Trade deal could open Canada for more asylum seekers

Around the world countries are struggling with the flow of asylum seekers.  I have stories to post from South Africa and Australia where both countries are struggling to cope with tens of thousands who want in.   Canada has been trying to deal with its asylum overload by throwing out asylum requests for those citizens of so-called “safe” countries.

For new readers, ‘refugees’ are brought into a country by the government largely with the “help” of the UN, but asylum seekers get across a country’s border somehow (visa overstays are common) and then ask for asylum.   Asylum technically is for people who have been persecuted or fear they will be persecuted on account of race, religion, nationality, and/or membership in a particular social group or because of a political opinion.

Canada has said that there are “safe” countries and will not accept asylum claims from those countries, nonetheless, Stephen Harper will soon have to decide if he will be pressured into opening Canada’s borders to several countries with whom they wish to engage in a special trade deal.

From the Globe and Mail:

In Cali, Colombia, next week, Stephen Harper will ponder a choice driven by the forces of globalization. Trade talks are increasingly applying pressure on Canada to lower restrictions on foreigners entering the country, and in turn, squeezing the refugee-protection system.

Mr. Harper will travel to Colombia to meet the leaders of a new trade bloc, the Pacific Alliance, to consider whether Canada should join. The alliance might be the next big thing in Pacific Rim trade, quickly reducing barriers between emerging Latin American nations and then with Asia.

But the biggest obstacle for Canada isn’t reducing barriers on goods crossing the border, it’s lowering restrictions on people.

The members of the Pacific Alliance – Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru – have dropped visa requirements so their citizens can travel freely within the bloc without forms and fees. They’d expect Canada to do the same if it joins, letting their citizens visit without getting a visa in advance. They find Canada’s visa-application process onerous, and say it rejects too many tourists and business people.

But for Canada, it’s not a straightforward decision on paperwork. Ottawa imposes visas on some countries so they can screen out people who might claim refugee status here. The pressure to lift them forces choices about the asylum system.

[....]

But visas are a tricky hurdle. Lifting them immediately would raise concerns about a flow of refugee claimants from Colombia or Peru.

Read on.  Canada has already given refugee status to some Mexicans so this surely would open the door to ‘visitors’ who then apply to stay in Canada.

Religious immigrants changing Canada’s demographics

In the last 40 years Christian immigration to Canada has dropped from 78% to 47.5%.

Baitul Islam Mosque, Maple, Ontario, Canada

I haven’t had much time of late for reports on our “welcoming” Canadian neighbors or the Australian asylum seeker on-going crisis (there they are taking failed asylum seekers off public welfare while “humanitarians” howl), so here, in order to begin catching up, is a story about Canada’s changing demographics.   I think that the reporter, Benjamin Shingler, is trying too hard to make a point that immigrants, passionate about their religion, will benefit Canada.   I wouldn’t go that far when it comes to the growing Muslim population.

From Canadian Press/AP:

While the Christian faith continues to dominate Canada’s immigrant profile, its proportion has been steadily fading. Where more than 78 per cent of immigrants to Canada prior to 1971 identified themselves as Christians, that proportion has dropped to 47.5 per cent among those who arrived over the past five years, the survey found.

Meanwhile, the Muslim, Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist faiths have been growing, claiming 33 per cent of those immigrants who arrived between 2001 and 2011. Among those who arrived before 1971, that share was just 2.9 per cent. All told, the four religions accounted for some 2.4 million people in Canada in 2011, about 7.2 per cent, compared with 4.9 per cent a decade earlier.

And then there’s the non-believers: nearly one-quarter of the Canadian population, some 7.8 million people, claimed no religious affiliation in 2011, up from 16.5 per cent in 2001.

The arrival of religious immigrants has worked to offset the country’s growing secular population, said Morton Weinfeld, a sociology professor at McGill University in Montreal.

“To a certain extent, this adds a level of traditionalism to Canadian society,” Weinfeld said. “There is probably a higher level of commitment (among immigrants) to their respective faiths.”  [How does adding Muslims, Sikhs etc. add to "traditionalism" in Canada?---ed]

Unlike its predecessor, the cancelled mandatory long-form census, the results of the 2011 survey come with a caveat: because the NHS was voluntary, Statistics Canada warns that its findings carry a greater risk of “non-response error.”  [The census will become useless as it becomes voluntary.---ed]

For many immigrant groups, religion plays a vital role as new arrivals to Canada contend with the often confounding challenges and difficulties that come with establishing a new home in a completely different country, he added.

“Churches or mosques or even some synagogues help in the adjustment and integration process.”

The Hijra continues unabated (read about it)!

Canada: Is access to health care a basic right for illegal aliens?

They call them failed asylum seekers—aliens who have arrived in Canada illegally, asked for refugee status, but come from countries that are capable of protecting them and so are being denied the right to stay in Canada.  We mentioned this policy earlier this month, here.   In the past they received free medical care, but no more.

America pay attention because as Obamacare kicks in and we can’t afford it, we will be headed down this same road.  Socialized medicine—free to all—cannot survive.

Here is the news from The Star:

Immigration minister Jason Kenney: They have to be real refugees to get our free healthcare.

Israel Sosa’s deportation has been put on hold as the 50-year-old battles colon cancer.

The failed refugee claimant from the Dominican Republic has been allowed to stay in Canada on humanitarian grounds for now — but he has been banned from getting treatment under Ottawa’s Interim Federal Health (IFH) Program for refugees.

The Toronto man could choose to delay treatment and face death — or go into debt paying his medical costs.   [He could go into debt and pay it off over time, could he not?---ed]

That’s the new reality for asylum seekers from the so-called “safe countries” — ones such as Mexico and the Czech Republic, which are deemed democratic countries capable of state protection — as well as failed refugee claimants.

They are no longer eligible for government health care as of last June, unless they put public health at risk. The old program covered them for emergency and basic health care, similar to what is included with OHIP.

Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has said these are not legitimate refugees and taxpayers should not be held accountable for their care. The cuts are expected to save Ottawa $100 million over five years.

“It is very important to distinguish between a refugee, an asylum claimant and a failed asylum claimant. Canadians have been clear that they do not want illegal immigrants and bogus refugee claimants receiving free, gold-plated health-care benefits,” Alexis Pavlich, Kenney’s press secretary, told the Star this week.

However, critics say the federal government cannot just sit back and watch these patients suffer as resource-stretched hospitals demand prepayments for medical procedures and tests.

A court will decide if the cuts are unconstitutional:

Two national organizations made up of physicians and lawyers are suing Ottawa, arguing the health cuts are unconstitutional and illegal under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The case is expected to be heard in a year.

There is much more, more sad cases to tweak the Canadian taxpayers’ guilt, read it all.

This is what I don’t get, why can’t all the complainers start a foundation to collect private charity to fund some of these medical cases.  Maybe they can’t all be saved, but some would and surely they could find enough rich people/celebrities and so forth willing to show their generosity to the poor immigrants.

Another 1000 Bhutanese headed for Canada

Just now looking over the website for Canada’s Immigration Department I see that they just this week announced that they will take another 1000 Bhutanese from camps in a safe country—Nepal—which would bring  their resettled Bhutanese population up to a total of 6,500.  Not to be too picky about the facts, but the Bhutanese are of Nepali descent and are in Nepal, again a safe country, but somehow they are persecuted refugees in need of resettlement to Canada (and to the US where our totals are now approaching the 70,000 mark!) and will be eligible for free, free, free health care?

Canada refugee numbers drop sharply; Refugee Council complains

Update May 11th:  But, but, but ‘we will get back on track when we open a mission in Iraq’ says Kenney, here.  Critics claim Kenney only wants the Christians, Kenney says, not true—we take Muslims!

Canada took less than 10,000 refugees in 2012 and the Canadian Council for Refugees, a leading pro-immigration advocacy group in Canada, is unhappy.   Immigration Minister Jason Kenney blames the slowdown on the closure of their processing office in Syria and promises to do better this year.

From the International Business Times:

Kenney critic Loly Rico of the Refugee Council of Canada

Despite its pledge to resettle more refugees, Canada granted asylum to the second lowest number of refugees in over 30 years according to statistics released by the Canadian Council for Refugees. The statistics shows a drop of 26 percent in the number of refugees resettled in the country from 2011 to 2012.

The Canadian Council for Refugees in a press release expressed its disappointment to witness the sharp drop last year.

“We very much regret that the Minister has not been able to keep his promise to increase the numbers, and that in fact last year fewer people were able to find safety in Canada in this way,” said Loly Rico, President of the Canadian Council for refugee.

“Canadians are proud to protect refugees through resettlement to Canada – but unfortunately the government has been closing the door on refugees,” said Loly Rico.

While commemorating the 60th anniversary of the Refugee Convention in Geneva December 2011, the Canadian Immigration Minister Jason Kenney pledged to increase the number of refugees by 20 percent.

The immigration minister in recent days has blamed the closure of refugee offices in Syria for the sharp drop in the number of refugees resettled by the Canadian federal government.

[....]

Resettled refugees come in two streams: Government-Assisted Refugees and Privately Sponsored Refugees. Arrivals in both categories decreased dramatically in 2012.   [The US does not have "privately sponsored refugees" except in a few small number of cases---ed]

According to the statistics, only 5,412 Government-Assisted Refugees were resettled – the lowest number since at least the 1970s, and only 4,212 refugees were received through Private Sponsored Refugees.

In a related story last week, we reported that Canada is speeding up asylum claims so that the citizens of Canada won’t have to support migrants who do not have legitimate asylum claims and need to be cared for sometimes for years as their claims are processed.   That’s a good move and one we should be copying.

For new readers!  Be sure to check our Canada archives, here, where we have 108 other posts about refugee problems in Canada.

The third world is making a beeline to Canada; government trying to get it under control

My Canada stories are piling up, so I’m going to post three here in one post.

First is an update of the Sri Lankan boat people that we first reported here in 2010.  Seems that at least two men on the ship were wrongly given refugee status according to a Canadian Court.  Pro-immigration lawyers had creatively argued that since the ship had been publicly identified with Tamil Tiger terrorists that none of the migrants could be returned safely to Sri Lanka without fear of persecution.

Sri Lankans are also traveling by boat to get into Australia as we reported here last week.

From the National Post:

Police and military personnel wear surgical masks as they board the MV Sun Sea after it was escorted into CFB Esquimalt in Colwood, B.C. on Aug. 13, 2010. Jonathan Hayward / CP files

The Immigration & Refugee Board misinterpreted the law when it granted asylum to two Sri Lankans simply because they had traveled to Canada aboard the human smuggling ship MV Sun Sea, the Federal Court has ruled.

In a pair of decisions, the court weighed in on attempts by refugee lawyers to argue that, because the Sun Sea has been publicly linked to the Tamil Tigers rebels, its passengers faced persecution if Canada sent them back to Sri Lanka.

The latest cases involved two men who were not considered genuine refugees except for the fact they had been on board the Sun Sea. The refugee board ruled that made them members of a “social group” that faced persecution.

But this week, the court said it had used the wrong standard of proof to reach those decisions. It overturned both men’s asylum claims and sent the cases back for re-evaluation.

[....]

The Sun Sea arrived off the British Columbia coast in August 2010, carrying 492 Sri Lankan migrants. The voyage had originated in Thailand and was organized by a smuggling syndicate that charged hefty fees.

Although those on board claimed to be fleeing persecution, Justice Sean Harrington said B472 “was found to be a liar,” while B323 was not credible and did not face a serious chance of mistreatment when he had lived in Sri Lanka.

“The Sun Sea passengers had a myriad of motives to come to Canada,” he wrote in his ruling.

“Some were human smugglers. Some may well have been terrorists. Some were garden-variety criminals who wanted to escape justice. Some had serious reason to fear persecution in Sri Lanka and some, like Mr. 472, were economic migrants.”

Second story for today

Canada saving billions by fast-tracking asylum claims from countries not considered to be producing legitimate refugees, including any who want asylum from the US!   Thanks to a reader for sending this about a week ago.

From the Globe and Mail:

Canada has seen a dramatic drop in the number of refugees seeking asylum here after Ottawa began fast-tracking applications from countries where it feels people are less likely to be persecuted.

Senior government sources say that on average, 164 foreigners are claiming asylum weekly in 2013, down nearly 70 per cent from the average weekly claim for the past five years, which was 537. This is based on data for the first seven weeks of 2013.

The plummeting figures show the impact of the changes that Immigration Minister Jason Kenney made to Canada’s refugee system in 2012 when he sponsored a bill that made this country a less welcoming destination for asylum seekers with shaky claims – those he called “bogus refugees.”

[.....]

Mr. Kenney’s legislation, now law, gives the Immigration Minister the power to designate which countries are less likely to be a legitimate source of refugees.

Changes last year designated 27 countries of origin – including the United States, most European Union member countries and Croatia – as places from which claims would be fast-tracked. Ottawa added eight more countries to this list this month.

Refugee claimants from countries on this safe list – those that Canada considers democratic states with a solid human-rights record and an independent judiciary – now have much less time to fight to stay here.   [and thus do not need to be housed and fed at taxpayer expense---ed]

The third story in my Canadian troika today is this one about Immigration Minister Kenney traveling to Turkey and being criticized for not committing to take thousands of Syrians home with him.  This is the story from the Edmonton Journal last week.  Kenney did commit to resettle more Iraqis and Iranians.

OTTAWA – The NDP and a Syrian Canadian group are questioning why Immigration Minister Jason Kenney chose to accept Iraqi and Iranian refugees when he visited fleeing Syrians in Turkey last month.

They accuse Kenney of misleading the Canadian public by touting his visit as being in support of Syrian refugees, which currently number about 200,000 in Turkey, when Canada opted instead to take 5,000 Iraqis and Iranians.

But Kenney’s office says there’s a perfectly good explanation for the decision: Turkey won’t let any fleeing Syrians leave the country until the United Nations officially declares them actual refugees.

Kenney’s aides also say Canada is currently co-operating with the UN’s refugee agency, which doesn’t want to push the resettlement of the hundreds of thousands of fleeing Syrians just yet.

Read it all!

I had been wondering why Western countries weren’t dashing to Turkey to bring home refugees.  The UN says it isn’t time yet.  Watch for it!  The Iraqis are getting boring to the US refugee contractors, Syrians will be next.  As a matter of fact, I bet at this year’s State Department hearing for who to bring in 2014, the likes of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops will be asking for Syrians please!

Muslim immigration not a threat says author

They are just like earlier waves of Catholics and Jews, says Doug Saunders a columnist who wrote a book to make his case.

From The Canadian Jewish News:

OTTAWA — Muslim immigrants are no more a threat to western countries than earlier waves of Catholic and Jewish newcomers were in their day, Globe and Mail columnist Doug Saunders told an audience here earlier this month.

Saunders, an author and award-winning journalist, explored the perceived threat of Muslim immigration to the western world in his recently published book The Myth of the Muslim Tide:  Do Immigrants Threaten the West?

Not to worry says Saunders, they won’t out-number us.  Just like previous immigrants their population growth will slow.

“I started to research this subject on my own and looked at this latest wave of religious minority immigrants in the west,” said Saunders. “Sixty years ago, there was fear of immigration by Catholics from Europe. Since Catholics had many children, there was a fear that they would become a majority and would try to impose their religion on the country.”   

Saunders compared similar fears in the past about Jewish immigrants and said his book details statistics showing that family sizes among ethnic immigrants haven’t changed much at all and that the fear of being overtaken by a majority of “others” is groundless.

Here is the kicker (and the funny part, sort of!).  Saunders continued with what we SHOULD fear if not demographics:

“This book tries to separate what we should worry about from what we should not. Antisemitism, Islamic terrorism and failed integration are serious worries. I am investigating the idea of what is causing the problems on the ground,” Saunders said.

Hint to Saunders—it is all from Islamic teaching that comes from the mosques that come with the Muslim immigrants!

Saunders got pounded by the anti-jihad writers for this book and here is just one critical post from Blazing Cat Fur from last summer.

Canada: Supreme Court hearing refugee/war crimes case

They are busy, busy, busy in Canada these days with refugee issues.  Yesterday it was the announcement that Canada would take 5000 more Iraqis and Iranians to make Turkey happy, and today the Supreme Court will hear an important case.

Here is the story (from Canada.com):

OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada will hear a case Thursday that grapples with how to determine just who is culpable for war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Rachidi Ekanza Ezokola, a former high-level diplomat with the Democratic Republic of Congo, was originally denied refugee status after he fled to Montreal with his family because he was found to be complicit by association with the crimes committed by the war-torn African country.

It will be the first time since 1999 that the Supreme Court is considering the interpretation of provisions of a United Nations refugee convention that denies refugee status to people who are associated with war crimes and crimes against humanity – provisions upon which hundreds of refugee cases in Canada are decided, said Lorne Waldman, the president of the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers.

Sheesh!  They have a whole Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers, I wonder if we have such an association?

Read it all.  The “humanitarians” are on Ezokola’s side, no surprise there.

I bet there are war criminals sprinkled throughout the US refugee population. 

Those two Iraqis convicted of terrorism charges in Kentucky would, in my view, fit the definition.  Oh, but then again, they only killed Americans so that doesn’t count I suppose.

But, this case from New Hampshire of a refugee woman (Beatrice Munyenyezi) charged with lying about her role in genocide in Rwanda is pretty stunning.  We paid for her resettlement and then she cost us millions in court costs for a couple of very expensive trials.  Looks like her next trial, that had been scheduled for last October, will be happening in March? in Concord, NH.

Canada: We will take another 5000 Iraqis and Iranians from Turkey, chosen by UN

To ease the burden on poor Turkey!  Oh brother!

From Canadavisa.com:

Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) has announced plans to resettle up to 5,000 Iranian and Iraqi refugees, presently in Turkey, by 2018. Citing “escalating violence in the region,” Immigration Minister Jason Kenney outlined his government’s intention to “help Turkey deal with this growing pressure.” He also commended the government of Turkey “for keeping her borders open to those fleeing the ongoing conflict in the region.”

It is expected that this undertaking will help ease the existing burden on Turkey, freeing up the Turkish government’s resources to deal with the current influx of Syrians seeking protection in the country. [Watch for it!  Canada will eventually be taking the Syrians too---ed]

Minister Kenney reaffirmed Canada’s commitment to its 2009 and 2010 pledges of resettling 20,000 Iraqi refugees. To date, it has resettled 12,000, most of them from Syria. 

Most of the refugees will be referred by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for resettlement.

Canada is one of a few countries operating a resettlement program out of Turkey, and is second only to the United States as a destination for refugees from the region.

A good refugee story for a change

A family escapes Muslim persecution in Pakistan and arrives in Canada.   This is the sort of case western asylum was initially intended for—before the whole system became corrupted.   Watch it here (8 minutes), hat tip: Janet.

Canada wants more private groups to sponsor refugees

Private charitable groups need to put their money where their mouth is!

Unlike the US where the federal taxpayer is on the hook for refugee resettlement via contractors (like the USCCB in the previous post), Canada has some private refugee resettlement.    Before the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980 (Kennedy, Biden, Carter), US resettlement was done with PRIVATE CHARITY as well.

This article in The Star is a little confusing.  But, if I can summarize it:  the government wants more private charities to pick up the costs and resettle refugees; they say that refugees assimilate better when cared for by a private charity; the private charities say they don’t want to be told which refugees they must take and believe this is a backhanded way for the government to pawn off its responsibility to private charities.

I say this is solely the responsibility of private charity and not a responsibility of the taxpayer in Canada or the US and we should be going back to that idea—private groups take full responsibility for the financial well-being of refugee families and their assimilation into their new culture (if we are going to bring any at all!).

Here is the article from Ottawa in The Star (emphasis mine):

OTTAWA—The federal government is seeking to offload some of its international promises to refugees onto the private sector.

It’s asking community groups to sponsor 1,000 of the refugees the Canadian government has told the United Nations it will resettle over the next three years.

But at the same time, Ottawa is restricting the groups’ ability to sponsor refugees themselves by placing caps on private applications.

The decisions are raising concerns from not-for-profit groups that they are being forced to carry out the Immigration department’s objectives instead of their own.

[....]

Refugee resettlement in Canada is a shared activity between the government and about 80 groups, which have formal agreements with Ottawa to sponsor refugees.

Canada voluntarily accepts about 10 per cent of the world’s refugees. Last year, there were 7,365 government-assisted refugees and 5,585 privately sponsored ones, according to government statistics.  [The US is resettling roughly 50,000 to 75,000 annually in recent years---ed]

[....]

Between 2006 and 2011, the top five source countries for privately-sponsored refugees were Iraq, Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea and Somalia.  [Mostly Muslims?---ed]

Immigrants fare better when privately taken care of—hmmmm!  Where have we heard that before!  But, we will throw you some taxpayer money too (as a sweetener).

A spokesman for the Citizenship and Immigration department said the decision to ask private groups to help settle 1,000 government-assisted refugees was made because research shows refugees fare better when they are brought to Canada by private organizations.

“By providing up to six months of income support for (UN-referred) refugees supported by sponsors, we hope to help organizations new to refugee sponsorship and encourage existing civil society groups to sponsor refugees who have few or no pre-existing family or community links in Canada,” said Remi Lariviere in an e-mail.

Supposedly Canada wants  more refugees, but private groups don’t have the money (surprise!).

The department’s Lariviere said Canada is seeking to increase the number of refugees it resettles to a high of up to 14,500 refugees and other vulnerable populations by 2013.

But both Dench and Wiebe said it’s not certain that goal can be met.

Wiebe questions whether the voluntary sector has the capacity or the resources to help resettle more refugees.  [Call in the taxpayers!---ed]

[....]

But community groups pin the changes to budget cuts — they say it’s cheaper for the government to ask private groups to pick up part of the tab for their international obligations.

Bottomline—There is not enough charitable money to bring in large numbers of impoverished people because private citizens and “charitable” groups only want to sacrifice so much or contribute personally only so much as they bring in ever more culturally diverse, job seeking, and socially needy people.  There are not enough private citizens/groups putting their money where their mouth is to be responsible for the immigrants’ long term well-being, so they milk the taxpayer all-the-while claiming we critics have no heart.