For one brief moment it looked as though Canada might actually be coming out of its long coma, when Mme. Robillard announced that immigration could not be significantly increased, “while so many people already in Canada cannot find jobs. She also said increased pressure by immigrants on social services in urban centres is a concern.” (Globe and Mail, October 24, 1997) That dangerous brush with sense was rectified when she informed Canadians (the same day) that the 1998 immigration target, “has increased modestly to between 200,000 and 225,000 immigrants next year,” [even as] “she noted … the ‘absorptive capacity’ of the country has been reached.” (Calgary Herald, October 24, 1997).
Many Immigrants Declare They Have No Intention of Working
Newly released figures from Statistics Canada confirm that Toronto and Vancouver serve as Canada’s immigrant magnets; “42% of all new arrivals to Canada settled in Toronto,” says Statscan’s November 4 news release. The Globe and Mail’s lengthy article on the subject repeatedly refers to Toronto as “an experiment”. A visit to the Statscan site leaves you with the distinct impression that “the experiment” was concocted with a Li’l Monster Junior Science Kit. Immigrants from each category were asked what their career intentions were in Canada. It’s important to remember as you read, these figures reflect SUCCESSFUL applicants – those who were actually admitted to the country.
- Immigration overall do not intend to work 32.55% Family class do not intend to work 47.12% Business class do not intend to work 51.08% Skilled workers do not intend to work 21.46% Refugees do not intend to work 20.64% “Other” category do not intend to work 15.64% Toronto profile do not intend to work 30.72% Vancouver profile do not intend to work 33.75% Montreal profile do not intend to work 28.42%
Even as we are required to believe that refugees really are fleeing for their lives and would say whatever it takes to strengthen their claim, the figures would seem to suggest otherwise. The highly desirable business class appears indifferent to the prospect of working in Canada. No doubt that will be justified by the enormous numbers of Canadians we confidently expect to be hired on. However, that doesn’t begin to explain why nearly 22 per cent of the equally desirable skilled class immigrants are determined to deprive Canada of the very skills which assured their admission in the first place. Indeed, the only group which appears to be marginally resigned to contributing is the nebulous “Other” category; even here, nearly 16% stated intention NOT to work is hardly cause for jubilant celebration. This unpleasant glimpse at the mechanics of the immigration process is a real myth buster. Whatever happened to hard working immigrants who “do the jobs Canadians don’t want”? Certainly, before the invention of welfare, the reward for an aversion to work would have been a cold grave. Some other news from Statscan: immigrants account for 26% of Ontario’s population, 24% of B.C.’s and a whopping 9.4% of Quebec’s. (Quebec receives one third of federal immigration transfer payments). The 1996 census shows 95% of Canada’s total population were Canadian citizens, 87% of whom were citizens by birth. Of naturalized Canadians, one in five maintains dual citizenship. Elsewhere, sovereign nations feel this implies dual loyalties.
Newcomers Should Pay ESL Costs, Poll Shows
More and more Canadians are coming to the view that, with the world beating on our door to benefit from life in Canada, we should be a little more selective. Moreover, perhaps people should have to qualify themselves to come here by learning English (or French) in advance. Recent polls seem to bear this out. “A recent poll found that only four per cent of British Columbians believe government should continue to solely fund such programs. The Vancouver Sun and CBC-TV poll also found that 51 per cent of B.C. residents think both government and ethnic groups should fund multiculturalism while 39 per cent feel only ethnic groups should pay. The survey found that 65 per cent of British Columbians feel that immigrants should be required to speak English or French before moving to Canada while 34 per cent believe it shouldn’t be a requirement. The poll also found that 79 per cent want new immigrants to contribute to ESL programs while only 17 per cent feel lthe programs should be fully funded by government.” (Vancouver Sun, November 10, 1997)
Immigration Round-up … But They’re Headed This Way!
Western Canada cherishes a long-standing resentment toward Quebec’s self-serving monopoly in federal politics. When B.C. recently made some half-hearted noises about separation, it was Inter-Provincial Affairs Minister, Stephane Dion, who was hustled out west to scold audiences. As the Quebecois politician chastised them, British Columbians learned that talk of separation (outside of Quebec) was tantamount to treason. The irony eluded the Canadian press. When Lucienne Robillard announced 1998 immigration levels, we found yet another Quebecoise dictating for our benefit, a federal policy which would never afflict her, her home, her riding, her constituents or her province. The magic kingdom of Quebec is blissfully exempt from normal immigration constraints. Under a Mulroney (special Quebecois) deal, Quebec agreed to accept “22% of the country’s immigrants, but got the largest number of federal dollars for settlement policies. Quebec’s share of immigrants then fell sharply, but the cash kept flowing. .. [La Belle Province] will continue to accept only about 12 to 13 per cent of the country’s immigrants. Quebec has selection power over immigrants, so it could easily increase levels. A variety of marginally plausible and deeply cynical explanations commend themselves.” (Globe and Mail, October 29, 1997) Earlier in October, a scathing 17 page report prepared for the immigration department surfaced. Among other recommendations: Ottawa (rather than the provinces or municipalities) should cover the cost of welfare benefits until refugee claimants are self- sufficient. The report, prepared by Susan Davis, went on to note that, “the immigration department is involved in a refugee process exploited by — and even designed for — people who have failed to gain refugee status. Some claimants deliberately travel to Canada to file claims rather than being sponsored by family already here, she said.
Once here, there’s no cost to claiming status, and claimants are eligible for welfare and some medical coverage. If sponsored, however, relatives must pay for a $975 application fee and look after the claimant. Davis said some claimants facing deportation are appealing to international tribunals to delay their removal and buy time in Canada.” (Toronto Sun, October 7, 1997) Refugee groups threw the predictable tantrum, charging that Canada’s laughing stock of a refugee system violates basic human rights. Accordingly, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights heard testimony from a government sponsored refugee who had been detained for 16 months following an eventful Canadian debut, in which he “became addicted to heroin after an accident and was convicted on drug charges [all within] a year after his arrival here.” (Globe and Mail, October 23, 1997) This matter of “Increased pressure by immigrants on social services” has recently preoccupied U.S. legislatures as well, “A Federal judge has ruled that states may not discriminate against new residents by paying them lower welfare benefits than longtime residents. … At least 13 states have adopted such restrictions.” (New York Times, October 14, 1997) Minnesota noted migration to the state had declined with the institution of a 30-day welfare residency requirement. “Do migrants move from one country to another in search of welfare benefits? The most eminent economist of immigration in the U.S., Harvard’s George Borjas (himself an immigrant from Cuba), has gathered evidence strongly suggesting they do. Before 1965, welfare benefits were scanty in the U.S. In those days, immigrants were much less likely than the native born to take welfare.
But since the mid-1960s, welfare and other social benefits (especially disability pensions) have become much easier to get. And today immigrants to the U.S. are much more likely than the native born to receive social benefits. Worse, the ready availability of welfare to newcomers seems to have attracted a new kind of migrant to the U.S. Before 1970, immigrants were better educated, on average, than the native born; since 1980, they have been much less well-educated. And these newcomers have imposed a huge burden on the taxpayers of the migrant-receiving country: the National Academy of Science in the U.S. released this spring a tightly researched report showing that immigration costs the average Californian $2,000 a year in taxes. The National Academy’s study and Prof. Borjas’ work argue that countries must choose. They can either offer generous welfare benefits or open their borders to immigrants. But if they attempt to do both, in a world in which most people are poor and most countries are an easy plane ride away, they will bankrupt themselves,” wrote columnist David Frum. (Toronto Sun, September 27, 1997) Two additionaln Californian demographic studies have concluded that in the short term, “Immigration has a small positive effect on the economy. The second analysis … looked at the same economic factors but over a longer term. We warned that the costs of immigration to California were growing. … Immigration advocates attacked the study as elitist and nativist.” (New York Times, October 15, 1997)
People Smuggling Gets Worse
Last January, confronted by escalating smuggling incidents involving ‘human cargo’, an enforcement officer compiled a proposal called “Catch the wave” for the immigration department. Resorting yet again to Access to Information, a copy was obtained by the Toronto Sun. “The illegal immigration game is like a game of Snakes and Ladders,’ former officer Mark Gaillard wrote to Leslie Toope, the department’s deputy-director of training. ‘As fast as we shut down routes the rings move to another.’ … They (rings) are not altruistic helpers who lead oppressed people to freedom,’ the report states. ‘They … prey on economic migrants.’ Immigration spokesman Denis Bouchard said no action has been taken on Gaillard’s proposal. (Toronto Sun, November 9, 1997) The logical cure would be to deny entry to ANY ‘refugee’ intending to make a claim from within Canada’s borders. When Mme. Robillard reinstated visa requirements for Czech citizens, she stated unequivocally: “People who have fled their country do not need to come to Canada to apply for refugee status. They can apply for this at Canadian missions abroad.” (Press release, October 7, 1997) Alas, Canadian missions abroad do not offer the perks available when one is ‘in situ’.
What Use Are They?
You can always count on the Toronto Star for a puff piece of pro-immigration propaganda. Actually, the following story was to raise funds for the Star’s Santa Claus fund. “She came to Canada from Sri Lanka to escape a vicious savage war a decade ago. … Peace, … that’s what she wanted for her husband and two children. They found peace, she explains in halting English, but they also found poverty in a land that was full of wealth for many. … This 38-year-old woman now has four children. Her husband supports them working as an office clearner for $800 a month. … With rent taking more than $300 a month, …. there’s little left. Often they have to go to the Scott Mission and a food bank for help.” (Toronto Star, November 9, 1997) The discerning reader might wonder: Why, if they were poor, did the couple have two more children? After 10 years in Canada, why can’t the woman speak better English? Rent of $300 a month — likely the family is in subsidized housing — a further cost to Canadians, to say nothing of the medicare and the costs of educating the children, and the costs to Canadians of supporting them at the food bank….
CRIME WATCH
Illegal Slays Gangster’s Child
“A Vancouver resident accused of killing a 5 1/2 month old baby earlier this month by driving over him twice and crushing him against a chain link fence is a member of a criminal gang based in China who was ordered deported 18 months ago, police say. … Mr. Hau and the father of the baby are members of the Big Circle Boys … The gang has roots going back to the Red Guards of China’s Cultural Revolution. … Mr. Hau arrived in Vancouver on Nov. 29, 1990, without travel documents or a visa. Canadian officials decided in January of 1992 that he was not a refugee. However, a deportation order was not issued until April 4, 1996, after he was convicted of criminal offences including two incidents of fraud and having counterfeit credit cards in his possession.” (Globe and Mail, October 17, 1997) Having first tried to strangle the child in the back seat with a necktie, Mr. Hau got behind the wheel and drove over the fleeing mother and child. A witness picked up a shovel and smashed the windshield of the car, but the determined Mr. Hau simply reversed the luxury car and drove into them a second time. Apart from the mother and baby, four additional people were injured before Mr. Hau crashed, and the gold Lexus burst into flames. “Hau told how he had gone to the police on October 7 after discovering he was being set up for a drug bust involving 50 kilograms of heroin. ‘They wouldn’t accept my story even when I said somebody’s trying to kill me,’ he said. ‘I told the police I had been selling heroin for my boss for more than a year and still they didn’t believe my story. My boss is the one who has a hand in setting all this up and he went back to China.’ The baby’s father, Wong Yuk-Ming, is a high-ranking member in the Big Circle gang who police suspect is involved in the Asian heroin trade. He is a Hong Kong resident wanted in Canada. … Hau, 34, is charged with second-degree murder … Premeditation has to be proved for first-degree murder…. Despite ordering him to be deported in April last year, authorities said they were still awaiting travel documents from Beijing.” (South China Morning Post, November 5, 1997)
Health Watch
Coughing Up for Immigration: TB & Poorly Screened Immigrants
At its final meeting before Toronto metastasizes into an amalgamated Frankencity, Metro council “passed a proposal to open the downtown building [Metro Hall] every night this winter to the homeless.” (Globe and Mail, September 26, 1997) Something really IS wrong with Toronto. Elsewhere millionaire-socialists know better than to put themselves at risk. In this case, it will be fun to watch as the ‘new broom’ sweeps the proposal quietly under the nearest rug. Ten days after Metro’s announcement, Dr. Andrew Sonor, head of microbiology at Sunnybrook Hospital made an announcement of his own: “We have found rates of positive skin tests of tuberculosis at 30% to 40% for Toronto’s homeless people when the positive skin test for the general population is less than 3%.” … The average provincial and national rate of TB is 7 1/2 per 100,000. … The rate for the City of Toronto’s general population is 20 per 100,000.” (Toronto Sun, October 6, 1997). Those who read carefully will note that Toronto ‘enjoys’ a tuberculosis rate nearly three times the national average. “In the last 10 years, resistance to penicillin has gone from zero to the rate of 46% in the U.S.” (Toronto Sun, September 29, 1997) In Canada, resistance rates to antibiotics are 31%. “Health officials in Toronto say the number of cases of drug-resistant tuberculosis in the city has more than doubled since 1990.” (CBC National News, October 24, 1997) How is it that our government has failed to protect OR inform us that this nearly-forgotten disease is ‘back’? Is it just a clerical oversight, or shall we assume that the welfare of the existing population will continue to be criminally compromised to an inexhaustable supply of newcomers? “Tuberculosis, not HIV, is right at the top of the list of dangerous infectious diseases because 30 per cent of the world’s population has been infected with it. … The disease is endemic in Southeast Asia, which provided roughly 40 per cent of all immigrants last year. And in some parts of Somalia, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe, as many as 90 per cent of the people have tuberculosis.”
(Ottawa Citizen, July 25, 1997) As we reported last month: “One [immigration] officer said ‘nearly all Somali refugee claimants are accepted.” (Toronto Sun, September 25, 1997) Under the current arrangement, refugees have a 60-day grace period to show up for medical screening. While the Immigration Act states that Canada shall deny entry to any individual “who is, or is likely to be, a danger to public health or to public safety” OR “would cause, or might reasonably be expected to cause, excessive demands on health or social services,” it’s painfully clear that Ottawa lacks the will to enforce its own regulations. “The federal government finally apologized this month to the family of the New York man who was harassed and refused entry to Canada in 1991 because he had AIDS. The government also agreed to an out of court settlement to pay $7,000 in damages to the family of Rowe, who died of AIDS in January 1995. (Ottawa Citizen, June 24, 1996) Canada has recently been enriched with a diversity of infectious diseases including malaria and hepatitis A, B, C, D, E and F! (Wash your hands. Pray everyone else does). The World Health Organization declared tuberculosis a global health emergency in 1993. Ottawa naturally responded by promptly and firmly — plunging its head in the sand, preferring instead to emphasize migrant/refugee rights and the dubious benefits of a completely borderless world. “With nearly half of all people in Asia already infected by TB,” (Press Release WHO/63 – 10 August 1994) little wonder that tuberculosis continues to gain ground.
Short of a surgical mask, preventative measures against this pernicious disease are largely futile. “In 1994, four travelers who took an eight-hour flight from Chicago to Honolulu caught TB after sitting near a [Korean] passenger with infectious TB. The U.S. Centres for Disease Control suggested shortly after the latter incident that people with active TB shouldn’t be allowed on commercial flights.” (Ottawa Citizen, July 28, 1997) The fact that non-smoking flights have permitted airlines to save a fortune by cutting back in-cabin air circulation should warm the hearts of the politically correct. “When a person coughs [talks, sneezes,- expectorates] for instance, tuberculosis bacteria are expelled from the lungs in droplets of watery sputum. When the moisture evaporates, the bacteria float free. In sunlight, they can be killed by ultraviolet light, but indoors, in a poorly ventilated room, they can float for hours before settling to the floor. They’re exactly the right size to be breathed way down into the lung, where they cause their first infection.” (Ottawa Citizen, July 28, 1997) At present, Canada requires prospective immigrants to submit to a cursory medical exam, a blood test for syphilis and a chest X-ray for tuberculosis. Chest X-rays are a notoriously outmoded technology, catching perhaps 70 per cent of ACTIVE (and wildly contagious) cases. Skin and sputum tests are the preferred method in countries employing twentieth century standards. In June, federal ministers received a report documenting some of the worst excesses of a hopelessly ineffectual health and immigration policy: Of the roughly 225,000 immigrants who came here in 1996, were some 60,000 people with inactive, non-contagious tuberculosis.[sic] … People with inactive TB stand a good chance of developing an active case within their first five years here. The medical examination administered abroad to immigrants “is inadequate for public health purposes.” The disease can be expensive if it’s allowed to develop. A few months of antibiotics can put contagious TB into an inactive state, but the cost is about $2,500. If the tuberculosis bacteria are of an antibiotic-resistant strain, treatment can cost between $25,000 and $300,000 for a single case! [the root cause of multi-resistant TB occurs when patients in underdeveloped countries stop taking the drugs once they feel better or can’t afford to pay for the antibiotics.
This allows the TB to mutate and become drug resistant, according to the chief of research at WHO’s global TB program.] Two-thirds of the 9,600 sick immigrants who need medical followups don’t receive them because federal authorities fail to fill out addresses and specific disease information on their forms. Newly arrived immigrants, visitors and students may not have adequate health insurance to diagnose and treat TB, and can’t or won’t pay for the treatment out of pocket. (Ottawa Citizen, July 28, 1997) The report oozes with examples of active TB carriers diagnosed only several months after arrival, as well as those who eschew treatment altogether. One of the authors of the report, Dr. K. Helena Jaczek, has had personal experience with inadequate health testing abroad. The Southeast Asian nanny she had hired passed every immigration test with a clean bill of health. Nevetheless, it transpired that the woman had active tuberculosis. “Dr. Jaczek said people in the woman’s home country are very aware of TB and of the problems a diagnosed case might cause for someone trying to immigrate to Canada.” (Ottawa Citizen, July 28, 1997) Most of us will remember the man quarantined at Pearson Airport during the 1995 ebola outbreak. He simply hopped the fence and vanished. No doubt prompted by fiscal self-interest, Ottawa is belatedly addressing the public health threat. Health Canada is working on a new computer model to assess the risk posed by 47 infectious diseases, a process they expect will take a year. Nor have the feds reached a consensus on which diseases actually pose a threat. Dr. Ron St. John of the Laboratory Centre for Disease Control in Ottawa says he does not see HIV as a public-health issue. “HIV is totally preventable and there’s plenty of HIV already in Canada,’ he said. …’98 per cent of the population is quite knowledgeable.” (Ottawa Citizen, July 25, 1997) But knowledge and practice are two different things, as a recent study of youthful sexual conduct and the Nushawn Williams case tragically attest.
Since our government insists that immigration is an ‘economic benefit’, then we should absolutely be testing for a disease which costs “an estimated $100,000 to $180,000 to treat … the long-range costs of each human-immunodeficiency-virus case could exceed $650,000, [in lost productivity] according to … the Community Health Resource Project.” (Vancouver Province, October 27, 1997) And stop apologizing if we feel compelled to turn someone away. This reckless disregard for a helpless population is typical of the ruthless desperados in charge of this collapse. The official line is that with new global market links, more Canadians than ever are travelling to, and presumably getting infected in, exotic locales. The fact that some countries will do anything for a buck is not going to make a case of active TB an honourable or pleasant experience. Even senior bureaucrats know what an infectious disease looks like. Ottawa should put the computer model away, scribble out an infectious disease watch-list and test for ALL OF THEM! Or isn’t it a problem until their own nanny tests positive?
How Did We Get Lepers?
Leprosy, or more politically correct, Hansen’s Disease is a curse. It’s contagious. Wouldn’t a prudent government who put our interests first screen for this disease? You would think so. Still, “Dr. Alastair McLeod, head of dermatology at St. Paul’s Hospital in Vancouver, said … there are a dozen people with leprosy residing in B.C., after moving here from places like Asia and Africa.” (Globe and Mail, October 10, 1997)
You can reach the Canada first Immigration Reform Committee at:
Etobicoke, Ontario
M9W 5L3
CANADA