The Trudeau government is committed to radically increase the number to immigrants coming to Canada this year.
According to Blacklock’s Reporter, Immigration Minister Marco Mendicino told the House of Commons immigration committee the government plans to increase the number of immigrants admitted to Canada from 184,370 in 2020 to 401,000 in 2021, an increase of 117%.
“In 2021 we plan to welcome 401,000 new permanent residents,” Mendicino said Monday.
“At the very core of our immigration plan is our belief that those who possess the skills and experience will accelerate our economic recovery.”
Immigration was reduced last year as people chose to stay in their home countries rather than travel abroad. To compensate, the government raised the annual immigration quota from 341,000 to 401,000.
Mendicino also defended his $3.25 billion budget by claiming that the increased rates of immigration will increase economic growth and hasten Canada’s recovery from last year’s recession.
“This funding will be put to good use as we advance our ambitious level objectives to accelerate our economic recovery.”
A recent study commissioned by the Department of Immigration found that most Canadians actually disagree with the Trudeau government’s immigration targets.
Out of the 1,500 people surveyed, 57% said Canada should limit the number of immigrants coming to Canada, with only a small minority thinking there were too few immigrants.
In June, a study commissioned by True North found that 76% of Canadians want a total pause on immigration until a vaccine is developed for COVID-19 and the unemployment rate drops down to pre-COVID levels.
Conservative MPs are sounding the alarm after the Senate passed an amendment that may allow for people struggling with mental illnesses to seek assisted suicide.
At a press conference on Monday, Conservative MPs Rob Moore and Garnett Genuis voiced their opposition to an amendment made to Bill C-7 (An Act to amend the Criminal Code (medical assistance in dying) which they say exploits the mentally ill.
The MPs were joined by concerned Canadians and experts who strongly oppose the amendments, including survivors of mental illness.
“Under the Liberal government’s amendment, medically assisted death will automatically be expanded to cover those with mental illness in 24 months,” Moore said.
“At a time where Canadians often struggle to access mental health services, it sends a dire message — that the lives of those struggling with mental illness are not valued by this government.”
In late Feburary, the Senate passed amendments to Bill C-7 which would eventually allow mental illnesses to become a valid reason to seek assisted suicide, also known as medical assistance in dying (MAiD). The Trudeau government later endorsed the amendment.
Prior to the amendments, Bill C-7 clearly stated that mental illness was not a valid reason to seek assisted suicide. While it is not yet clear if the Liberals will ultimately vote in favour of the amended bill, they will permit the amended bill to move forward.
Dr. Stephanie Kafie, a family physician with a specialization in elder care, explained that suicidal thoughts can be a long-term battle which usually ends with recovery. By allowing suicidal people seek assisted suicide, the bill will prevent vulnerable people from getting help.
“Giving up on patients by offering [assisted suicide] when they’re at their lowest and most challenging period of their lives is not good medicine,” she said.
“Mental illness can be treated, MAiD is not the standard of care for depression.”
Dr. Kafie noted that many Canadians do not have access to timely psychiatrics or palliative care, and that offering assisted sucide is not acceptable as an alternative.
The Conservatives have proposed their own amendment to exclude mental illness from Bill C-7. Genuis has also created a campaign calling on MPs to vote against the amendment and better support the mentally ill.
Health Minister Patty Hajdu says Canada is discussing the idea of a COVID-19 vaccine passport with other G7 countries.
Speaking on CTV’s Question Period on Sunday, Hajdu said Canada is engaging in “very live” conversations on requiring proof of vaccination in order to travel internationally.
“We’re certainly working on the idea of vaccine passports with our G7 partners,” Hajdu said.
“I was on a call with my G7 health minister counterparts just a couple of weeks ago and that is a very live issue.”
Hajdu said that other unspecified nations and industry groups are eager to see a vaccine passport launched internationally. While she did not say if Canada is leading these conversations, she did add that the Trudeau government is hesitant to implement a vaccine passport as so few Canadians have been immunized so far.
“We’ll be coming back to Canadians as we understand more about the intentions of our counterparts internationally, and as we understand more about how that will unfold around the world,” she explained.
Most recently, the European Union announced it will create a digital vaccine passport that would also permit vaccinated individuals to travel freely through the Schengen Area.
Canada’s rate of vaccination lags significantly behind other Western countries.
When asked if vaccine passports may be required to travel within Canada, Hajdu said that conversation has not been held with provincial leaders.
“We know that different provinces and territories have taken different stances around domestic travel, and of course, while COVID-19 is raging in parts of the country, often we will hear the requests by different parts of the country to just stay put, to resist the urge to travel even domestically,” she said.
“What I can say is that the health ministers are always reviewing their own stances on interprovincial travel.”
The Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) is currently in the process of accepting more hotel accommodations as federal quarantine facilities, a statement emailed to True North reveals.
“PHAC is currently accepting more hotels as government-authorized accommodations to ensure additional rooms are available for travellers. Currently, there are 47 hotels available, some of which now can be booked online,” said a PHAC spokesperson.
“More rooms will also become available as passengers get their test results and vacate the facilities following their mandatory stay.”
Under the current rules in place, travellers are required to have a government-authorized hotel booking before entering Canada, per the Quarantine Act. Those who fail to find proper accommodations can be ticketed up to $3,000 for each day they were found to be non-compliant.
“Travellers who pre-booked the required government-authorized accommodation must go to the hotel as per their booking,” a PHAC spokesperson told True North.
“A traveller who could not secure a room at a government-authorized hotel will be assessed by a Quarantine Officer and may be directed to a designated quarantine facility or another suitable place to quarantine, if they have private transportation to get there. A traveller may also be fined for not booking a room in advance.”
Federally-mandated quarantine sites have faced increasing scrutiny as many travellers have complained about the poor conditions of the hotels. There have been numerous reports about a lack of food, transparency and security. In February, two women were allegedly sexually assaulted while under a government self-isolation order.
Liberal Health Minister Patty Hajdu was grilled in the House of Commons in February after reports revealed that one woman was allegedly sexually assaulted after staying at a federal quarantine facility where the locks were removed from her door allowing the assailant to force himself in.
“On entry into Canada, her passport was seized and she was forced into a taxi without knowing where she would be taken. She was forced into a federal run facility under a federal duty of care by the Liberal government and she was sexually assaulted. This is misogyny and a gross violation of her rights. The deputy prime minister and the health minister have implied that the victim shouldn’t have travelled. Were they suggesting that she deserved what happened to her under their duty of care?” asked Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner.
“Every woman deserves to live a life free of violence and a life of dignity but I will repeat that these border measures are in place to protect Canadians and they will remain in place until such time that science and evidence indicates that it is safe to release them,” said Hajdu in response.
Conservatives have since called on the Liberal government to suspend the program until an investigation into the incident is conducted and measures are put into place to ensure that it never happens again.
“We know people are just walking right out of the airport. We know that there are problems with getting people to these facilities. We know that there’s problems with getting food at these facilities. We know that people are having problems getting into these facilities,” said Rempel Garner on March 2.
“The federal government has a duty of care to people in these facilities. They have not been able to show that they are able to execute that and we also know that we have tools like pre and post arrival testing and at home quarantine that can be used to protect Canadians from the spread of the variant.”
During a House of Commons committee meeting on Monday, Liberal Minister of Canadian Heritage Steven Guilbeault claimed that his government had no plans to censor Canadians online despite seeking to introduce sweeping social media regulations.
Guilbeault made the comments in response to a question by Liberal MP Tim Louis while appearing before the Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage. The committee is currently studying the Liberal government’s proposed Bill C-10 which seeks to revamp Canada’s Broadcasting Act.
Minister of Canadian Heritage @s_guilbeault just told a Commons committee that the federal government is "not interested" in censoring user user-generated content on social media.
“[It’s] clearly not what we’re doing. There’s no censorship in Canadian broadcasting right now. There’s different types of stations, different types of TV, radio stations that will have different angles on the political spectrum. This is totally normal in a democracy,” said Guilbeault.
“What we’re trying to do is apply that regulatory framework to online broadcasters. In case of Youtube for example, we’re not particularly interested in when my great uncle posts pictures of his cats, that’s not what we’re interested in as a legislator. When Youtube or Facebook will act as a broadcaster, then the legislation will apply to them and the CRTC will define how that will happen. Really, we are not interested in user-generated content.”
While Bill C-10 does not contain any provisions on online hate speech, critics have accused the Liberal government of attempting to clamp down on freedom of speech with proposed regulations.
In his mandate letter to Guilbeault, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau indicated that online hate speech regulation was a top priority for the minister.
“Create new regulations for social media platforms, starting with a requirement that all platforms remove illegal content, including hate speech, within 24 hours or face significant penalties. This should include other online harms such as radicalization, incitement to violence, exploitation of children, or creation or distribution of terrorist propaganda,” Trudeau wrote.
Guilbeault has indicated that his government will be introducing such legislation in the next few weeks.
Part of the proposed plan will include the creation of a new federal regulator who will be tasked with moderating social media and forcing the platforms to comply with removing content that doesn’t comply with government standards.
According to the National Post, the new law will include a statutory definition of hate which will be based on prior court decisions including the Human Rights Commission v Whatcott case which included truthful statements under the umbrella of hate speech.
Guilbeault himself has also indicated support for using a regulatory system to protect public servants from negative online criticism and opinions and to clamp down on statements that “undermine Canada’s social cohesion.”
When it comes to COVID-19 statistics and what’s happening around the world, Canadians are told to have the narrowest perspective as possible.
Rather than taking into consideration other variables about COVID-19 or how other countries are managing the pandemic, Canadians are told to only focus on case counts and dismiss what’s happening in other countries.
Prosecutors in Alberta have dropped multiple fines issued to people who allegedly violated public health orders and mask mandates, according to an organization helping people challenge these citations in court.
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) said in a statement Monday that Alberta’s Crown has withdrawn fines issued to at least four Albertans.
Three of the tickets were in relation to attending anti-lockdown protests in Calgary late last year.
In one instance, a man was followed by Calgary police for blocks after leaving a protest. He was eventually surrounded by officers and fined for allegedly not social distancing.
“It was really outlandish to me that they would wait until I was no longer breaking the law to actually fine me,” said Trevor Simpson, whose $1200 ticket was rescinded.
In another instance, a man was fined $1,200 because he was photographed not wearing a mask in a grocery store. The man, a primary care paramedic, also received a three day suspension from work and has since moved out of the community.
Thousands of Canadians have received hefty fines for allegedly violating public health orders, even when no risk has been demonstrated. Canadians have been fined for doing activities such as drinking coffee outdoors while not wearing a mask or playing basketball alone in an empty park.
“Public health officials are not the supreme law of the land – the Constitution is,” said JCCF Litigation Director Jay Cameron. “A significant portion of the arbitrary and confusing public health orders which have so oppressed Canadian society are, on their face, unconstitutional and cannot be justified.”
Cameron believes that many tickets issued across Canada will eventually be withdrawn as they cannot be justified under the human rights laws.
“Many of the tickets issued for the supposed violation of such orders will never be prosecuted. We expect the mass withdrawal of Covid tickets to continue as prosecutors across the country correctly decide to stay charges.”
Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner is sponsoring a parliamentary petition demanding the Trudeau government to create an immediate plan to end lockdowns in Canada.
Petition e-3225 or A Plan for Hope accuses the federal government of choosing to continue lockdowns rather than using effective technologies and policies to reduce the spread of COVID-19.
“A year into the pandemic, tools to prevent spread and reduce serious illness, like rapid tests, data on how COVID-19 spreads, therapeutics, and vaccines, are available, and being utilized globally, but are not being effectively deployed in Canada,” the petition reads.
“Canadians need hope and a clear, permanent path out of lockdowns to preserve their mental health, and a plan to save their livelihoods while using tools to prevent COVID-19 deaths.”
On Sunday, Rempel Garner tweeted that “Canada needs a clear, data-driven plan to get Canadians safely beyond ongoing widespread COVID-19 restrictions. Tell Justin Trudeau that Canada needs a plan for hope.”
The petition demands that the federal government create a timely plan to transition Canada out of lockdown and make it public. The petition has just over 6,000 signatures.
With vaccinations and new treatments well on their way, many U.S. states and countries like Israel have begun reopening their economies.
A recent international study found that lockdowns failed to have a noticeable impact in reducing the spread of COVID-19. Countries like South Korea and Sweden, which had less strict measures, saw similar rates of infection and spread to Western countries that kept citizens home.
“Mass economic lockdowns should never have been viewed as a long term measure to prevent spread of COVID-19 but rather they should be temporary and designed to allow governments time to develop more sustainable solutions,” the petition reads.
“Prolonged lockdowns across Canada have led to large increases in domestic violence, opioid deaths, mental health crises,business closures, unemployment and they create inequality.”
Rempel Garner is one of the growing list of Canadian politicians calling for a complete end to lockdowns. Last week Conservative MP David Sweet called for an end to lockdowns, saying government efforts caused “incalculable suffering to all Canadians.”
A new survey shows that an overwhelming majority of Canadians are in favour of the House of Commons’ decision to declare China’s treatment of the Uyghur peoples amounts to genocide.
According to the Nanos Research poll, which was commissioned by The Globe and Mail, a whopping 83% of people support or somewhat support the initiative.
The survey also reveals that most Canadians looked unkindly on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s and his cabinet’s decision to abstain from the vote. In total, 59% of respondents said that they disapproved of the abstention.
On February 22, the House of Commons voted to declare China’s treatment of the Uyghurs as a genocide.
The motion, which was introduced by Conservative MPs Michael Chong and Garnett Genuis, received unanimous support from all parties except for the Liberal cabinet.
“It’s pretty clear that Canadians see this as genocide and the polls suggest that they are ready for action and a hardline when it comes to responding to the government of China,” Nik Nanos told the Globe and Mail.
“It looks like Canadians are hitting a boiling point on this where they just want to see action and there is less of an attitude to ameliorate China.”
With regards to how Canadians believe Ottawa should handle China, 62% of people polled indicated that they would support joining the United States in levelling economic sanctions against Chinese officials.
Following a similar genocide declaration across the border, the US has since introduced Magnitsky-style sanctions on a number of high-ranking Chinese officials suspected to be involved in the human rights abuses in the Xinjiang region.
An inflammatory article condemning a recent conference used innuendo and half-truths to stifle public policy debate about the Great Reset.
PressProgress, a division of the Broadbent Institute and eponymous ‘source for progressive news and analysis’, published a nasty rant online targeted at a webinar “Pushing Back the Great Rest” organized by the Canada Strong and Free Network (CSFN), formerly the Manning Centre, and seven other organizations. Full disclosure, I am on its board and privileged to know the distinguished speakers.
The sponsors were characterized as “teaming up to promote a conspiracy theory popular on the far-right online fringes of the Internet.” The article also referenced the Anti-Defamation League’s comment about a conspiracy circulating in dark corners of the Internet, “with neo-Nazis using Great Reset rhetoric to express ‘anti-Semitic sentiments’ and baselessly ‘accuse Jews of orchestrating the plot.’” What vile bigots are spewing on social media has nothing to do with the CSFN or any of its board members. Nevertheless, by referencing that hateful rhetoric the article may have intimidated conference participants, a tactic antithetical to a tolerant society. (Broadbent subsequently removed the online article, but posted tweets about it.)
During a time of resurgent domestic and global anti-Semitism I feel obliged to defend friends and colleagues from false associations with that bigotry for three important reasons. Sly insinuations undermine the battle against the world’s oldest hatred. Decent people should be supported when subject to scurrilous and mendacious innuendo. The political and ideological motivation needs to be exposed and countered.
Tragically, more than three-quarters of a century after the holocaust, a new anti-Semitism with ancient roots has resurfaced from a cesspool of hatred. In 2019, there were 2,206 reported anti-Jewish incidents in Canada, up 8%, with violent incidents up 27%. The Jewish community remained the most targeted religious minority. Globally, an increase in the extent and virulence of anti-Semitism has put many communities at risk. For example, France reported a 74% rise in offences against Jews and Germany recorded a 60% surge in violent attacks.
The effort to counter this metastasizing prejudice is weakened by misleading narratives implicating honourable people who themselves abhor it. That almost no one ever pays a price for baseless intimations or outright accusations of racial and religious intolerance stultifies public discourse, emboldens would-be censors and disempowers their victims.
I am reluctant to exhume another noxious smear I excoriated in the Financial Post. However, it is relevant. Because some conservatives were critical of George Soros, VICE Magazine published a bizarre screed in February 2019 alleging anti-Semitic roots for Conservative attacks on foreign funding of opposition to Canada’s natural resources. However, you do not have to be an anti-Semite to harbour strong reservations about Soros who donated substantial funds to block the development of the Canadian oil sands and pipeline construction. Unfortunately for the author, the inconvenient fact of my religious heritage undermined his credibility when he put me first in line of the guilty. Needless to say, the Conservative Party’s uncompromising rejection of anti-Semitism, principled support of Israel and opposition to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement (supported by some left-wing militants) merited no mention.
Paradoxically, progressives who label the Reset a conspiracy also claim it is a worthy and indeed inevitable transformation of the political economy. True to form, PressProgress cites a BBC fact-check that claims groups believe “a cabal of global leaders is using the pandemic to introduce a range of damaging socialist and environmental policies.” In fact, highly prominent individuals, not a secret political clique, are explicit in their writings and public statements about opportunistically exploiting the pandemic to advance big government and green policies. They include Klaus Schwab, Executive Chairman of the World Economic Forumwho co-wrote a book on the subject, Prince Charles, Mark Carney, former governor of the Bank of Canada and Bank of England, President Biden and Prime Minister Trudeau.
It does not matter whether you call it the Great Reset or its kissing cousins Build Back Better, democratic socialism, the Green New Deal or Modern Monetary Theory. Federal Liberals are hell-bent to enlarge the public sector, implement stakeholder capitalism, oppose fossil fuel development and impose potentially brutal taxes hikes. Momentum is also strong among powerful international organizations, including the U.N., to push political economies to the left.
Insinuations of prejudice should not be allowed to stifle criticism of a Great Reset that poses significant risk to the free enterprise system and economic growth. That means that accusers should be called out for their falsehoods and intolerance of opinions that deviate from progressive dogma. Otherwise, we leave the field open to a dystopian future.
Joe Oliver is the former minister of natural resources and finance (2011-2015)
