ann m

I don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but dual citizenship for the Dutch was a no-go for years anyway. So even if he had eventually acquired Canadian citizenship, then after 2003, even if you had Dutch citizenship and dual citizenship with another country, if you spent more than 10 years outside the Netherlands, you would lose your Dutch citizenship anyway.

Sounds like an unsatisfactory situation all round. Returning him to a country he knows nothing about, and doesn't speak the language, and potentially putting the onus of care onto distant relatives does not bode well for a long or in any way successful life.

Has he managed to stay out of trouble for the past 10 years? Give him back to his mum. But it sounds like he might need long term mental health care in the near future if mum is in her 80's. Who provides and pays for that? The "system" won't as it can't cope already.

What a mess.

FishAndChips00

BristolUK, depending on newspaper articles for hard, objective facts is a dangerous business. Journalists love to write stuff that advances an agenda, sells newspapers, or both. Who cares about the "truth" ?

He was a permanent resident.

Here is his one of his many appeals against his removal order. Quote:

Former Lancastrian

Excellent bit of research for a newcomer. Too many people on here reliant on the stories themselves as opposed to actual verifiable facts which can cause heated discussions between members.
Don't even think about a thread on the current refugee situation in Manitoba, Quebec or BC (not the Syrian refugees). If the full truth was known some might reconsider their position.

FishAndChips00

Former Lancastrian, how does the newspaper coverage of the 'canadian refugee crisis' differ from the objective facts ?

I have no facts to verify against, but perhaps you do.

BristolUK

Yes, I'm aware of that. (No sarcasm or rudeness intended)

I don't think CBC - dependent upon government money - falls into an anti Canadian government agenda though.

More relevantly, note that I based my impression not only on what the writer said but also the comment from the guy's lawyer.

Thanks for the link confirming he was indeed originally a PR.

Seems like careless writing rather than anything else.

macadian

Remember the Journo maxim "never allow the truth to get in the way of a (good) story"

Yorkiechef

FL, I wouldn't change my view. Just for the record.

Former Lancastrian

Oh boy Im sticking my neck out on this one.

The vast majority crossing the border in between ports of entry entering Canada are not refugees. They are people seeking protection and on arrival making a refugee claim as defined by section 97(1) of IRPA as opposed to a convention refugee as described in section 96 of IRPA.

We can then split these people down into other groups

Citizens of countries who entered the USA and lawfully admitted to the USA by having a valid visa. So if lawfully admitted to the USA and in fear how come they didn't make an asylum/refugee claim in the USA?

Citizens of countries who entered the USA unlawfully or lawfully then overstayed and then made a claim in the USA which was denied and ordered to leave the USA or their claim is still pending.

Citizens of countries who entered the USA lawfully/unlawfully over stayed and did not make a claim and then made their way to Canada to make a claim.

Citizens of countries who were granted convention refugee status in another country e.g. Sweden, Switzerland etc. Didn't like living in that country so made their way to Canada and making a claim and not disclosing that they have already been granted protection which would make them ineligible to make a claim in Canada as per section 101(1)(d) of IRPA or came from a designated country as per 101(1)(e) or inadmissible under 101(1)(f).

Those found to be ineligible are then told that they can make an application for a Pre Removal Risk Assessment if eligible. A lot of those ineligible to make a refugee claim are eligible to make a PRAA application.

What also the press are not reporting is that if a person is ineligible to make a claim and ineligible for PRAA then if they come from certain countries listed on the Administrative Deferral Of Removal (ADR) or Temporary Suspension Of Removal (TSR) then Canada will not remove them unless they are inadmissible under serious criminality section 36(1) or a security risk under section 34, 35 or 37 of IRPA.

Where removal orders have been issued to individuals they also have appeal rights before the IRB and where applicable the Federal Court Of Canada.

We have had individuals where it has taken over 20 years to remove and the odd one or two who will never be removed.

Manitoba and Ontario provincial leaders are now seeking help as they need more money, accommodation, language training, mental health assistance etc etc for some of these individuals. Some of these claimants are pregnant on arrival.

Nobody is suggesting that the genuine claimants in fear should not be helped however there are a number of individuals making claims who have found not to be credible and had their claims denied but get to stay and apply for work permits due to the ADR or TSR being in place.

A certain number are no shows for their refugee hearings and simply go underground hoping they won't be caught and even if caught can they be removed as per the ADR & TSR.

Canada as a country cannot help all of the 63 million displaced persons in the world of which 21 million are refugees in the camps and 10 million stateless persons.
Canada does not have infinite money. Granted some of the claimants become very productive members of society but a certain proportion do not and commit crimes within Canada and then deported where applicable.

A lot of the media reports focus on the plight of the individuals and I agree a lot of them have been through horrendous situations but the media doesn't cover the negative aspects of what is going on.

There is no simple solution. When does Canada either put a No Room At The Inn Sign up or realize they don't have the financial means to help everyone who sets foot on Canadian soil.

FishAndChips00

Invitations have consequences. Merkel already knows this, perhaps it's now dawning on Trudeau?

If a country's ruling class feels generous towards the displaced of this earth, they have to be able to withstand the populist backlash.