willmore

[
Agreed. Asylum and refugee policy is complex and I would be reluctant to criticise it. It's an area where you have to accept a higher proportion of false positives because people's lives are at stake.

Yes, but the point is.....how many are truly as risk and how many just make the claim because they don't want to go back to their own country for whatever reason. Canada has the most liberal refugee policies in the world and are critized and laughed at by others because our reputation is.....that we just have a revolving door for these people....no checks are made....in many cases.....people are claiming this.....and I agree that if I was from a war torn country I certainly wouldn't want to go back.......but how many of these claims are really legit and how many are people that just don't want to return.....and remember that the people that come as refugee get full benefits and welfare immediately...unlike many other classes of immigrants who might not be able to afford these themselves. And the interesting part is.....how many of these people are actually able to make a life for themselves in Canada and how many stay at the bottom - is that better - to be starving in Canada or in your own country where at least you might have family.

And please, before anyone starts pm me about my comments - DON'T!!!! Do not mis-consrue my message - it's in no way meant to be racist towards immigrants - I'm a product of immigrants myself who came over for a better life and had to start at the bottom - one side of the family didn't even know english until they settled here.



There is something to stop anyone bringing family over: that family has to be an immediate relative. No grandchildren allowed. So that means you must be a first-generation immigrant to sponsor someone. Less than a quarter of potential sponsors in Canada are today coming from "white" countries (http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/fac...gration_5.html).

Yes, that's correct. In BC for example we are having most of our immigrants from Asia/India - at the last swearing in ceremony in Victoria - there wasn't a 'white face" to be had. The people interviewed were coming over as "family"



You're right, it is stacked against them. And your average Asian applicant is not applying or being accepted. It's the most needed of their societies that are leaving.



.[/QUOTE]

iaink

Far from it. CIC exists for one purpose and one only, to make canadas economy stronger. Anyone who thinks different is in my opinion kidding themselves. That is the purpose of any immigration department. I just happen to think that Canadas system is much fairer than most others in the developed world (although I have no direct experience of other ones)

Someone mentioned skilled workers going down to the states, well that situation applies only to Nafta candidates. For a brit to get into the states is extremely difficult, although i agree that once there they dont run into the same ludicrous "local experience" trap that catches some in Canada, but at least everyone has a reasonable chance to get into Canada in the first place, and for family sponsorship candidates there is not the whole business of not leaving the country / dual intent etc etc etc.

Iain

iaink

There are many checks made against the legitamacy of all refugee applications, and if you left everything and ran from a war zone, i think it only reasonable that there be some welfare assistance from day one. The danger is that not enough help is given to get refugees integrated into society and working, but my suspicion is that a lot of these unfortunate people are still scarred and shellshocked by there experience and are in no mental condition to hold down a 9-5 job for a while. Unless you hae lived on welfare i think it hard to appreciate how much people dont want to be on it. Its not exactly the "high life"!

In many parts of the world Canadas compationate outlook is far from laughed at, in fact it may be one of the few obvious destinctions between Canada and the US, and could be a cheap and effective way of maintaining national security here by making an obvious destinction from the warmongers to the south! (said somewhat tongue in cheek, but not entirely!)

Iain

willmore

I was trying to make a distinction between the REAL refugee person and the person who for whatever reason just decides that they want to live in Canada and can't get in any other way. These people are not thoroughly checked - there was a entire program about the CIC and how many many of the people are processed without even a second glance. We don't know who we are letting in. I don't begrudge them getting welfare and benefits from Canada (but remember this from taxpayers money) - but a much more thorough check needs to be made. I agree that for the "real refugee" no where near enough is being done to help these poor folks.


The CIC has said themselves that Canada is known as the "revolving door" of the world, and although it's great that the UN has declared Canada a most passionate country for refugees.....remember they also "gave us hell" not that long ago....when we finally caught a criminal who came to Canada as a refugee and finally had him deported......only to be told by the UN that we "hadn't given him enough chances. This man had a very long criminal record in his old country and was linked to terrorists.

Iain

iaink

There are always going to be examples of where the system has failed, and the media will delight in revealing them, Im sure it was presented in a fair and balanced way Prior to 9/11 next to no money was available to do background checks etc because there was no political will to spend it. We are in a different world now. It is a question of balance, would you rather risk letting a few bad apples in (and then catch them later) along with the real refugees, or would you turn away some real refugees just to be sure no one unworthy lands? In my view if a few bad cases get by, its a small price to pay. I'd rather it was biased that way than the other.

Are you signing your replies with my name now???

Iain

willmore

Gee, - you don't let me get away with anything do you?????? sorry about that......my little girl was on my lap and I was in a hurry!!!!

I promise to try to do better!!!!!

liftman

The real problem for Canada will be when thay adopt a similar immigration policy to the UK.

Turn up at the airport/port/railway station.

Be sent by the police to an immigrant processing station. Yes, SENT. No accompanying officer, no trip in a van. Sent by bus/train. 70% of the people admitted like this just disappear into the country never to be seen again.

Any terrorist/smuggler/undesirable can enter the UK like this, and periodically the country has an amnesty.

Turn up at certain centres and collect your national insurance number and start collecting benifits!

I agree that the Canadian system is a long drawn out proceedure, but I would think the prize for the fastest revolving door should go to the UK!

Toontje

Some poor excuse for trying to create a controversy.

The refugee problem is the same everywhere. No matter where they come from or where they go to, it's up to the government to find out whether these people are claiming asylum for political or for economical reasons. This last category should be send back to where they came from whereas the first category is more than welcome.
Those economical refugees ought to try immigrating by the same procedures that we all have.

Glaswegian

I second that ... but I can't see it happening.

willmore

How is the procedure in Canada any different in Canada than in the UK......there have been many stories where people claiming refugee status...just turn up. Once admitted to Canada they start collecting benefits/money immediately. Our entire immigration process is so flawed....that it has been proven that terrorists/smuggler/undesirable can easily get into Canada....we had an incident in Victoria where a man was let in as a refugee only to be caught trying to cross the border to the States with material to make bombs - his intent was to blow up the a building in Seattle. He had definite connections to undesirables.....

For a very long time after 9/11 the States accused Canada of allowing the terrorists into Canada for easy access to the States because of our lax system.....even though its been proven not to be the case......

Canada is known as a revolving door.....want to immigrant to Canada but don't think you qualify....hey, just claim "refugee status" and your in like flynn..

Please don't mis-construe my comments.....I completely support our govt with our compassionate policy for refugees....if they are really and truly running from a bad situation.

willmore

Me....create a controversy.....no way....I just thought we were trying to have an intelligent discussion....and I think you're taking my comments as racist....which they are not in any way. I as a taxpayer would like to see a complete overhaul of the immigration system (and even CIC) has admitted that they are understaffed and overworked and many things go by the wayside. Legit refugees are more than welcome in Canada.

iaink

Certainly is...they let me in!

I think you are making way too big a deal about the phony asylum seekers coming in. Its such a tiny number in the great scheme of things, and since 9/11 background checks are a lot stricter. It easy for the media to blow things out of proportion, like after 9/11 when the US was pointing the finger at Canada, only to find out later that it was there own system that was letting them down. Maybe the system is flawed, but I really dont think its a case of show up at the airport and claim asylum and start to pick up your benefits the next day anymore, even if it ever was. They do a pretty good job under difficult circumstances.

willmore

Well, before we get into a "fist-fight" let's just drop it......the info that I was quoting is "right from the horses mouth" so to speak......high level ranking civil servants working for the CIC - who are saying that the systems is terribly flawed....but who am I.......I'm not from a war-torn country trying to get refugee status......

Glaswegian

Most of us aren't, fortunately.

I don't think anybody takes real issue with real refugees .... it's the criminals, terrorists, etc who slip through the net.

Given the concentration of people in modern cities, it doesn't take huge effort to kill a lot of people.

Go to Brooks sometime - a large proportion of the population are Somali, they moved to the town because they could get work in the meat packing plants.

Then look into the history of the "lost boys" of Somalia - I don't think anybody would grudge them a decent future in Canada.

But .... I flew back to the UK through NY two days before Sept 11th 2001 .... I sat and watched the WTC destroyed over breakfast.

How do you balance the needs of refugees with the protection of your own citizens?

squarepants

yES....But because its not written on their heads, people just lump them all together to be criminals as you put it, how do you know who is who? I'll like to know how people know the number of real/bad refugees that come in, when you don't work for immigration?

For someone to have flown halway round the world to come here, surely there must have been some serious isues with their country, we are not talking about people landing in France, and the trying to get into the UK here.

September 11 seems to come up a lot now, and its not going to go away anytime sooner, but let's not forget that those terrorists were mainly Saudis, but hey the super powers ended up in another country, for obvious reasons

I have never had any beef with the whole refugee/immigrant debacle, because its not going to stop me and my family from achieving what we want, as long as we are working towards what we want for ourselves.