Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Liberals urged to fight immigration proposals

GLORIA GALLOWAY

From Monday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 8:06 PM EST 23/03/08

Changes tucked into Conservatives' budget bill would give Minister too much unilateral power, immigrant groups say ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Beer and Popcorn from Toronto, Canada writes: If you feel so strongly call your MP and bring it on!
  2. Mr. Justice from Liberals have ceased a separate existence here in, Canada writes: The Liberals have willingly given up their separate existence. Just as they now endorse Tory foreign policy, don't expect them to be a problem for the Tories on any other issue.
  3. Duane Freemantle from writes: On one side allow an official to look for those that are the highest demand in Canada's workplaces seems to be fair. However, no matter how you look at this is wrong. The demand of Canada's workplaces are constantly changing. A problem that could arise is that many immigrants could forgo Canada and instead go to America, or another country. However, we all can protest in our own way come election day.
  4. Mr. Shim Shalla Bim from Canada writes: If this is important enough to the Tories, they should introduce it as a separate bill instead of sneaking it through as part of the budget. Maybe it's time we had a discussion about our immigration policies and goals...however, backdoor policy changes won't help. From a political viewpoint, being forthcoming about the issue would look better for the Tories than this strategy.
  5. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: What a bunch of BS from the idealist leftist socialist crowd! We can only handle so many immigrants at a time, and preference SHOULD be given to those with the skills we need right now. Race, skin colour religion, doesn't really matter...skills that Canada needs does. This damn idealist thinking based on 'universality' is pure BS. NOT all people are equal, no matter how much you dudes profess it to be! That's just life..deal with it! If Canada needs Doctors, why the hell should we give preference to someone's unilingual (not English) grandfather just bacause they've been on the List for awhile? Totally absurd!
  6. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'An election fought over whether the PMO can hand pick who gets into the country based on the color of their skin will only play well in Alberta.'

    I disagree - it would work fine in rural quebec and ontario too.

    Seriously though, we can't be sure the tories want this to further some sort of racist agenda, since they haven't really said what its for other than to 'eliminate backlogs'. Its another example of the 'alarming concentration of power' issue, though.
  7. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Aside from what agenda might be being served here, if any, it makes little sense for such a key matter as immigration to be buried, ear-mark style, in the budget. This is a matter that should face the light of day, be discussed in the media, committees, etc. Unfortunately, the impression being left by the CPC is one of a lack of transparency, which has become the NGC's default modus operandi.
  8. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: But go ahead Liberals, bring the Gov't down. It'll just cost Canadians a few million dollars and not change anything.... The Cons will be back in with a minority.... probably more seats than they have right now, and COULD even end up with a majority...all depends on wether the people get out to vote. 'The times, they are a changin' .... and about bloody time. This Country has listened to idealist whackjobs for far too long now! Thank goodness the younger generation is starting to show some common sense!
  9. B Benton from Thornhill, Canada writes: Oh listen to the libbies scream racist and dicatorship. I love it when they make things up to prove their non-existent point - like the bill will allow the pmo to choose based upon skin colour. It just goes to prove how weak their argument is. Let's see, who should we not ask about how to set our immigration policy? I say not recent immigrants and definitely not immigration lawyers. Recent immigrants are not concerned with what is best for Canada. They are overly concerned about getting their families in, which is understandable. However family members logically should not be the best first choice for the country. I might also point out that the Globe talks about immigation communities being opposed, but only quotes one immigrant. The logical stakeholders we should be asking is the prospective employers. Does it really make sense to anyone that we take them on a first come first serve basis, when employers are screaming for certain skills. My understanding is that this is exactly what the new bill is proposing and that makes a lot of sense. Why wade through thousands of family members to get to the skilled tradespeople we need in this country. Why doesn't the Globe interview a prospective employer of immigrants and see what they think about the proposed bill? Wouldn't that put quite a different spin on the article.
  10. Fake Name from Canada writes: Hi CC ... I agree that that's how the decision of who gets in should be made, but I don't think that it should necessarily be at the unilateral discretion of the minister.

    For one thing, even if the current government was inclined to use that power responsibly (and in fairness we haven't seen any reason to think otherwise), future administrations would also be in a position to do whatever they wanted. For example, a strongly leftist minister could use the same authority to let in far more immigrants at a time than the system can appropriately settle.
  11. I R from White Rock, BC, Canada writes: Mr. Justice from Liberals have ceased a separate existence here in, Canada writes: The Liberals have willingly given up their separate existence...
    --------------------

    Mr. Justice, I disagree with your post. In my view it is the NDP that you are describing for they, under Jack Layton, have brought Harper to power and have acted childishly to keep him there. They can call for Canada's return of troops from Afghanistan - a popular but unrealistic alternative.

    I think Dion is doing the right thing. Harper and the CPC are masters of deception and machiavellian tactics. They are bullies and their antics have taken Canadians totally by surprise. Rather than play Harper's game, Dion has wised up. The LPC is no longer a slave to Harper's game.

    When the election is called, I believe Dion is making sure it is an election where the CPC will be utterly and devastatingly wiped out. There is much at risk and I believe Dion and his people see that. An election returning a majority CPC or another 4 years of minority CPC would be disastrous for Canada. When the election is called, it must be on Dion's terms and not on Harper's or whomever is lurking in the PMO.

    I believe Harper will last to 2009, but by then what little legitimacy he and his party ever had will have vaporized as a result of Harper's brilliant machievellian politics.
  12. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Diane. We know the current system isn't working. Yes, perhaps it should be brought up as a separate item for debate, but that's just not going to help the current situation. With a Cons. minority Gov't, the opposition are falling all over themselves trying to make the Cons look bad. Do you really think they'd look at this, and debate the issue objectively? I don't. So, at least, SOMETHING is getting done with a system we KNOW is broken. better this than the status quo. Besides, as you well know, nothing is cast in stone. The Libs or the Cons could re-open this agenda once one or the other has a majority, so what's the big deal? As long as something get's accomplished, now, Canada is better off.
  13. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: IR from White Rock. Gee, it must be nice to see everything through rose coloured glasses! :-) Oh well, back to your rainbow world now, you've had your say.....unrealistic as it may be :-).
  14. B Benton from Thornhill, Canada writes: For those proposing that the immigration portion of the bill be separated, there is a very good reason why it shouldn't. It won't pass, unless it is made a matter of confidence.

    The other parties are very brave in opposing everything, unless there is the threat of an election. Then they toe the line and do what's best for Canada and Canadians.
  15. Mr. Shim Shalla Bim from Canada writes: B Benton - you talk a lot about consultation of stakeholders, etc. Great idea. But it isn't happening, because the Tories are putting this through as part of a budget instead of having an actual, you know, debate. You also write: 'Why doesn't the Globe interview a prospective employer of immigrants and see what they think about the proposed bill?' The problem is there isn't a separate bill. It's the budget. There can't be a proper debate when it's all piled into the budget. Like the new tax savings great initiative but not the immigration plan? Tough. It's both or none (and an election).

    You Tories out there should be encouraging a proper debate instead of this method - it just makes it look like the old hidden agenda argument again. And Fake Name has a good point - increased ministerial power is great when your guy is in power, but not so great when it's the other guy.
  16. Nassar Ben Houdja from Canada writes: Its about time the brakes were applied to some of the policies the former liberal regime implemented. Some on has to pay the bills, and the few of us left who pay taxes are getting a bit tired of social engineers developing theories at our expense. How about for every job outsourced, a citizenship go's to the same country with it?
  17. J. Bergin from Canada writes: The Conservative Centrist....you are completely right and I would venture that you are also speaking for the silent majority. Good post.
  18. Ermos Smith from Toronto, Canada writes: God forbid we have a government that wants to implement some common sense for a change.

    As a former liberal supporter, I am appalled at what the Liberal party stands for these days. Which is basically NOTHING!!!

    I will be voting Conservative this time around.
  19. Joe Bloggins from Canada writes: The totally mindless Victoria Rutherford from Canada says 'Harpers hidden agenda is truly frightening.'

    Well, his 'hidden agenda' might be frightening to you, but likely not to the majority of Canadians. What is truly frightening is the Lib/left hidden agenda of buying immigrant votes.
  20. H Chu from Canada writes:
    Call him in this, worst case another minority Con gov't and Dion will be given the punt so too the video professor.
  21. Mr. Shim Shalla Bim from Canada writes: B Benton from Thornhill, Canada writes: For those proposing that the immigration portion of the bill be separated, there is a very good reason why it shouldn't. It won't pass, unless it is made a matter of confidence.
    ----
    Thank you for at least addressing the question instead of the 'Rawk! Liberals are bad! Liberals are bad! Rawk!' comments that some have left here.

    Thing is, they can make it a confidence motion. If the crime bill in the Senate can send us to the polls, so can this.
  22. sol levin from Canada writes: Poor Jason Kenney Secretary of State for Multiculturalism and Canadian Identity... all that work for nothing.
  23. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: I don't know if people are paying attention or what. We have shortages of key people. Want a MD? Environmental Engineer whatever. People have been wanting fast tracking for years. Ok here it is and I knew, I knew that first post would be what it is.

    The reason it is part of a money bill is not too hard to figure out. None of the legislation the Liberals sat on their hands for has been BAD legislation. This is not BAD legislation. Honestly how long would it take to get any immigration bill through this House? this term? next? We need the people sooner then after everybody has a consensus. I happen to like leadership, it kinda gets stuff done.
  24. Fake Name from Canada writes: Alright Bloggins, libby-slagging aside, what about the actually frightening prospect of what a future leftist government might at some point do with unlimited ministerial authority?
  25. Mike B from Canada writes: Looks to be a common sense answer to a big problem. No wonder the left wing whacko's are frightened to death. It boggles the mind that we don't look for the most qualified applicants in the first place. It's truly shameful that a qualified applicant would be forced to wait 6 years to get in. Lets face it. Anyone worth their salt has gone elsewhere by then. Of course that's why all the usual 'sky is falling' suspects are coming out of the woodwork. They'd rather stick with a system that is so clearly broken and works for no one than endorse a badly needed change.
  26. Free The West from Free the West, BC, Canada writes: As a Conservative supporter I think there may be issues upon which the Liberals might be able to fight an election, but not this one. If rationailizing and getting control of Canada's immigration was the central election issue, the Conservatives would get a landslide majority. Everywhere but Toronto of course where the voters have been bought out by Ontario-only Liberal policies.
  27. Blaque Jacque Shallaque from Canada writes: Our immigration system is chaos. Worth applicants languish years, while criminal refugees enjoy a revolving door policy. We can't deport anyone because our immigration is so pathetic. We we want to come here decide to go somewhere else.

    An overhaul is warranted. I welcome a review and attempt to make it more rational.

    And we also need to put a control on immigration lawyers and their assistants. Many of these people are the lowest form of parasite, preying on desperate people, milking them for every last dollar, and having no regard for Canada's law or aspirations.

    Bring on some immigration reform! We badly need it.
  28. Johnny Canuck from Canada writes: This is p[robably the best imigration bill we have had in decades. Anyone who opposes it is probably a brick short of a full load.
  29. martha stewart from Canada writes: How many immigration lawyers are there?
  30. dave mackay from nova scotia, Canada writes:
    Martha stewart from Canada:

    Tooooooo many lawyers ...... period.
  31. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: neil b Nope, the son that came back to Canada in a wheelchair was the one with Dad. The sweet little angel that tried to kill the medic was another fruit on the vine.
  32. martha stewart from Canada writes: Ermos Smith from Toronto writes: 'As a former liberal supporter, I am appalled at what the Liberal party stands for these days. Which is basically NOTHING!!!'

    No kidding. Dion suffers from electile dysfunction.
  33. Gordon White from Vancouver, Canada writes: Let's not forget that immigration lawyers depend on immigrants for business, so this bill threatens their job security. I'm not anti-immigration, but I do want Canadians to re-examine immigration policy, rather than let ethno-politics dictate our country's direction. We need rationality, not gut feelings on immigration.
  34. martha stewart from Canada writes: dave mackay writes: 'Tooooooo many lawyers ...... period.'

    Plan a - allow no more into Canada unless they are also qualified welders or some other useful trade.

    Plan b - encourage lawyers to emigrate. Perhaps they can sue the Taliban or some crocodiles in a far off country.
  35. martha stewart from Canada writes: Mr. Wong says: “We would be very disappointed in the Liberals”

    Join the crowd.

  36. Bob G - from Hohhot, China, Canada writes: canada desperately needs immigration reform
  37. Scare Crow from Canada writes: Why not a compromise? A certain quota will be given as a discretion to the immigration office to use as they see fit (ie. open to a certain skill to meet certain economic needs). And still leave a portion to be used in the old system.
    On a longer term it will make us less competitive with other countries in attracting immigrants. Australia for one has already a very liberal process making students eligible for permanent residency after graduation.
  38. bob saunders from Belleville Ontario, Canada writes: Loudan Bellicose from Canada writes: . It is easy to understand why immigrants don't want anything changed. What other country will let in people over 65 give them immediate OAS and immediate free health care-------------------- not Canada! OAP is only available to people after they have been in Canada for 12 years, and only then if they came before they were 65. There is nothing racist about the proposed adjustments in the immigration act, and nothing hidden either. Perhaps it shouldn't be in the Budget Bill, but other than that it is just trying to fix a problem created when it was changed by the last government-it didn't go to committee last time either.
  39. D K from Canada writes: ' Vern McPherson from writes:

    You want to fight an election over bigotry and dictatorship ? ?

    What are you going to tell the people at the doorstep ? What's stevie going to say in the debates ? That he is a bigot and a dictator ?

    Are you sure .....................'

    That's right, vote Liberal to ensure the stable supply of immigrant strippers...
  40. Mike Potter from Hamilton, Canada writes: Hiding something like this in a budget speaks volumes about the ethics of Harper and his flunkies.
  41. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:

    We can always trade for Immigrants : 2 of our Lawyers for 1 employable
    immigrant or a dozen Liberals for one employable.
    The Liberal wouldn't recognize good policy if they had some.
  42. Brian Kates from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Why is it that Liberal supporters can only complain? Are they devoid of thoughts and ideas? One goof above even brought up a hidden agenda! HA! Nice to see their through process hasn't evolved in four years.

    I think most people can agree that they're are problems with immigration and it's refreshing to see the government doing something about it. What do we hear from the Great Liberal Party? We'll huff and puff and blow your house down. Well, not even that. They'll huff and puff and sit on their hands when it counts. Rather than acting like children, why not propose ideas like adults?
  43. S Boatright from Canada writes: Mike Potter from Hamilton, Canada writes: 'Hiding something like this in a budget speaks volumes about the ethics of Harper and his flunkies. '

    Nothing unethical about it - the Conservatives have found an effective way to capitalize on the impotence of the Liberals. The Conservatives faced a frustrating first year while the Liberals stonewalled everything they tried to implement. Good on the Conservatives for finding a way to get the job done - well within the rules and the law.

    If the Liberals don't support this legislation, they know the drill.
  44. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'Blaque Jacque Shallaque from Canada writes: I'd rather take able bodied young couples from all over the world who will come here to work and become Canadian and make a better future for themselves and their children in this country.'

    Amusing ... as though manual labour is going to drive significant economic expansion. I mean, sure, its not a good deal to accept someone with a serious medical condition that's going to cost the health care system millions, but dollars for dollars, accepting foreign-trained doctors and other professionals would be a heck of a lot more beneficial to our economy than foreign-trained woocutters and drawers of water.

    Anybody can do manual labour to serve the resource economy with a year or so of training - the problem with these sectors in canada is that young people are pushed into taking humanities degrees at university (lets face it, most of them aren't going to be using that education for anything but some letters after their name to get them through the door for a job interview anyway) rather than the trades at college.

    That could be corrected by slashing subsidies to the economically irrelevant university programs (trust me, there'd be a lot fewer people interested in bumming around at uni taking humanities programs if they were paying the full cost themselves), so that there are simply fewer spaces available, and boosting financial incentives for apprenticeship training & community colleges. If we're recruiting internationally, why not target the high-value professionals rather than the people who will be making maybe $15/hr and generating little tax revenue?
  45. A Canadian from Cole Harbour, Canada writes: Joe Bloggins from Canada writes: The totally mindless Victoria Rutherford from Canada says 'Harpers hidden agenda is truly frightening.'

    Well, his 'hidden agenda' might be frightening to you, but likely not to the majority of Canadians. What is truly frightening is the Lib/left hidden agenda of buying immigrant votes.

    I totally agree
  46. Dave Phelps from Milan, TN, United States writes: Won't be long before Canada is declared an inalienable part of China ever since 1100 AD, and the white folks are throwing Molotovs into Chinese shops while demanding access to jobs and toilet paper (because the latter is all shipped to China along with the free oil from the tar sands).
  47. martha stewart from Canada writes: Apparently the Green Party more penguins to immigrate to Canada.

    That's their hidden agenda. Very scary.
  48. Mick H. from Canada writes: As an environmentalist who likes Dion, I shudder to imagine an election fought on this issue. Whatever I may think, the fact is that Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate on the planet, and this is a fact that the majority of Canadians are not happy about. Surveys show that again and again. If you say, 'Oh, well then Canadians are racists', then you are logically obligated to say that every other country in the world is MORE racist, because every single one has a lower immigration rate. I am sure that if surveys were done among actual immigrants (as versus immigration lawyers and unelected immigrant lobbyists), that even they would say, 'Well, it wouldn't hurt to chop the levels down to 4000 per week or so, at least for a while, because then maybe we could get some hospitals, roads and general infrastructure in place to catch up to the needs of the previous few years of world-topping immigration levels.' This is what people would think, regardless of what the pundits are telling them they SHOULD think, and regardless of what I think. And so, cutting to the chase, the Conservatives would likely win a majority if they were brought down and sent to an election about immigration. I therefore think it would be unwise for the Liberals to join with the NDP to defeat the Tories on this issue. In actual fact, I don't think that the bill even does reduce the overall numbers anyway, it just tweaks the selection process to meet job vacancies, so it's not the big deal that the immigration lawyers are making it out to be, and certainly not a big enough deal to force a money-wasting election that Canadians don't want.
  49. siren call from Canada writes: Probably all Canadians, immigrant or otherwise, have problems with the immigration system.

    But what is there in this bill that would alleviate the specific problems?

    The immigration process will be closed off or capped to deal with the back log.

    Okay, but what makes you think immigrants will be selected who are in the medical profession and help us deal with health care here? Has the current Harper government shown any interest in dealing with health care?

    The PMO will be able to pick and choose -- great, based on what criteria?

    There are plenty of mundane jobs available in the tar sands. Is that where the immigrants will be selected for?

    And if it's such a wonderful bill, why sneak it into a budget bill? Would you like to see more policy bills snuck into law in this manner? Why not shout the great solutions to deal with immigration problems from the roof tops, if that is what this bill accomplishes?

    Canadians might be greatful for some good news for a change.
  50. R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Not frightening at all. Anyone who thinks the 'Minister' will be making the final decisions (thousands of files) is out to lunch. The most qualified where we need them makes tremendous sense while leaving room for true refugees.
  51. spicydoc--That'll do, spicydoc, that'll do... from Canada writes:

    Mick H at 10:33 pm--nice post!
  52. Fake Name from Canada writes: S. Boatright - 'The Conservatives faced a frustrating first year while the Liberals stonewalled everything they tried to implement.'

    The liberals couldn't block anything by themselves. The tory policies were 'stonewalled' by a consensus of all three opposition parties, representing some 65% of the voting population. I'm sorry democracy in action upsets some people, but the divine right of kings has been a bit of an out-of-fashion concept for the last few centuries. This tactic of everything being a confidence motion will only work so long as one of the opposition parties is in too much of a financial mess to afford an election.

    Of course, given their current level of competence, the libbies may abstain on a bill that makes it a crime to oppose the governing party in an election, before they ever do get their money situation straight...

    A preferable scenario would be for the old reform and PC factions to split again, and we could have a perpetual minority situation where getting anything done requires consensus from the centre-right and centre-left, with the extremist NDP & elements of the current LPC, as well as the reformers, deservingly marginalized.
  53. martha stewart from Canada writes: Oops. Should have read: 'Apparently the Green Party WANTS more penguins to immigrate to Canada.'

    The previous incorrect post might not have been taken seriously.
  54. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: There were better ways of addressing the backlog of files. Whether or not the current government's intentions are truly benevolent, as they claim, the change is destined to be abused at some point in time. It also subjects immigration to the potential for political interference to an extent that wasn't possible before. It is, therefore, a very poor legislative change that needs to be opposed. I do hope that the LPC will oppose this legislation. All the better if it means killing the budget right along with it.
  55. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: Mick H, the problem is that I think it is probably true that virtually every other country is more racist than Canada. Certainly, Europe, China, and the U.S. would fit into this category. The other problem is, as Finley correctly stated, we need immigration because we are not replacing our population through births.
  56. Fake Name from Canada writes: ' R. M. from Regina, Canada writes: Not frightening at all. Anyone who thinks the 'Minister' will be making the final decisions (thousands of files) is out to lunch.'

    Anyone who thinks ministers even decide what colour tie to wear without consulting sandra buckler is out to lunch :p

    Seriously though, Bobby Dy is right. As i said above ... to all the Harper fanboi's posting what a great idea this is because it concentrates more power to cabinet instead of parliament - what about when its someone else, potentially dangerously left-wing, holding the office?
  57. Yussi M from Canada writes:
    The amount of thinly veiled racism and anti-multiculturalism sentiments in some of those posts is scary. The reality is that Canada's immigration policy is the defining feature of our country. We will not achieve the goal of becoming a true international mosaic unless Conservatives are stopped. New Canadians have been lured here under the assumption that the coutry will continue on the road to multculturalism. If Canada starts dividing immigrants into better or worse as befits the present (white and Western-culture based) government, that will be a collosal failure which will make us a laughingstock around the world.

    Liberals should force the election over this.
  58. Dion or Dijon? Canada or France? from Canada writes: IR from White Rock - Your posts can only be described as foolish. The 'disastrous' Tories - as you call them - have slowly nudged the pendulum in a different direction after years of leftist lunacy, and are restoring some balance to a country that was beginning to slant too dangerously far to one side of the political spectrum. The Conservatives should be thanked for that - and I suspect they will be once your gutless, abstaining Liberals are at last forced to call an election, and the Conservatives secure their well-deserved majority. I know you Libs and Dippers will be chewing the carpets on that blessed day, so get your shots in now! :-)
  59. One Eye Open from calgary, Canada writes: Common sense is BACK! from Canada writes: An election fought over whether the PMO can hand pick who gets into the country based on the color of their skin will only play well in Alberta.

    Complete ignorance on your behalf, so-called common sense. First, this article makes no mention of the PMO, or skin color. Second, Alberta is as multi-cultural as Ontario or any other region of Canada, so give it a rest. What motivates you to be so deceptive with your statements? Is this Alberta bashing supposed to serve a political purpose, or break-up Canada?
  60. Rachael .... commenting from .. Hollywood North, Canada writes: The minister need the power in order to fill the vacant jobs of MP who hide from voting in Parliament :)

    As for Martha's comment about Green party bringing in the penguins... well only if they can vote in the next election.
  61. Mike Sumners from Toronto, Canada writes: Quote from article: 'And the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants said in an e-mail last week that 'responding to Canada's economic needs should not compromise Canada's vision to build this country through the settlement and integration of immigrants as fully equal participants in society.''

    Integration. Now there's an interesting concept. How many of the immigrants that Canada has been taking in over the last 10-20 years are even interested in integrating in our society?
  62. john stockton from Hamilton, Canada writes: This CPC government is looking like the Bush Republicans more and more. Deception, Divide and Conquer politics - setting regions against regions... is this the kind of party that will unit Canada?
  63. neil b from edmonton, Canada writes: Multiculturalism is a two way street. Unfortunately, it is only the resident Canadians that are expected to practice this concept.

    I have never felt welcome in an immigrant setting to the extent I have 'opened up' to those who are new to Canada.

    Without any feedback from the average newcomer, I wonder if this 'open door policy' is worth it. Is gunplay part of their culture as well?
  64. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- Don't worry. Any poster who reduces her argument to 'electile dysfunction' is unlikely to be taken seriously.
  65. Paul Chislett from Windsor, Canada writes: 'Under the proposed law, the Immigration Minister would be permitted to cap the list of people waiting to be accepted into Canada. The government would also be able to reject an applicant who had been approved by immigration officers. And the Minister could unilaterally make decisions about immigration policy that, under the current system, require regulatory changes.'

    This is blatantly anti-democratic and must be defeated.
  66. Yussi M from Canada writes:
    bob saunders claims that 'Yussi is a closet Islamic supremacist' offering no proof, yet his own words present his wife as a very open sellout and Uncle Tom; go figure.

    Mike Sumners - the goal of our immigration is that Canada becomes a mosaic of different communities, unlike the American 'melting pot'. Unless we want to parrot Americans--and I think we can do better than that--too much emphasis on integration is not a good thing.
  67. david sandford from Canada writes: Time to bring them down.
  68. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - I got that idea from the article heading right beside this one. Think its great that this esteemed newspaper of record includes so much tabloid trivia these days, don't you?

    There's another extremely significant story here about the 'Foo Fighters' big concert in TO. Almost dragged that one into the latest bombing story from Iraq but didn't.

    In any case, after reading all the propaganda about China and Tibet, electile dysfunction just sounded right. Especially for Dion.
  69. Yussi M from Canada writes:
    Paul Chislett: Exactly.

    Mike Sumners [2]: In a country that's an international mosaic we should prevent any community or culture of domonating the government, not just white westerners. Nothing personal here. It's the person who defends our current racial and cultural imbalance of power that's the true bigot, not the one who points it out.
  70. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'Loudan Bellicose from Canada writes: John Stockton from Hamilton you come from a long line of Latte-Lieberals your great grandfather, your grandfather, your father and you have always voted Latte-Lieberal no-one is going to change your mind the world is flat.'

    Yes, play right into the stereotypical neocon idiot mold he wants you to fit in, by sticking to personal attacks and name-calling instead of attacking the lefties on issues. While our government is nowhere near as bad as Bush's on policy, its most ardent supporters certainly seem to exemplify the worst of the republicans' tendencies.
  71. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: I read the posts in the G & M, and more and more I'm feeling better about Canada and where it's going. I see people standing up, using their common sense and talking back to the idealist socialist crowd, no longer afraid of being thought of as 'politically incorrect'. People actually saying what they feel, and to hell with hurting the precious 'feelings' of the idealists. Just look at today's post. The one's against this immigration bill are way outnumbered. Common sense is beginning to prevail! Beautiful! Maybe I'll live to see the day Canadian thinking and politics is reversed, goes back to the pre Trudeau way of thinking. I can only hope it'll happen in my lifetime, but I am sure it'll happen in my children's lifetimes. A good legacy I can leave behind for my kids, the fact I was one of the ones who stood and fought for it. Let Common Sense prevail in Canada again!
  72. CJ Golf from London, Canada writes: Sometimes the opposition party sounds like a Leaf Fan, No sense of reality what so ever.

    So many of these comments are so mislead it is ridiculous. Suggesting that the Minister of Immigration wants the power to hand pick what colour of immigrant they allow in is ridiculous.

    We are talking about about a country that will be very short skilled labour as the baby boomers age and folks are already starting to retire in droves. How else can you explain the economy slowing yet unemployment rate is virtually at its lowest in history. Yes, manufacturing is struggling but overall the rate is at its lowest.

    So yes, we need to take care of Canadians who are already here and that means ensuring more skilled immigrants are accepted into our country. Which in turn should mean less immigrants arriving and immediately taking advantage of our social services. I believe in helping those in need but not if the cost is going to kill the existing social structure of our country.
  73. One Eye Open from calgary, Canada writes: I don't think the Dion Liberals have the parts to stand up to anything....
  74. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: One Eye Open, my experience of living for the past 15 years in Alberta is that the stereotypes of Alberta are generally correct. There are two approaches that you can take to addressing this criticism: 1) accept is as valid and do your part to increase tolerance in Albertan society or 2) defend Albertan society according to your own system of beliefs. While it is true that Alberta is multicultural, it is not true that Alberta is as tolerant as other parts of the country (Quebec on some issues excluded). It may be that there is just a much more vocal minority of bigots in Alberta (implicit in this is that Alberta is much more tolerant of intolerance). I completely agree with the statement of Fake Name as it applies to the Alberta Reform constituency: 'While our government is nowhere near as bad as Bush's on policy, its most ardent supporters certainly seem to exemplify the worst of the republicans' tendencies.'
  75. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - Further to my posts of 9:33 and 11:25, and yours of 11:18, just thought I would clarify by reposting something I wrote to the famous Vern McPherson in the thread about poor Jack's NDP house crumbling:

    'Vern, you must have missed the news. I'm joining a new party that Robert Miller from Halifax found... 'The Common Sense Party -- They do admit that their platform is a little 'skimpy'... here it is in a nutshell:

    '1) Government should leave us alone

    2) F*%@ people with no sense of humour'

  76. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- Never has so much obvious mental equipment been applied to the honing of such a juvenile style. It is your choice, of course.

    Conservative Centrist:-- What you read on these fora should not be taken as any representative indication of the mood or views of the nation. On-line fora, not unlike talk radio, can be a place of refuge for those whose views would not stand up to rational debate. The so-called pre-Trudeau era that you have such nostalgia for included such embarrassments as the pillaging of Japanese Canadian property in the name of national security, the turning away of Jews who sought refuge from the Nazis, and the setting of quotas to limit the number of Jews at universities.

    There is no question that Canada's immigration policies and procedures require a complete overhaul, but that is no excuse whatsoever for trying to avoid reasonable debate by applying the band-aid of 'ministerial discretion' by way of its inclusion in a confidence motion. Given the moderating/down-turn of the economy, there is little reason for haste.
  77. Fake Name from Canada writes: 'The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: I read the posts in the G & M, and more and more I'm feeling better about Canada and where it's going.'

    Really? The more opinion posts I read, the more convinced I am that we're heading towards the kind of complete polarization that's so bad for US politics. It seems like most people feel they have some sort of written-in-stone obligation to support their party, no matter what they do. It seems to me that the people willing to criticize either main party for mis-handling something are outnumbered three or four to one.
  78. martha stewart from Canada writes: Never? Wow.
  79. neil b from edmonton, Canada writes: Bobby Dy...Nobody really cares if Alberta is as bigoted as cuebeek or linked to the rebuplicans.

    Hard work is the great equalizer here in Alberti! Come to think of it , us REDNECKS should become a DISTINCT SOCIETY.

    Fifteen years in my province and still an outsider. To bad.:(
  80. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: martha stewart:-- In truth, I can't think of a better example.

    neil b:-- Yet, when a survey was taken on the topic of happiness and contentment, Alberta scored poorly, whereas the generally less affluent (and, according to the conservative myth, participants in a culture of defeat) are more content. Apparently, all that equalizing hard-work does not happiness make, perhaps because keeping up with the Joneses is not a satisfaction-producing endeavour.
  81. martha stewart from Canada writes: diane marie - Perhaps... if you don't think too hard.

    But I should at least point out that the description of the Common Sense Party was a direct quote from a second party... though so succinct that I could not have said it better myself.

    I take it that you're not keen on joining?

  82. neil b from edmonton, Canada writes: DM....You could be right. Only difference being , when I retire I will become a Gov. employee, not a moment before.

    Nobody said employment was a joy. It is a necessity. Besides, take away their beer for an hour and survey them again. UH-HU...thought so.
  83. The Conservative Centrist from Canada writes: Let Me Tell You. Yeah, that's what the idealist leftist socialists have been pushing for years. Common sense people are finally standing up and pushing back.... and winning.

    Diane Marie...I refer to the Pearson Canada.
  84. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: neil b, I'm proud to be an outsider. Unfortunately, I have a child who was born in Alberta and my wife is an Albertan. They can't make the same claim that I do to dissociate myself from the redneck reputation of Albertans. I always make that distinction when I travel. That said, where I grew up (rural Manitoba) is not a whole lot different than Alberta but I now call Winnipeg 'home'. This is where my immediate family now lives. Winnipeg is very progressive in comparison.

    Hard work is not the great equalizer in Alberta. Albertans are well paid because of the boom in the resource sector and the shortage of labour to fill those jobs. Take away those two factors and Albertans would earn no more (and perhaps less) than the rest of the country. This is the other irritating point about Albertans, their arrogance knows no bounds. They constantly congratulate themselves as 'earning' their good fortune rather than recognizing the truth that it is merely the luck of living in a place rich in dinosaurs millions of years ago.

    The other frustrating part about Alberta is that it has, because of this resource wealth, the potential to be so much more than it is. It is the failure of Albertans to recognize this and demand that their government build for a future where resources no longer carry the day.
  85. The Middle Finger ..I.. from Canada writes: G&M reports: Ms. Finley says the changes are necessary to clear up a backlog of 900,000 hopeful immigrants, mostly from China, India and Pakistan, who have now been waiting more than six years to come to Canada.

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    The URL below is for the CIC processing times. Can anyone identify where the 6 year backlog is?

    http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/times/canada/process-in.asp#temp_res
  86. Loudan Bellicose Best Post 24/02/08 at 1:30 PM, seconded by other true story from Canada writes:
    Loudan Bellicose (24/02/08 1:30 PM):
    ... limit immigration from any one region, to 1% of total immigration. Ethnic enclaves are start of problem.
    Other solution is to lower immigration by 95%.
    Present immigration causes more problems than it solves.
    Immigration lowers our standard of living.
    We have shortage of Doctors, Schools, Housing, etc.
    We have increase in taxes, crime, rents, energy, GHG emissions, etc.
    We lower our academic and work place standards to accommodate the newcomers.
    We lower our housing standards. It is now acceptable for kids to live at home until they are thirty years old.
    We have for all practical purposes lost freedom of speech.
    If you call this progress, well OK then.
    It is a fallacy that a country must increase its population to prosper.
    China has probably the lowest rate of population growth in the world. China probably also has the fastest increase in standard of living in the world.
    --------

    Exactly 'Loudan Bellicose'.

    You know what, I bluntly said the same in mid '90 (1st Chretien Lib Gov), as new immigrant myself, to the audience at one higher-end professional/scientific conference, with lot of Ottawa crowds, 'real Canadians'. I said I would myself accept to give up on my mid-term landed immigrant status and leave, if new radical measures deem so.

    Everybody was like jaws dropped and PC silent. I still didn't know what was going in our Canada (who's who and what's really in power).

    Becoming expert in the meantime, I am skeptic about that possibility because majority of real Canadians, not to mention newer ones, are simply clueless, gullible, brainwashed ... about who are exactly 'Special Interests' pushing this self-destructive immigration.

    No, it's not ONLY NeoLib/NDP immigrants' voting machine, it's more sophisticated / sinister .
    24/02/08 2:07 PM
  87. Nancy Wilson from N.Ontario, Canada writes: Finally, some common sense prevails in our Immigration policies!
    Electile dsyfunction..
    That was a good one Martha.LOL.
    You know,some people DO have a sense of humour.
  88. Bobby Dy from Canada writes: neil b, the other distinction between someone like me and an 'Albertan' is that I think of myself as a Canadian first, and proud to be Canadian. 'Albertans' always try to dissociate themselves from Canada, making a point of their Albertan heritage. To 'Albertans', the 'Canadian mentality' is an embarrassment. To Canadians, the 'Albertan mentality' is an embarrassment (hence my need to dissociate myself from the province--I live in Alberta but in no way do I consider myself Albertan). Albertans like to believe that they would be better off as an independent country. That is very short term thinking. Resources may attract people here (not the reason I came by the way) but these people, as you say, are not Albertans and many won't be interested in staying once that resource revenue dries up. I would bet dollars to donuts that Alberta will suffer a serious 'brain drain' once the resource revenue is no longer around if the government does not put enough away to build a future beyond oil.
  89. Ivana Tinkall from Victoria, Canada writes: Okay, I don't get the 'Latte-Lieberals' reference, as so wittily invoked by Loudan Bellicose. Care to explain that one, or are we just picking insults out of a hat?

    How about the 'Cappuccino-Cons?' Oooh, mega-burn!
  90. Brian Dell from Alberta, Canada writes: Paul Chislett: 'This is blatantly anti-democratic and must be defeated.'

    Because Parliament has an agenda and immigration lawyers and the immigrant lobby does not? You can vote against the former, Paul, you can't vote against the latter. I can understand how you wouldn't want elected officials interfering if you don't want any interference in current immigration policy. Canadians are entitled to exercise some oversight through the Parliament they elected, however. If it is not the will of Parliament to empower the Minister to cap applications for efficiency reasons, the opposition parties can introduce an opposing bill and call it a confidence measure.

    It is unfortunate that the young, single, high qualified and entrepreneurial applicants out wouldn't get to vote if there were an election on this. Not that these potential Canadians wouldn't get outvoted by current Canadians who have gotten in and want to keep the queue full of their relatives anyway...
  91. ali mansur from Canada writes: Up until now, we officially let in about 1% of our population each year. That's not 1% of our Canadian born population, but rather 1% including naturalized citizenry.

    I may not be that good at math (I am), but it means Canada will be a nation where immigrants are the majori