DSCToronto
Superstar
I thought your usual gifts were a bit late this year!
|
|
|
- Thread starter King of Kensington
- Start date
- Status
DSCToronto
Superstar
PP has now demanded action on the border: "The Conservative leader told a news conference that Canada should also cap the number of asylum seekers as it faces a significant influx in refugee claims." SEE: https://www.thestar.com/politics/fe...cle_090cd426-7f21-52ce-ac7d-b7c89b285837.html
Not quite sure how that would work as international law states that a country must offer asylum to those with well-founded fear of persecution. One could not simply say "Oh, sorry, our asylum quota is full for 2025, come back next year". It would be possible to process claims faster and, maybe, deport those who fail but limiting claims is, I suggest, impossible. I fear that he will be our next PM and that will NOT be fun!
Not quite sure how that would work as international law states that a country must offer asylum to those with well-founded fear of persecution. One could not simply say "Oh, sorry, our asylum quota is full for 2025, come back next year". It would be possible to process claims faster and, maybe, deport those who fail but limiting claims is, I suggest, impossible. I fear that he will be our next PM and that will NOT be fun!
Richard White
Senior Member
There is precedent across Europe of caps being placed upon migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.
Look at what happened with the migrant crisis..
Having said that, there does need to be a discussion on resettlement of refugees and asylum seekers. I get it, people want to flee persecution but it cannot be a ticket to enter a country at will.
At some point, nations need to simply say no. There are far too many people who look back at examples from WW2 where Jews were turned away as justification for accepting anyone and everyone fleeing persecution.
Quite simply, countries should have a right to turn away asylum seekers and refugees if deemed necessary. It is not Canada's concern if something happens 4000 KM away in the middle east.
We, nor other nations should be responsible for cleaning up other countries messes.
Northern Light
Superstar
While a cap as such is an odd duck way to address the issue............ there is a legitimate concern......... which is that the majority of U.S. asylum seekers in recent years have actually been economic migrants and to a lesser degree fleeing high rates of violent crime.
Both of the above are entirely understandable reasons why someone would wish to relocate, but they don't typically fall within the traditional view of asylum which is based on group identity persecution (religion/ethnicity etc.), or individual persecution by a state actor against an individual or family.
If you look at the Canadian numbers from 2022, the leading number of asylum claimants came from Mexico. Mexico is a nominal democracy, its not in a state of war, while I'm sure there is racism and such, the state itself does not promote active discrimination so far as I'm aware.
What people flee from Mexico is the violence of the cartels; corruption, rural poverty etc. and also domestic violence.
I can't blame anyone for wanting to escape those things........but the asylum system isn't really meant for that, by and large.
Canada also has finite capacity to absorb and assist said claimants. At one point during the height of Roxham Road in Quebec ..... the latter was using Olympic Stadium to process and even shelter applicants as they'd run out of all other available space.
That's certainly not fair to any legitimate applicant and not ideal for improper ones either.
I'm not going to defend Polievre's proposed solution........but he is right to suggest some action is required on the file.
Last edited:
DSCToronto
Superstar
I certainly agree that asylum claims must be 'managed' efficiently (and fairly) but a cap on applicants (or successful applicants) really cannot be imposed. Asylum is not meant for economic migrants, however sorry one may feel for those who try to come here on that basis.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
Canadians and our governments need to understand that the era of orderly immigration is over, such as my own story in the 1970s when my Dad working at JWT in London asked HR for a transfer to their Canadian office, applied at Canada House, waited for the immigration approvals, came over bought a house and then sent for us. Or the much hardier journey of my wife’s Ukrainian ancestors, who in the 1930s waited in Danzig (Gdańsk) for approval from the Canadian authorities before they could board the ship to start new lives as Canadians on the Praries. Those days are done - we’re now in the era of migration, where people aren’t coming to Canada to start a new life, but grabbing whatever floats as they drown in their own failed countries.
Immigration vs Migration - Difference and Comparison | Diffen
What's the difference between Immigration and Migration? While immigration means for an individual or a family to move to a new country from their country of origin with due formalities at the embassy, the word migration denotes the act of moving from one place to another - within a country or...
We have two huge oceans and a xenophobic southern neighbour between us and the sources of any migrants or potential asylum seekers. I think we can now rely on the US to slow traffic at their southern border, so if we do a better job on controlling who is getting onto flights to Canada from Europe/Asia/Africa we can stem the tide.
It’s a shame that it took the re-election of Trump for Ottawa to begin taking border security and integrity seriously. In January we can expect Trump to renew the Muslim travel ban, meaning people trying to sneak into the USA will likely come to Canada. Meanwhile, those targeted for deportation in the US will try to cross into Canada to claim asylum, knowing that our catch and release system takes three plus years to process. With this in mind, CBSA and the RCMP should be working with U.S. Customs and Border Protection and ICE to ensure the border is solid going both ways.
Maybe Canada can ask the US to help stem the flow of illegal firearms while we’re at it.
Last edited:
evandyk
Senior Member
It probably won't matter because Trump doesn't care about international agreements, but right now Canada has the right (under the Safe Third Country Agreement) to deport asylum seekers coming here from the US back to the US since we have an agreement to process them in the first country they arrive in. Back in the first Trump administration, Canada wasn't going to do that because we wanted to show everyone how morally superior we are to Trump's America.
I assume if we tried to do that, Trump would just refuse to let us send them back, so the international agreement is probably a moot point. I doubt it even has any enforcement mechanisms.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
From today’s NYT. Joly would be heading for the same glass cliff as Kim Campbell and Kamala Harris, who replaced the deeply unpopular Mulroney and Biden. Let the deeply unpopular Trudeau be followed by an empty shirt without any political aspirations. If that’s you Joly so be it, but the cliff awaits.
Last edited:
kEiThZ
Superstar
On the flip side....
www.readtheline.ca
Matt Gurney: Joly's Halifax humiliation was at least on-brand for her government
Her terrible performance on stage was, if nothing else, consistent with how the Trudeau government approaches every issue: a comms plan instead of an action plan
www.readtheline.ca
jje1000
Senior Member
More late-Wynne Ontario Liberal-style flailing in the face of total annihilation.
The fascinating thing about voting to get governments out of power instead of voting for a party in a Westministerian system means that at a certain point, the amount of accumulated disdain means that everyone knows that the government is doomed regardless of what they do, but everyone's just waiting out the clock until the election.
Also the total silliness on using Ukraine as the fig-leaf on this lol
The fascinating thing about voting to get governments out of power instead of voting for a party in a Westministerian system means that at a certain point, the amount of accumulated disdain means that everyone knows that the government is doomed regardless of what they do, but everyone's just waiting out the clock until the election.
Also the total silliness on using Ukraine as the fig-leaf on this lol
Last edited:
Towered
Superstar
2 projected seats in Ontario? Wow.
Richard White
Senior Member
I can see them getting closer to between 15 and 20 seats.
If there is a bloc resurgence there's a good chance the BQ will win more than 50 seats.
Atlantic Canada is likely an overestimate. The Liberal brand is tarnished on the east coast. They have more than overstayed their welcome.
According to friends in Halifax, the Liberals are not well liked there at the moment.
All things considered I don't expect anything good to come of this.
What I'm most intrigued by is the prospect of a BQ opposition. It would shift the power dynamic a bit and bring Quebecois issues to the forefront.
kEiThZ
Superstar
This really pissed me off. It just pushes up antipathy towards the Ukrainian cause. This is some shitty nihilism and they know it.
Northern Light
Superstar
I don't know where he got that projection from..........I've reviewed all the recent polling data I can find, and none seem to indicate that. I'm not sure if I'm missing one, or mis-reading one..........but I don't see a 2-seat total in Ontario.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Yes, that's kind of out there. Even in a total Liberal rout nationally, there's about seven seats in Toronto alone where there's zero chance the Liberals lose.
Ottawa and London have at least one each as well. And that's the absolute worst nightmare total crush case scenario conceivable.
There's no way they are only getting two in Ontario. The analysis is bonkers.
- Status