This article by John Ivison is noteworthy since he exposes serious asylum abuses in Canada – Budget officer finds illegal migrants entering via a ‘loophole within a loophole’.
It’s bad enough that the actual costs of illegal migration are a tremendous burden to the taxpayer. However on top of that we are now discovering that illegals are taking advantage of serious weaknesses within the system – thereby possibly threatening public safety:
This means a migrant can cross into Canada from the U.S. between official entry points, avoiding the Safe Third Country Agreement that would have otherwise made them ineligible…
Once a claim has been made, the migrant can access Canada’s generous welfare system as he or she navigates the asylum claims process that gives them multiple hearings and appeals. In the meantime, they can effectively sponsor other members of their family, who can then arrive as regular migrants — also avoiding the Safe Third Country Agreement.
Ivison goes on to explain how relatives being brought in by that illegal anchor person can extend way past immediate family members. You would think the government would take all steps necessary to resolve this problem. And yet they seem to be dragging their heels.
Of course, if the ultimate goal of this Trudeau government is to flood the country with “irregular” Liberal voters before October 21, 2019, then I suppose they would have very little incentive to deal effectively with the problem.
Andrew Scheer is putting forward a motion to stop Canada from signing onto the UN Global Compact for Migration! Good for him. (h/t Cara in comments)
As Cara and a few others mentioned in the comment section of the previous post, it is indeed very troubling that Unifor is in effect openly declaring war on Andrew Scheer and the CPC.
We all know that journalists have their biases. Some are very upfront about them and others attempt to keep them quiet – especially if they are reporters as opposed to opinion writers.
But when their union calls for this level of confrontation in an election year, you know where the dues are going —> anti-Conservative attack ads. How will that affect each member’s work?
And to add insult to injury you can expect to see some kind of corporate welfare initiative for Canadian media in the upcoming Federal fall economic update (in addition to the $50 million over five years announced in last winter’s budget.)
Candace Malcolm asks some pertinent questions (thx Cara):
How can journalists remain independent when they’re the beneficiaries of government handouts? Can they really be trusted to scrutinize the politicians who fund them? Will they remain unbiased if other politicians threaten to end their funding?
Journos like David Akin are doing their best to deflect their union’s stronghold, but what will the pressure be like on such outliers? Will they be able to resist The Resistance?
Maybe we’ll all end up watching more of this:
Some readers in the comment section of the previous post noted with alarm that StatsCan plans to mine data from citizen’s banking information. It is very scary indeed.
And Justin Trudeau seems to have no problem with it. I think this could be a huge election issue if the Liberals don’t step in here and stop this invasion of privacy.
I don’t trust StatsCan, and I don’t trust the Trudeau Liberals either. Do you?
And now this!! —-> StatCan scooped up 15 years of personal financial data from Canadian credit bureau – Global News
How many times have you found yourself in a discussion where someone asks you if you “believe” in climate change? It’s a loaded question isn’t it? And you know exactly where it’s going: If you don’t answer in the affirmative you will be met with a combination of shock, derision, and scorn.
Personally I usually say something like, “Of course. The climate has been changing since the beginning of time.” If they want to pursue it further, then I have to make a decision whether or not I want to get involved. They usually only want to consider “their” facts and it usually isn’t worth the effort to engage in the debate.
To me this is on the same level as the outrage that I encounter if I dare to suggest that President Trump isn’t a blithering idiot ready to set off WW3!
The left really wants to intimidate you and many people have submitted to the pressure.
What? You’re black or gay or a celebrity and NOT a democrat? That is vile! Or so we are told. Everyone must adhere to stereotypes.
This attempt by the extreme left to control thought, speech and behaviour under penalty of social ostracism is showcased in a brief clip here by Roseanne(!) I wish it wasn’t cut off at the end but you’ll get the idea. She makes a lot of sense.
It’s so much easier to give in. It takes a strong person like Kayne West or Roseanne to swim against the current.
I found the full interview! Available here.
This Federal Liberal government seems to have quite the knack for coming up with impressive euphemisms to downplay illegal and criminal activity.
The obvious example is their use of “irregular” vs. illegal border crossing of migrants coming into Canada from the U.S.
Now we have Ralph Goodale explaining that Tori Stafford’s killer is being moved to a healing lodge to help her rectify the “bad practices” of her past.
Huh? First of all where is the healing lodge for the parents?
And secondly where is this all heading? The Government seems hell-bent to give every possible comfort to the criminals and let the victims rot. Where is the justice?
To me this is just more politically-correct claptrap designed to intimidate people from voicing their opinions because we are so programmed to do just that. You must feel guilty for those thoughts and consider the plight of the poor perpetrator.
At what point do we finally screw up enough courage to yell “Enough!!”?
– End of rant.
Manny adds a new one and sums things up here quite nicely.
When I first heard about Ontario Premier Doug Ford‘s announcement that he would use the notwithstanding clause to override a decision on the constitutionality of shrinking Toronto council, I was somewhat concerned. This option was always supposed to be the last resort.
But after having read many reactions from various sources I now realize that this represents the larger issue of judicial activism in Canada which has been a huge problem for years. Add to that the fact that the decision itself required a whole lot of creativity in order to tie it in with the Charter – and so it would likely lose in an appeal – or at least be seriously challenged.
Brian Lilley highlights the tenuous legal logic here:
He [Justice Belobaba] also claims voters’ rights to freedom of expression were violated because the changes would make the new wards too large with too many people.
That is not only a stretch, it is is an attempt to apply a part of the Charter that does not apply to municipal voting.
And Kelly McParland explains the problem of urgency in the National Post:
Judges, of course, aren’t elected. Politicians are. Both are human and make mistakes — sometimes dumb ones. Politicians can be replaced by voters; judges can’t. The activist community is well aware of this fact, and has learned that using the courts to foil government initiatives is far more effective than arguing with politicians themselves. Delay is a powerful political tool; courts are an excellent means of bringing about delay.
The window of opportunity is very short. If Ford simply appeals the decision we all know what will happen – delay, delay, delay. And then another municipal election will come up again in four years with nothing done.
Could this be a worrying pattern if Ford continues using the NWC each time he hits a roadblock with the courts? Perhaps. But meanwhile let’s just sit back and enjoy watching the heads of leftwing elites explode while their little fiefdoms are being challenged.
Update – There are so many articles out there about this story but this one is particularly interesting since it explains why the NWC can’t be used regarding the pipeline impasse: Ford’s move against court would never work for Trans Mountain – Don Braid, Calgary Herald.
The recent exit of Maxime Bernier from the Conservative Party of Canada has caused quite the kerfuffle in Canadian politics. And no doubt Gerald Butts is salivating at the prospects.
But why did Bernier do this? What is his grand plan? The move will likely split conservative vote support and improve Trudeau’s chances of continuing his destruction of our country after the 2019 election.
As Andrew Coyne wrote, “The whole thing looks suspiciously like a personal vanity project.”
This discussion began towards the end of the previous post and readers are encouraged to continue here.
As Anne mentioned in comments on the previous blog post, what is going on with Saudi Arabia and Canada? And where is Justin Trudeau on this? In fact why was he MIA on so many files lately?
I know this guy needs a work-life balance of more “personal” days than work days, but come on! And when most of his so-called work days aren’t a whole lot more than photo-ops one has to wonder who is really in charge?
O.K. we know it isn’t the puppet but that doesn’t instill us with confidence.
So it seems as if the PMO brainiacs have attempted to move GropeGate off the political radar by introducing an Attack Ford Gov strategy. The initial shot was fired by Trudeau when after he first met with Premier Doug Ford, explained to media how he had to spend “a little time explaining how the asylum-seeking system works and how our system is supposed to operate.” Oh and apparently Justin got it wrong.
Trudeau’s condescending attitude towards Ford was bad enough, but things really soured during the recent meeting between federal Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen and some of his provincial counterparts. This time we had a man (Minister Hussen) apparently taking offense to Ontario Minister of Children, Community and Social Services Lisa MacLeod’s “false language“ and refusal to sign the official communique by labeling her actions as “not Canadian” among other nasty phrases.
This provoked quite a Twitter backlash with the optics favouring Ms. MacLeod as Hussen was accused of bullying and mansplaining which are both no-nos in today’s current social environment. And by the way a recent poll appears to back up MacLeod’s concerns as to how the feds are handling the border issues.
However GropeGate did seem to disappear for a few days until Brian Lilley came up with this beauty which ties it all together: Justin Trudeau’s Liberals continue their fake feminist ways.
And so when Liberal male political types (including Butts) aggressively go after female opposition members both federally and provincially, they have to be called out for their hypocrisy as so-call feminists. Sure let’s debate the issues in a respectful manner but bashing and disrespecting women for political gain just isn’t going to cut it these days. And female Liberal MPs who either stay silent or openly support their male colleagues’ aggressive behaviours are just as guilty.
This could get interesting. ‘The situation is going to get worse’: Liberals pushed to come up with answers on asylum issue – National Post:
“The motion calls on Hussen to testify, for the committee to meet at least twice more this summer and that the study be concluded before Aug. 3. Rempel also wants provincial ministers to either testify or provide written submissions to the committee.
MacLeod said she’d happily oblige.”
And another great Brian Lilley column here: Trudeau’s Liberals worry about words, not the illegal border crossers.
Okay. I’m going to break my own policy here and link to a Kinsella article because it’s just so interesting!
Most mainstream outlets didn’t even want to touch the Trudeau Grope story when the rumours first started trickling out. Then some in Canadian media started picking it up. But yesterday during his Bash the U.S. tour, Justin was asked about it and repeated the official statement: That he doesn’t remember having any “negative interactions” that day.
Except that it is very puzzling that Trudeau provided a quote for a column in the Creston Valley Advance at that time explaining that he didn’t realize the woman was “reporting for a national paper” or he would never have been so “forward”!!
And now we hear from Warren:
He “doesn’t think he had any negative interactions there.” Not exactly a categorical denial.
So, that matters, and so does this: the young woman who was assaulted doesn’t want to say anything else about the incident. She holds a senior position in a federally-regulated sector, and she is undoubtedly afraid about what could happen to her and her family. Until she says otherwise, then, she should remain what she is. Which is anonymous.
And I totally agree. But the problem for Justin now is that his Feminist persona is becoming tainted with hypocrisy, which affects his credibility.
And so that Golden Boy image is becoming increasingly tarnished. The PMO must be desperately hoping this story goes away but there are too many unanswered questions that won’t be satisfied by a “selective memory” response.