magnumpi

MarkG

Doesn't really seem like a policy that will go down too well in a country with as many immigrants as Canada. I saw an article about an anti-refugee protest in Quebec by Asian immigrants a while back, for exactly the reason you mentioned.

Just another headache for Trudeau, I guess. He may have to put his thinking head on.

Former Lancastrian

Now that is assuming he can think.

Its the politicians on all sides that are beginning topics to piss me off. Its not a crisis, they are not illegal, they are well screened, if their claim is not valid they will be sent back etc etc etc.
So how come today we had to do a redetermination on one who was actually a wanted felon in the United States and had a fairly lengthy criminal record? Or how about the one who made a claim in 2009 under a different name and abandoned that claim and went to the USA only to return last weekend and make another claim. How come we cannot send some back because we have an Administrative Deferral Of Removal to certain countries so we cant send them back. How about the ones that have status in Italy, the Netherlands and US? I could go on and on.
Look dont get me wrong genuine refugees I can deal with and support resettling them but I have personally come across over 200 that were not genuine or inadmissible for criminality or had legal status in other countries so yes I am starting to become somewhat refugee jaded and less sympathetic or somewhat cynical about this situation.
BTW I am only talking about the border hoppers from the USA and NOT the Syrians we admitted.

magnumpi

dbd33

But it's not our problem, is it? We arrived five minutes before these people, whether or not the Canadians choose to let us, or them, in, is up to them. We might be in sympathy with the new arrivals, having done the same thing ourselves, but, if the Canadians choose to throw them back, there's nothing for us to complain about. It's just not our business.

carcajou

It is an outrage, an abuse of the system, and makes things geometrically more difficult for legitimate refugees who need quick processing.

Canada should not be taking any "refugees" from the US.

Quebec, itself, has its own immigration criteria and should have right of refusal. I hope the Quebecois Government challenges Ottawa over this.

magnumpi

Shard

Not really. As a young country the "they" only arrived a few minutes before you, and so really it's up to everyone to decide who else comes in to build the country. Having said that, there's something unsavoury about recent arrivals being keenest to draw up the drawbridge.



​​​​​​

MarkG

No-one's saying they shouldn't be able to apply for PR and wait years, as we did.

But refugees are supposed to be fleeing persecution in the country they're coming from. Which means that pretty much anyone coming from America to claim refuge in Canada is a scammer.

And it's only going to get worse as Trump clamps down on the scammers in America, and they decide to try their luck here. If the government don't stop it now, it will go from a headache to a crisis.

And most of the opposition right now seems to becoming from the French, who aren't exactly known for quietly ignoring these kind of issues.

carcajou

​​​​​​
I don't know about you - but most of the posters on this site did not arrive in Canada illegally and by claiming asylum from the UK or US. Therefore they did not "do the same thing themselves" or anything close to it, and it is a false equivalency.

What is unsavoury is gumming up the system with bogus asylum claims based on false pretense, and then making legitimate refugees wait for years to be processed. This also undermines public support for Canada's asylum program. That undermining then gets compounded when activists and extremists try to claim that racism is the only possible explanation why people are opposed to illegal immigration and bogus asylum claims, and dushonestly try to turn the issue into a referendum on racism, instead of trying to deal with and resolve the very real problems in the current system.

carcajou

Separatism has not gone away - it is just laying in the weeds - and the province is political tinder right now. This is a dangerous issue that has the ability to light it up and create the "winning conditions" Lucien Bouchard was so fond of talking about. In the current global context - there are unpredictable results. Maybe third time is a charm.

All it's going to take is one or two politicians from the PQ to peddle a conspiracy theory that this is an Ottawa plot to pump in enough Haitians and Central Americans to eventually outnumber the Quebecois, undermine its culture and sovereignty, and the "yes" vote. That will immediately take hold among 25-30% of the population - enough to keep that talk going in the casse-croutes in the rural regions - and some districts of Montreal. From there, who knows where it will grow. But the English will not be able to shake it out. Pierre Trudeau was a son of Quebec and had cache and influence in the province, and could (more or less) keep a lid on this sort of thing. Justin is a son of Ottawa and Davos, and does not have anywhere near the same influence or respect his father did.

Justin Trudeau is playing with fire, and doesn't realise it, and may not be capable of realising it. What has changed since the 1990s is the number of English-speakers in Quebec, which has declined. A much-trumpted census in 2016 that showed a small increase for the first time in decades was revealed last year to be an error that has now been corrected and replaced by Statistics Canada with a further decline. Virtually all of those leaving, are "no" votes. None of which will matter in the heat of an emotional referendum campaign.

Torontoids, Vancouverites and those in the Golden Horseshoe are not going to be able to vote in a Quebec referendum.

Siouxie

Lack of compassion raises it's ugly head in BE too.
Sad times.

How do any of you know that ALL refugee claimants coming up from the US are scammers? There are people who have 'run' from countries in S. America - from Mexico - or further afield.. we all know that Trump will likely send them straight back - so what other option do they have?

If it was YOUR family in danger and knowing you'll get sent back to the place that your lives are at risk if you try to hide out in the US.. what would you do?

carcajou

I have now re-read these posts three times and nowhere do I see anyone saying that all refugees from the US are scammers as you claim. What I did see were posters making clear distinctions between legitimate refugees and "scammers." Calling out abuses in the system and how it negatively impacts legitimate refugees is a valid point, as is fretting that the abuses undermine public confidence in refugee resettlement, or that divisive figures would use the abuses for their own nefarious purposes. Those sentiments are in no way whatsoever "xenophobia" and I question the motivations of anyone claiming it is. It's a bullying tactic to try and deflect from the issue.

I would substantially challenge the idea that "Mexico" is a uniformly dangerous place with no possibility of internal re-settlement, and the idea that "South America" is as well (Chile? Argentina? Really?).

Now that the name-calling has started - probably time to give up on this thread.

Former Lancastrian

Before this thread becomes off track I will give you some 1st hand personal experiences having dealt with and still dealing with refugee claimants who have entered Canada by crossing in between ports of entry.

1. Once they have crossed into Canada between ports of entry they can make a claim for protection.
2. Is that claim eligible to be made will then be decided as not all can make the claim or have the claim eligible to be referred to the Refugee Protection Division. See section 99(3) and 101(1) of IRPA Act.
3. If found to be eligible then the claim is processed and referred and their refugee hearing is booked and they have 15 days to send in the Basis Of Claim form to the RPD.
4. If not found eligible to make a claim then there is a whole different process dependent on why the claim cannot be referred.
5. Dependent on the outcome of the claim they will either be granted protection and then allowed to make an application for Permanent Residence. Once they have PR status then they can apply to sponsor and have certain family join them in Canada.
6. If their claim is denied they can appeal the decision made by the RPD to the Refugee Appeal Division and if that fails they can appeal that decision to the Federal Court Of Canada. It will then be decided if they can be removed and if entitled to a Pre Removal Risk Assessment.
7. Those who are ineligible to make a claim or found ineligible to make a claim go through a different process be it an Admissibility Hearing/Pre Removal Risk Assessment or seeking Judicial Review to the Federal Court Of Canada.
8. Those who can be removed will be removed unless there is an Administrative Deferral Of Removal or a Temporary Suspension Of Removal to their home country.

So that is basically how the system works.

Having dealt with over 1000 claimants over the last 3 years here are some claimants I have dealt with

Not eligible to make a claim as they already have a removal order against them from Canada.
Ineligible to make a claim as they had previously abandoned or withdrawn a claim previously made in Canada or it was previously rejected by the RPD.
They have previously been given status in another country and can be returned to that country. At an Admissibility Hearing they have been found described under sections 34, 35, 36(1) and 37 of IRPA and been issued a Deportation Order.
Stated they were under 18 but in fact over 18. Claimed they were a citizen of X country when found to be a citizen of Y country.

Also don't forget that those who have their claims heard by the RPD have been denied protection as the member does not find their claim to be credible.

Is there a lot of misinformation, myths etc circulating then yes there is but there is also a lot going on that the general public are unaware of or not being told by the Government or they are downplaying some of the things mentioned.

So take from this what you will and draw your own conclusions.

BristolUK

First use of the word 'scammers' is "Trump clamps down on the scammers in America"
Trump has clamped down on them all, has he not? They've all faced the same issues prior to identifying whether they are genuine or not. That rather makes it look as if the comment did mean all.

Furthermore what about " pretty much anyone coming from America to claim refuge in Canada is a scammer"...is that not a suggestion that it is all? Are you going to quibble whether "pretty much anyone" doesn't quite mean all?

It's grudgingly recognising that maybe there are one or two that are genuine.