, an estimated 400,000 illegal aliens
7. LIFE Act Amnesty, 2000: A reinstatement of the rolling Section 245(i) amnesty, an estimated 900,000 illegal aliens
Source is here. As you can see, it never stopped at just one amnesty. There was always another group to be considered.
While items 2-7 in fact were signed into law by Bill Clinton (a Democrat), it’s worth pointing out that Reagan, a Republican, was the one who started the trend in 1986. Furthermore, Reagan wouldn’t be the last “conservative” to propose blanket amnesty policies for illegal aliens.
As with Reagan, Clinton seems to have no issue with granting mass amnesties, even while the border is still not secure. This surely means that
5. Bush’s “Comprehensive Immigration Reform”
3. To Secure Our Border, We Must Create A Temporary Worker Program
America’s Immigration Problem Will Not Be Solved With Security Measures Alone. There are many people on the other side of our borders who will do anything to come to America to work and build a better life. This dynamic creates tremendous pressure on our border that walls and patrols alone cannot stop.
As We Tighten Controls At The Border, We Must Also Address The Needs Of America’s Growing Economy. The rule of law cannot permit unlawful employment of millions of undocumented workers in the United States. Many American businesses, however, depend on hiring willing foreign workers for jobs that Americans are not doing.
If you read between the lines, Bush has a solution in mind: many or most of the illegal aliens in the U.S. can be put to work, and made to be productive.
But as long as they have economic value, I suppose. Ignore the demographic changes. Ignore the voting changes that will happen. Ignore the culture clash, and tension. Ignore the slap in the face that it causes to people who come to the U.S. legally.
4. We Must Bring Undocumented Workers Already In The Country Out Of The Shadows
Comprehensive Immigration Reform Must Account For The Millions Of Immigrants Already In The Country Illegally. Illegal immigration causes serious problems, putting pressure on public schools and hospitals and straining State and local budgets. People who have worked hard, supported their families, avoided crime, led responsible lives, and become a part of American life should be called in out of the shadows and under the rule of American law.
The President Opposes An Automatic Path To Citizenship Or Any Other Form Of Amnesty. Amnesty, as a reward for lawbreaking, would only invite further lawbreaking. Amnesty would also be unfair to those lawful immigrants who have patiently waited their turn for citizenship and to those who are still waiting to enter the country legally.
The President Supports A Rational Middle Ground Between A Program Of Mass Deportation And A Program Of Automatic Amnesty. It is neither wise nor realistic to round up and deport millions of illegal immigrants in the United States. But there should be no automatic path to citizenship. The President supports a rational middle ground founded on the following basic tenets:
Some quotes from the White House, on the subject. Despite the explicit denials, this “is” an amnesty program. Stating publicly that there will not be mass deportations means existing laws will not be enforced. Saying you can work for legalization in fact is the reward that people have crossed the border illegally to get in the first place.
It never seems to dawn on successive administrations that rewarding people for breaking the law only encourages more lawbreaking to happen.
Or more likely, they know but don’t care. There seems to be another agenda at play.
Thankfully, this “reform” eventually fell through. However, Bush also seemed to only pay lip service to the idea of real border security. As long as the U.S./Mexico border is porous, people will keep coming illegally. This reality is undeniable.
6. Donald Trump and “Build The Wall”
Donald Trump (narrowly) defeated Hillary Clinton in November 2016 to win the White House. One major campaign was to build a wall across the U.S./Mexico border. This pledge proved extremely popular, as American are tired of continued illegal immigration, and want a secure border.
However, even Trump’s most vocal supporters have had to face the reality that it wasn’t getting done. 2 years into his mandate, with Republican control of both Houses of Congress, nothing had been built. To be fair though, some Republicans were obstructionist.
While some new parts have been added since the 2018 Midterms, and some existing structures replaced, it seems to fall far short of what supporters were expecting.
7. Financial Costs Of Illegal Immigration
There is a lot of conflicting information of the actual costs to the American public. However, here is one statistic. Forbes estimates that the U.S. public subsidizes health care for illegals to the tune of $18.5 billion per year.
Another estimate comes from the Daily Caller, and suggests that it costs about $44 billion per year to educate children illegally in the country.
That doesn’t even include crime data, which can be tricky to find.
8. Voting Trends By Demographics
It foolish to ignore demographic patterns when it comes to voting. Leftist parties push for more immigration at least in part because they believe it will result in more voters. Hence this will result in better election results.
They aren’t wrong. These patterns absolutely do exist. Could be why leftists have little to no interest in securing the borders. Conservatives have little interest either, but that is economically driven.
In this sense, though, it seems to make no real difference if people have immigrated legally, or are illegals given amnesty. The result is still more voters.
In liberal states like New Jersey, illegals are eligible to obtain driver’s licenses. This is despite (by definition) being in the country illegally. And how do we know they aren’t voting illegally?
9. Illegal Immigration Hurts Everyone
Illegal aliens do access social services that they haven’t paid into. This limits resources for citizens who are in the nation illegally, and who have been paying in.
Undermining the borders is an assault on national sovereignty. Rewarding them with a pathway to citizenship only encourages more of it. Americans are sick and tired of politicians who have little to no interest in enforcing border security.
As for the argument that this generates extra tax revenue: How do you pay U.S. taxes without a Social Security Number? How do you get an SSN without legal status? Even if taxes were withheld, they most likely went into the employer’s pocket.
A possible 22 million people in the country illegally. A nice potential voting bloc, if only they could be given amnesty.
Canada, how many do we have?
10. Ann Coulter Estimates Much Higher
Author and political commentator Ann Coulter suggests that even the 22 million figure is lowballed. She gives various estimates, including that it could be 30-60 million all told. She makes 2 very valid points:
(1) Previous estimates based on self-reporting.
(2) Numbers haven’t changed much over the years, despite continued entries.
(Jason Kenney laments continued job losses in AB, even as he plans to expand economic immigration)
(Employers who abuse rules in Temporary Foreign Workers Program and International Mobility Program)
(TFW in Brooks, Alberta)
(Unemployment data from Service Canada, September 2019)
(Unemployment in Maritimes, September 2019)
(Unemployment in Prairies, September 2019)
1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada
Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.
CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention. CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan. CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement). CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974. CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.
Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.
(All from 2019 listings)
7.5% – Newfoundland & Labrador, outside St. John’s
17.9% – Newfoundland & Labrador, outside St. John’s
6.8% – Prince Edward Island, Charlottetown
11.1% – Prince Edward Island, outside Charlottetown
13.8% – Eastern Nova Scotia
7.5% – Western Nova Scotia
5.6% – Nova Scotia, Halifax
6.2% – New Brunswick, Fredericton-Moncton-Saint John
9.1% – New Brunswick, Madawaska-Charlotte
13.4% – New Brunswick, Restigouche-Albert
11.7% – Northern Ontario
35.3% – Northern Manitoba
19.3% – Northern Saskatchewan
11.4% – Northern Alberta
9.7% – Northern British Columbia
12.7% – Northwest Territories
18.2% – Nunavut
One thing to point out: the EI rates only consider people who are on active EI claims. People who have had their benefits lapse are excluded from calculation. So the real numbers may be much higher.
4. Lax EI Rules Cause Unemployment?
My friend said she was willing to work all year long. Once word of this got out, she got calls from employers all over town fighting to hire someone willing to work over the winter.
One year in Petit Rocher, New Brunswick, the fish plant closed for lack of fish; the locals demanded a provincial make-work project until they could get fully stamped up. When the fish plant in the next town offered them work, and a free shuttle bus service to get there, the workers angrily refused — until the province told them if there was work available there would be no make-work.
The Ocean Choice fish plant in Souris, P.E.I., has to bring in temporary workers from as far away as Russia and Ukraine in a province with one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney finds this inexplicable. Look no farther than EI for that explanation.
My wife and I owned a restaurant in Halifax and had first-hand experience of the system. People would leave us resumes and then be genuinely puzzled when we phoned to offer them work. We apparently hadn’t understood the blindingly obvious: those resumes were strictly for the benefit of the EI administrators. Don’t try to blow the whistle on these cheats to EI, though; the people who administer it in Atlantic Canada long ago became complicit in the plundering of the system. The claimant is king and the local politicians who have fought for ever richer benefits for their constituents like it just fine that way.
We had applicants who would only agree to be hired if we would promise to lay them off when they had qualified for EI. They liked to do their crafts during the autumn and sell them (under the table for cash) at the Christmas craft fairs. Now you know why there are so many bad crafts in Atlantic Canada: it is your tax dollars at work.
This Calgary Herald article from 2012 suggested quite a different picture. The author believes that the EI rules are gamed in order to provide people an income for working only a few months a year.
It is further claimed that that politicians and administrators are complicit in the scheme as it provides a permanent supply of voters. An end run around welfare and having to work. Interesting article, well worth a read. if any of this is true, then it should merit a much stricter set of regulations, and kicking some people off permanently.
5. Atlantic Immigration Pilot Program
About the pilot
The Atlantic Immigration Pilot is a pathway to permanent residence for skilled foreign workers and international graduates who want to work and live in one of Canada’s 4 Atlantic Provinces:
Let’s get right to the point: this program is a direct pathway to permanent resident status.
Not only one person, but a husband or wife is also eligible for an open work permit. This is yet another pathway to permanent residence.
There are 3 streams:
(a) Atlantic International Graduate Program
(b) Atlantic High-Skilled Program
(c) Atlantic Intermediate-Skilled Program
Of course the obvious question: why is this program even being offered? Don’t people in the Maritimes constantly complain about there being no work available in the region? The unemployment numbers certainly seem to suggest that.
An interesting situation. Universities across Canada want more foreign students as they are needed to pay for their extensive budgets. Graduating from a Canadian college or university means fast-tracking to other visa options. While native Maritimers (allegedly) milk the EI rules to avoid working, those jobs are filled by people seeking easy citizenship.
Great way to replace your population.
6. Rural Alberta Immigration Push
As part of his campaign to become Alberta Premier, Jason Kenney has talked about expanding economic immigration. He said it was necessary to find people to fill jobs that otherwise were being left empty. He proposed an extra 10,000 people a year, much of it to rural Alberta.
However, this is blatantly contradicted by repeated claims made that Alberta has suffered heavy jobs losses, especially due to the losses in the oil sector. Among other factors, the Federal Liberal Government is blamed extensively.
This is the same man, as Federal Immigration Minister, imported Somali Muslims to work in a meat packing plant in Brooks, Alberta. Cheaper labour, but there were some other costs to be considered.
If oil is becoming an occupation for fewer and fewer people, then they would have to find other work, at least for the time being. How does it make sense to be importing large numbers of people to fill a “labour shortage”, when there is no shortage to begin with?
7. Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot
Under the pretense of declining population, the Federal Government is proposing massive immigration to (for now) 11 towns throughout Canada. They include:
Thunder Bay (ON)
Sault Ste. Marie (ON)
Sudbury (ON)
Timmins (ON)
North Bay (ON)
Gretna-Rhineland-Altona-Plum Coulee (MB)
Brandon (MB), Moose Jaw (SK)
Claresholm (AB)
West Kootenay (BC)
Vernon (BC)
Interestingly, Quebec will be exempt from this program. In fact, Quebec will be getting an overall reduction in immigration.
More migrants for thee.
But less migrants for me.
Other than population replacement, it isn’t clear why these towns were selected. After all, they do have fairly high unemployment.
But to be fair, employers will “always” say they have labour shortages. Having a surplus of workers causes wages to be driven down, as there becomes more demand for the same jobs.
8. Remittances Sent Out Of The Country
This was discussed in a previous article. We are repeatedly told that immigration is good for economic growth. Yet the issue of sending billions of dollars annually is omitted. Whose economies do remittances prop up? Every one except where the money originally came from.
9. Importing People Drives Down Wages
True North covered abuse and manipulation of the “Temporary” Foreign Worker Program. It included hiring people for less than comparable jobs for Canadians would have gone, dodging fees, and not advertising in good faith.
The Trudeau government’s Labour Minister Patricia Hajdu signed off on recommendations allowing eight southwestern Ontario corporations to not face punishment for incorrectly hiring approximately 615 Mexican and Jamaican migrants under the Temporary Foreign Workers Program’s farmworker classification for five years — in contravention of labour regulations
The foreign workers were hired to work in food processing plants, but were paid a farmworker’s wage of $14 an hour, four dollars less than the standard rate in food processing industry.
Hiring under the classification of agricultural workers, the memo says the eight corporations had a “distinct advantage over employers using the low wage stream of the TFW Program” because they didn’t have to pay the $1,000 per position processing fee and were only required to advertise the jobs to Canadians for two weeks instead of the four required for temporary foreign workers strictly working in food processing.
This isn’t about filling empty jobs. It is about importing cheaper labour than would otherwise be available. Instead of putting Canadians to work, and focusing on social cohesion, it becomes a race to the bottom.
10. This Doesn’t Put Canada First
Canadians should be getting first crack at the jobs. It shouldn’t be a competition against subsidized foreign labour. Shipping in more and more people helps employers and businesses, but puts additional pressure on workers. This is especially true if those newcomers are willing to work for less.
Looking at the unemployment rates (Northern Alberta and the Maritimes), it doesn’t seem to be a shortage of people available. That comes from official Service Canada data. Something is seriously wrong if there is both: (a) a huge labour shortage; and (b) high unemployment. It doesn’t add up.
To be fair though, if the allegations against many Maritimers is true, they should be kicked off EI. It was never meant to be abused like this.
This article focused on economic costs, but doesn’t get into the social costs. People go to smaller towns in order to get away from all the forced diversity.
(Domestic violence is a category all its own apparently)
(Minister of Open Borders, Ahmed Hussan)
(No joke, this really is a path to permanent residence)
1. Mass LEGAL Immigration In Canada
Despite what many think, LEGAL immigration into Canada is actually a much larger threat than illegal aliens, given the true scale of the replacement that is happening. What was founded as a European (British) colony is becoming unrecognizable due to forced demographic changes. There are also social, economic, environmental and voting changes to consider. See this Canadian series, and the UN programs for more detail. Politicians, the media, and so-called “experts” have no interest in coming clean on this.
CLICK HERE, for UN Genocide Prevention/Punishment Convention. CLICK HERE, for Barcelona Declaration & Kalergi Plan. CLICK HERE, for UN Kalergi Plan (population replacement). CLICK HERE, for UN replacement efforts since 1974. CLICK HERE, for tracing steps of UN replacement agenda.
Note: If there are errors in calculating the totals, please speak up. Information is of no use to the public if it isn’t accurate.
Why even write this? Shouldn’t we show some compassion for people who are in situations of domestic violence?
We should. However, consideration also needs to be shown for the Canadian public. Canada is for Canadians, and they are heavily footing the bill for these various immigration schemes.
The public is repeatedly told that immigration is good for the country. It brings diversity (which is always good), it grows the nation, and that it is overall beneficial. Multiculturalism enriches the nation. Only racists oppose high levels of immigration from highly incompatible groups. (Pardon the sarcasm).
Despite all this, domestic violence among immigrant families is apparently a huge issue. It’s an issue so large that a special program is being launched to grant Temporary Residence Permits to people who claim to suffer domestic violence. And of course, there will be a pathway to Permanent Residence built in.
Canadians can be forgiven for second guessing the wisdom behind such a program.
4. Quotes From Gov’t Website
Benefits of a TRP
You may need a TRP for any of these reasons:
-to escape the abuse of your spouse or partner
-to give you time to decide whether you want to leave Canada or consider other immigration options
-to help make sure you are not separated from your children in Canada while you decide your next steps
-to earn a living without fear of family violence (using a work permit)
If you want to stay in Canada permanently
If you are in a situation of family violence, you may be able to apply for permanent residence based on Humanitarian and Compassionate grounds. If you do, make sure you clearly describe your situation of abuse in your application.
.
Be sure to mark the outside envelope with the letters “FV” to help us quickly identify your application.
If you are in a situation of family violence and already have an application in process, you can tell us about it. We’ll consider it in processing your application. Contact the office that has your application, or contact our Client Support Centre at 1-888-242-2100.
How did we get to this point? Is domestic violence so rampant that we now have a special category for giving spouses (and presumably children) a pathway to permanent residence?
5. Free Health Care Available
Health coverage
Suspected victims of family violence who are not covered by a public or private health insurance plan may be eligible for coverage of health-care benefits under the IFHP, per the discretionary authority of the Minister, under IFHP Cabinet-approved policy. Benefits include (for the duration of the TRP)
(a) basic coverage (hospital services, physician care)
(b) supplemental coverage (urgent dental and vision care, mental health counselling)
prescription drug coverage
Note: If the client has already had an immigration medical examination covered under the IFHP, they are not eligible for a second. Also, any individual who has access to provincial or territorial coverage should not be issued IFHP coverage. The IFHP does not cover Canadian citizens, including babies born in Canada to IFHP beneficiaries.
Not sure what to say about these perks, other than there are a lot of Canadians who don’t have access to this sort of health care.
6. Eligibility For Open Work Permits
Work permits
A TRP that is valid for at least 180 days makes the holder eligible to apply for an open work permit. A TRP does not exempt the permit holder from the requirement to apply for a work permit if they wish to work in Canada. A fee-exempt work permit should be offered to the client as an option to ensure they are aware that they are eligible for one. If the victim of family violence wants to apply for a work permit, the application should be processed by the local IRCC office at the same time as the TRP application, due to the urgent nature of this kind of case.
And a lesser known branch of the International Mobility Program is the so-called humanitarian option. Let’s take a look at this portion of it.
Temporary resident permit holders
LMIA exemption code: H82
This exemption applies to persons who have been issued a temporary resident permit (TRP) to allow them to stay in Canada. If the TRP holder will be in Canada for a long period of time (six months or greater), and they have no other means of support (meaning no family support or other means of meeting their needs) they may be issued a work permit.
In the case of permit holders who were refused the application for landing, and who are waiting to become eligible for permanent residence, officers need not be too rigorous in determining whether applicants need to work because they have no other means of support.
The integration of future permanent residents will be assisted by allowing them to work.
An open work permit may be issued that coincides with the validity period of the TRP.
Yes, this is repeated from before. But again, all of this is pathway to permanent residence.
7. From CBC Article On Launch
Beginning July 26, newcomers who are victims of domestic violence can apply for a free temporary resident permit that will give them legal immigration status in Canada. That will include a work permit and health-care coverage. In “urgent” situations of family violence, the government will expedite the process by allowing people to apply for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
The new permit process is open to foreign nationals who haven’t yet landed permanent residence status, and whose status is depending on their abusive spouse or partner.
Obvious question: but why aren’t we screening for potential domestic violence BEFORE letting people into the country? This should absolutely be a top priority.
If people are coming to Canada, but afterwards violence is discovered, should this not be grounds for deportation? Immigration regulations apparently mean nothing if people can enter, and only afterwards let this come out.
8. From Immigration.ca Site On TRP-PR
As of July 26, 2019, newcomers who are victims of family violence can apply for a fee-exempt temporary resident permit to give them legal immigration status in Canada. The status includes a work permit and health care coverage.
IRCC is also expediting the process for those in urgent family violence situations who apply for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
The expedited temporary resident permit process for victims of family violence is only available to foreign nationals in Canada who have not yet obtained their permanent residence and whose status in Canada is dependent on their abusive spouse or partner.
It is not available to foreign nationals outside Canada.
Not available to nationals outside of Canada — yet.
The Canadian public will also be on the hook for health care expenses. Presumably education expenses too, if there are minor children. Sure let’s hand out work visas as well.
Assuming (and let’s be sexist), that it is the Husband/Father who is supposed to be doing the providing. Can the Mother and Children claim domestic violence and immediately apply for a Temporary Residence Permit? Can it later be converted into Permanent Resident status?
9. Potential For Abuse Of Program?
Research by her organization found some shelter providers in Calgary found up to 40 per cent of women seeking help were visible Muslims. Many are new immigrants and refugees and can be socially isolated with few friends and no family in Canada.
From this CBC article in Calgary, it states that up to 40% of domestic violence cases are visible Muslims. 40% of the cases, but at the time their population was what, 3% of Calgary’s general population.
Let’s repost a little math that had been done in an earlier piece.
Let’s do some math: suppose you have a city with 1,000,000 citizens, which would mean 30,000 muslims, and 970,000 non-muslims. Now, suppose there are 1,000 incidents of domestic violence in a year. That means that 400 of those incidents would involve muslims, and 600 would involve non-muslims.
Now, those 30,000 muslims would have been involved in 400 domestic violence incidents, or about 1333 per 100,000 people. The 970,000 non-muslims would have been involved in 600 domestic violence incidents or about 62 per 100,000 people. Comparing the two groups of 1333 and 62 per 100,000, we divide and (1333/62=21.5). We get about a magnitude of 21 or 22.
If these numbers provided by the article are correct, Muslims would be perpetrating domestic violence at a rate of about 20 times (per capita) that of non-Muslims.
Why are we allowing such a violent culture to immigrate and take root in Canada? Clearly they haven’t left their “traditions” behind.
To be fair however, this could also be deception, or “taqiyya” on their part. Lying to infidels is okay as long as it somehow advances the cause of Islam. That also is rampant of the culture.
10. So, What Happens To Abusers?
The Government web pages don’t address the long term future of alleged abusers. One would think a speedy deportation to be appropriate.
To be fair, however, such cases may very well in criminal court. As such, this may not be the best place to make conclusions.
If Trudeau thinks that terrorists should get to keep their new Canadian citizenship (remember Bill C-6), it seems very unlikely that domestic abusers will be deported. Public safety isn’t much of a concern.
11. Why Import Incompatible Cultures?
It is true that domestic violence occurs in Canada. It’s also true that rates of domestic violence are much, MUCH higher in many other parts of the world? Islam is an obvious one, but far from the only one
So why bring the problems here? Why bring very different, and largely incompatible cultures to Canada?
This seems like a case where preventing a problem would be far easier and more effective than finding a solution afterwards.
