Refugee/Migrant Crisis


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Federal gov’t sparks outrage for giving newcomers free access to Canada’s parks
Author of the article:Denette Wilford
Published May 08, 2024 • 1 minute read

Canada is blessed to have a multitude of national parks, historic sites and marine conservation areas for people to visit.

And while many have to pay to access any of the dozens of beautiful spots across the country, there is a group that has been granted free admission.

A new policy issued over the weekend from Parks Canada states that “newcomers to Canada and new Canadian citizens” can get in free.

“Get back to nature and unwind amidst the spectacular scenery in Canada’s national parks and marine conservation areas,” the Parks Canada website reads.

“Celebrate your arrival in Canada or your citizenship with great Canadian experiences,” it continued.

“Check out some of the most awesome places in Canada. We look forward to welcoming you!”

However, people on social media were angry that all Canadians don’t get free admission.

“Why do we even pay taxes?” one person asked. “What is the benefit to living in Canada?”

A second user added: “So wrong. Why don’t retired people get free passes? They paid for the parks most of their working lives.”

A third commenter wrote, “So we pay taxes to benefit immigrants, not the citizens who live and work here and pay the taxes. What a backwards country.”

Another added: “Welcome to Canada, home to everyone but Canadians.”

Parks Canada did not immediately respond to the Toronto Sun, though according to its website, revenue collected from park passes goes to help fund the management of Canada’s national parks.

Earlier this year, active members and veterans of the Canadian Armed Forces and their immediate families were also granted free access to Canada’s parks.

The parks are also free to youth 17 and under as well as support persons travelling with a visitor who has a disability.

The Parks Canada Agency Act, which came into force in 1998, established Parks Canada as a separate Government of Canada Agency reporting to Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault.

Daily admission and service fees and single-location passes vary depending on location.


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Feds target hard-working for deportation while crooks get a break

Author of the article:Brad Hunter
Published May 10, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 2 minute read

Most Canadians know the feds love (love! love! love!) low-hanging fruit.

Why bother going after foreign criminals (there are about 37,000 running around) for deportation when you can target a hard-working woman whose immigration paperwork was screwed up 30 years ago?

After all, the AAA-Team (Activists, Advocates, Academics) is unlikely to go public about that sort of thing. They prefer blood-thirsty freedom fighters, despots and foreign-born criminals.

Canada Revenue Agency? Same deal. Going after billionaire tax cheats is a drag, man. Instead, let’s screw Bob’s Plumbing into next week.

Three stories over the past week or so underscore how screwed-up our courts and immigration system is. And sometimes, in a beautiful moment of synchronicity, the pair match up like rum and Coke.

On Monday, the National Post’s Jamie Sarkonak reported that big-hearted Calgary judge Anne Brown had her heartstrings tugged by the charming Rajbir Singh, 25. As Sarkonak noted, the empathy-robed judge is not alone.

Singh is currently in Canada on a visitor’s permit after arriving in 2018 as an “international student.” But at a Calgary watering hole, he “groped an 18-year-old woman’s genitals under her skirt as she stood at the bar to buy a drink.” And then he did it again.

The perv was reportedly found guilty of sexual assault at trial — but was not convicted.

Instead, the judge fretted that a conviction would automatically result in Singh getting the heave-ho without an appeal.

So, Singh was given a discharge so he, uh, wouldn’t be tagged with a permanent criminal record. So, uh, he could appeal his deportation. Three years’ probation! Thanks, judge!

Brown agonized that (HAR! HAR! HAR!) a conviction was not in the public interest: “In consideration of the devastating collateral immigration consequences to recording a conviction.”

Canadian courts have doubled down on playing saviour to foreign-born miscreants. Often, these thugs get lesser sentences than Canadians for the same offence because, uh, they might get sh**-canned.

At the same time, Arielle Townsend of Ajax had her citizenship cancelled. Why? Well, the feds screwed up 30 years ago.

Townsend — who came here from Jamaica — was told by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), that her Canadian citizenship was at risk of being revoked, CBC reported.

IRCC said in a letter to her lawyers: “Townsend’s status in Canada is now a foreign national.”

She came here as a baby. Her mother was a Canadian citizen when she was born. To their credit, IRCC acknowledges their error but it will still cost her $600 to sort it out.

Yes, by all means, zero in on Arielle Townsend. It’s not like there aren’t, what, 300 violent foreign criminals here? And there aren’t 37,000 foreigners who may pose a flight risk who currently have outstanding arrest warrants?

Chillingly, 33,000 of those warrants are for removal.

Screw that! Let’s go after Arielle Townsend!

No doubt, the keener “international students” charged in the shocking assassination of Sikh activist Hardeep Singh Nijjar in a Surrey, B.C., parking lot last June might cheer Justice Brown.

Kamalpreet Singh, Karanpreet Singh and Karan Brar face first-degree murder and conspiracy charges in the Nijjar case. Their charges have not been tested in court. The trio arrived on temporary visas in 2021, with at least two classified as “international students” who didn’t attend school.

So yes, let’s target Arielle Townsend.



Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
NYC mayor Eric Adams suggests migrants be lifeguards because they're 'excellent swimmers'
Author of the article:Eddie Chau
Published May 16, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 2 minute read

New York City Mayor Eric Adams may need a life preserver after stating that his city’s open lifeguard positions could be filled by migrants because they are “excellent swimmers.”

Adams made the comments during a city hall briefing this past Tuesday to a reporter from news outlet The City, which drew criticism and raised a lot of eyebrows.

“How do we have a large body of people in our city that are excellent swimmers at the same time we need lifeguards,” said Adams, per the Daily Mail.

“And the only obstacle is that we won’t give them the right to work to become a lifeguard. That just doesn’t make sense.”

Many were quick to bury Adams’ comments, claiming they were racist and divisive.

Murad Awadeh, CEO of New York Immigration Coalition, said, “New Yorkers are looking for Mayor Adams to unite our city, not foment more division. His comments imply that because some immigrants had to swim or wade across water on their dangerous journeys to seek safety in the U.S., that they would make good lifeguards. This comment is racist.”

“He regularly asks asylum seekers if they know how to swim, so that one day he could randomly suggest they become lifeguards at a presser?” an X user posted.

“What a revoltingly racist thing to say,” another posted.

“Why does NYC always have terrible mayors?” another criticized.

In a New York Times report, Adams clarified his comments, stating he had visited migrant centres in New York City and asked people there if they knew how to swim. Adams said he was “blown away” by the number of people who raised their hands.

“We have these capable people who know how to swim — from West Africa, from Ecuador, from South and Central America, from Mexico — and we have a shortage of lifeguards,” said Adams. “If we start planning out now, we could be prepared next year.”

The Times reported the mayor has previously called for migrants to find work and support themselves.

“This hasn’t been new — I’ve been saying this over and over again: Let people work,” said Adams.


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Immigrant restaurateur says he was ruined by human-trafficking allegations

Author of the article:Brad Hunter
Published May 19, 2024 • Last updated 10 hours ago • 4 minute read

Everol Powell was living the Canadian dream after opening a popular Caribbean-themed restaurant, the Boat House, in the Kawartha Lakes area. The dream turned into a nightmare when he was charged with human trafficking, despite eventually receiving an absolute discharge.
It is no secret that this country has a propensity to spring killers, sex offenders and other miscreants with woke-eyed abandon.

A blind eye is frequently turned depending on political expediency (see protests). Bail is spooned out like seafood chowder.

But sometimes the wrong guy gets accused and finds himself against the state’s staggering — and frequently stupid — might.

Everol Powell is one of those people.

The 54-year-old Jamaican immigrant opened a popular Caribbean-themed restaurant, the Boathouse, in the Kawartha Lakes area, where it was a favourite of cottagers and locals alike. Powell was living his Canadian dream.

Sometimes he hired international workers from Jamaica to staff the joint.

That might have been his first mistake.

“I was pulled over by the cops in 2014, completely out of the blue,” he told the Toronto Sun. “It was for human trafficking.”

The charge still stings. Powell said several of the Boathouse workers had run off.

“Officers told me they had received a 911 call from someone, who was anonymous. They said, ‘Everol is paying girls to have sex,'” he recalled, adding that he owned two restaurants at the time. “It wasn’t remotely true. But I had nothing but my good name and good word.”

Everol Powell’s businesses in the Kawartha Lakes area began taking a nosedive after he was sullied with human-trafficking charges. They would never financially recover and both would eventually be shuttered.
Everol Powell’s businesses in the Kawartha Lakes area began taking a nosedive after he was sullied with human-trafficking charges. They would never financially recover and both would eventually be shuttered.
Whispers move like the wind in smaller burgs. Powell said he never had problems with the local police, knowing many by name and often serving them free coffee and conversation in the morning.

But the OPP was a different matter. The provincial cops carried out three search warrants and he was locked up. And when he was out on bail? Cops followed him constantly.

And then he was hit with 17 human-trafficking charges.

That makes the news in small towns.

Powell alleges that the OPP wanted to nail him so badly, his restaurant was wired.

His businesses began taking a nosedive after he was sullied with the charges. They would never financially recover and both would eventually be shuttered.

On Feb. 14, 2014. The charges were muted. The pain, anger and outrage continues.

“They assassinated my character, my integrity, they ruined my livelihood. My first lawyer tried to get me to wave my rights, to plead guilty to a misdemeanour charge … I told him, ‘I can’t do that.’ And he told me it wouldn’t affect my chances of suing the police,” Powell said.

Everol Powell says he lost everything after being charged with human trafficking and has not worked since 2018 despite an absolute discharge.
He said he went through five lawyers, each wanting him to plead to the lower charge. Powell described the whole affair as a “malicious prosecution.”

The father of three has not worked since 2018. Legal fees cost him everything he had, his assets and his savings.

Powell had wanted to sue local police, the OPP, Canada Border Services Agency and the RCMP.

That didn’t happen because he claims his civil litigators did not file the suit within the two-year time limit allowed. Powell alleges he was misled.

“Everol was sold down the river by his lawyers,” said his current lawyer, Osbourne Barnwell. “It’s not a matter of Monday morning quarterbacking or hindsight being 20/20.”

Barnwell alleged that Powell has shelled out to lawyers more than $70,000 and “from a man who had nothing left.”

The lawyer said that following the two-year statute of limitations had passed – when any case against the cops was moot – Rogerson Law Group still took the case.

“Cops saw him as a culprit and didn’t give him the benefit of the doubt. It is simply wrong,” Barnwell said.

In their statement of defence, Andrew Rogerson and the Rogerson Law Group said that Powell told them “that he understood” that unless there was a formal retainer “no steps would be taken to protect his interest.”

The Rogerson firm also said that Powell was cautioned there was a “material risk” that the courts may not let him proceed with his lawsuit against the cops and that timing was an issue.

They have denied any wrongdoing.

Eventually, he paid a $10,000 retainer. But his current lawyer claims Powell should have been told the statute of limitations had passed and there was an absence of merit in his case.

Powell claims the Rogerson firm held themselves out as civil litigators with knowledge of that area of law.

The lawsuit claims that the firm “failed to meet the basic standards of a civil litigator” and caused Powell grave financial, familial and social hardship.

The statement of defence suggested the restaurateur was gung-ho about charging ahead with the suit. Powell said he would have been “blindingly foolish” to charge ahead if he had known the difficulties.

Powell had been charged with seven counts of human trafficking along with seven counts of material benefit from a criminal offence. He would receive an absolute discharge.

His criminal lawyer claims in his statement of defence that he got the charges downgraded. He added that he reminded Powell of limitation periods.

Rogerson said that by March 2020, Powell could no longer afford to retain the firm’s defendants and had fallen into arrears.

The firm added: “At all times discharged their duties in his best interest.”

X: @HunterTOSun


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Calgary serial-killer flew under the radar for two decades. How did he go undetected?
Srery illegally crossed the border into Canada in 1974, according to police

Author of the article:Michael Rodriguez
Published May 18, 2024 • Last updated 1 day ago • 5 minute read
Gary Allen Srery, who RCMP say is linked through DNA evidence to the killings of two teen girls and two young women in the Calgary area in the late 1970s.
Gary Allen Srery, who RCMP say is linked through DNA evidence to the killings of two teen girls and two young women in the Calgary area in the late 1970s.
Now-dead serial-killer Gary Srery came to Canada in 1974, fleeing northward after posting bail on rape charges in California.

In 1999, he was charged with a sex crime in New Westminster, B.C., and sent back to the U.S. after serving a five-year sentence.

Now, after using new genetic evidence to connect the American to four five-decade-old cold case murders in Calgary, police are attempting to put together the pieces of what Srery did during the rest of his 25 years in Canada.

Srery, who died in an Idaho prison in 2011 while serving a life sentence for rape, has been named the killer in the 1976 and 1977 slayings of Eva Dvorak, 14, Patricia McQueen, 14, Melissa Ann Rehorek, 20, and Barbara MacLean, 19, in Calgary.

crime serial killer
Eva Dvorak, Patricia McQueen, Melissa Rehorek and Barbara MacLean have been linked as victims of serial killer Gary Allen Srery.
Alberta RCMP and Calgary police officers who worked on the file believe his crimes were sexually motivated and say it’s likely there are more as of yet unknown victims from the time he spent in Canada entirely off the radar of law enforcement.

“He has a consistent pattern of regularly committing sexual-based offences (in the U.S.), getting charged, getting convicted,” Staff Sgt. Travis McKenzie, head of the Alberta RCMP’s historical homicide team, said at a Friday news conference in Edmonton. “And then when he comes to Canada, it’s almost like he disappears. So our biggest concern is there are other victims out there we don’t know about.”

Srery illegally crossed the border into Canada in 1974, according to police. Without any official record of his entry to the country and with Srery living a transient lifestyle supported largely by odd jobs, he would’ve been nearly impossible to pick out among a crowd for police or civilians, says a Calgary criminologist.

“The very fact that he was in the country was unknown to people,” said Mount Royal University justice professor Doug King. “People wouldn’t know who he was.”

With DNA technology being non-existent at the time of the killings, police had to rely on evidence like blood typing and fingerprinting as their top-tier biological evidence. Even as the technology began to emerge in the late ’90s and early 2000s, it was “rudimentary” compared to today’s databases, King said; police were only able to connect that Rehorek and MacLean were even killed by the same person as recently as 2003, but Srery’s name still never arose as a suspect in the investigation.

Only recently has investigative tech advanced to the point that police were able to pinpoint Srery as the killer of all four girls thanks to investigative genetic genealogy — a technology that relies on DNA profiling and comprehensive databases like those used in family-tracking genealogy tests.

“As technology is developed, it makes police work more precise,” said King. “This situation was really tragedy built on tragedy; the reason they were able to zero in on this guy in particular is that he was a sex offender in the United States and he had a DNA sample drawn from him in Idaho.”

Police say Srery was in Calgary between 1975 and 1979, and while Calgary police don’t currently believe he’s tied to any other cold case murders here, King says chances are violence followed as the man moved around Western Canada over the coming decades.

“He killed four people in Calgary, and then he left Calgary,” said King. “It would be highly unlikely that he stopped his violent crime spree when he left Calgary. I suspect there are going to be more cases solved … Now we know the name, so now we can start kind of solving some cases that have been on the books for 40, 50 years.”

RCMP announcement
On Friday in Edmonton, Supt. David Hall, Officer in Charge of the Alberta RCMP’s Serious Crimes Branch, announces RCMP have ‘definitively’ established Gary Allen Srery was responsible for the murders of Eva Dvorak, Patricia McQueen, Melissa Rehorek and Barbara MacLean, whose bodies were found dumped around Calgary between 1976 and 1977.
Each of the four Calgary victims was said by police to have been hitchhiking prior to their deaths — which, at the time, was a widely accepted and even government-endorsed way for young folks to get around. King said he was a teenager in the early ’70s and would often hitchhike “without any worry, without any concern, without any warning.”

“A different time and a different place. But it certainly was easier to victimize people for all sorts of crimes because of the time and the place,” said King. “It’s not that (Srery’s victims) were reckless. It was just part of living in their time.”

In the early 1970s, Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s government encouraged young people to traverse the country, opening a network of free hostels countrywide; the prime minister once advised young Canadians: “Hit the road. Drive or hitchhike and see what Canada’s all about.”

The feds had billed hitchhiking as a cheap means by which to conduct a journey across Canada, even releasing a handbook entitled On The Road that provided tips for young folks on a cross-country trek.

“There was a lot of student unemployment at the time and a lot of student unrest. Rather than finding jobs for kids, (Trudeau) thought we’d create this ‘Find Canada,’ ‘Trudeaumania’ sort of response,” said Linda Mahood, a University of Guelph history professor who penned a book about Canada’s hitchhiking past. “The Trans-Canada Highway was brand new, and for a while … it became kind of a fad to hitchhike across Canada.”

It wasn’t until later in the ’70s that people became more wary of the potential dangers of hailing a ride with a stranger as more missing persons cases and killings — many being young women — started to hit the newspapers.

Serial killer locator map
When Mahood was working on her book and put out an appeal for Canadians’ hitchhiking stories, she heard from a friend of Rehorek’s. The friend was waiting for Rehorek back in Ontario after they spent the summer travelling together before Rehorek’s death in September 1976. The two had enrolled at a Toronto college together and had planned to be roommates.

“She never came to the dorm. They found her body a few days later. She was she was just hitchhiking around Calgary, getting ready to go back to school,” said Mahood.

Mahood said there are several cases dating back to the hitchhiking days of the ’70s that remain unsolved, and she wouldn’t be surprised if some were tied back to Srery now that police have his name.

“I interviewed women who jumped out of moving cars,” she said, noting almost everyone she spoke with had a story about a “Mr. Wandering Hands.”

“There are cases I mention in my book where they’ve never found the person that did it … A lot of bodies were never found.”

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
Regina, Saskatchewan
I don’t know where this should fit, but it’s gotta fit somewhere, & here might be as good as place as any:

Canada plans to restore the right of citizens born abroad to pass their citizenship to children also born outside the country, following a court ruling that a “first-generation limit” in the law was unconstitutional.

Seriously, If other countries start doing this, I might be joint Canadian English Irish Scottish etc…citizenship. Just because my ancestors had to leave the British Isles via Australia to South Africa and then to Canada….Doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t also have citizenship to all those other countries, does it?
The federal government announced legislation to amend the Citizenship Act, removing a “second-generation cut-off” introduced by the previous Conservative government, after an Ontario court ruled in December that the limit was unconstitutional.

“We wanted to take this opportunity to continue to minimize differential outcomes as much as possible for children born abroad … compared to children born to Canadians [in Canada],” said Marc Miller, the immigration minister, to reporters on Thursday. “Not everyone is entitled to [citizenship], but for those who are, it needs to be fair.”

The previous Conservative government of Stephen Harper limited citizenship by descent to a single generation in 2009 following criticism of the $85m spent evacuating 15,000 Canadian citizens from Lebanon during the brief 2006 war with Israel, with Conservatives labelling such dual nationals “Canadians of convenience”.

Since then, Canadian citizens born abroad have been unable to pass their citizenship to any children born outside the country, creating what some have called a generation of “lost Canadians” and what critics argued amounted to a two-tiered system of citizenship…& what we call citizens of whatever country they’re actually born in I would assume???

The new bill would allow a Canadian born abroad to pass on citizenship if they have a substantial connection to Canada, demonstrated by showing they have spent at Least three years in the country.

The “substantial connection” clause is aimed at addressing anti-immigration critics who claim that many immigrants leave Canada after obtaining passports and will only return to claim benefits ???


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Canada 7th in foreign aid spending, but a fifth goes to refugees inside country
Canada spent just over US$8 billion in aid last year

Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Dylan Robertson
Published May 23, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 4 minute read

OTTAWA — While Canada is one of the top contributors to foreign aid among some of the world’s richest countries, one-fifth of the spending never leaves Canada’s borders.

Some 19 per cent of Canada’s aid reported to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development last year benefited refugees and Ukrainians within Canada.

“Most Canadians would not think that counts, because when we think of foreign aid we think of something happening in other countries, not costs that we have here,” said Elise Legault, Canada director with the One Campaign, an anti-poverty advocacy group.

Canada ranks seventh for dollars spent on foreign aid, according to the OECD, a group of mostly rich countries.

Last month, the organization released its analysis of aid spending in 2023.

It shows Canada spent just over US$8 billion in aid last year, of which $1.5 billion went to supporting refugees, asylum claimants and Ukrainians who fled the Russian invasion, during their first year in Canada.

The tabulation includes provincial and federal spending in this area, and it folds in Ukrainians who came to Canada on an emergency visa to wait out the war, but who are not technically refugees.

The spending accounts for 19 per cent of Canada’s foreign aid, compared to an average of 13.8 per cent among other OECD countries.

The United States spends 9.7 per cent of its aid budget within its own borders, while the United Kingdom spends 28 per cent domestically.

Unlike some other countries, Legault says the refugee spending is not eating into Canada’s baseline foreign-aid budget.

“So far, they haven’t been robbing Peter to pay Paul,” she said.

“Other countries like the U.K. and Sweden have been raiding their foreign-aid budgets to cover the cost of refugees arriving in the country, and thankfully Canada has avoided that path.”

Many have called for those costs to be reported separately for years, she said, despite the long-standing practice of combining them.

University of Ottawa professor Christina Clark-Kazak argued that combining them makes a certain amount of sense. She specializes in migration and development policy.

“Whether we’re helping a refugee in a refugee camp or helping them in Canada, it’s still money that’s being spent on non-Canadians,” she said.

“That’s why it’s captured in that way.”

The spending reflects a turbulent era, as a historic number of people around the world have been forced to flee their homes due to armed conflicts and natural disasters linked to climate change, she said.

The high proportion of money spent on refugees partially stems from specialized resettlement programs, such as Ottawa’s pledge to bring 40,000 Afghans to Canada, as well as health care and temporary shelter for people who claim asylum in Canada.

As for the portion that is spent abroad, significant funding goes toward responding to the conflict in Sudan and hunger in Haiti, and 21.4 per cent went to Ukraine, particularly in the form of loans.

The aid sector loudly protested the 15 per cent cut to foreign aid spent outside of Canada in the 2023 budget, despite the Liberals’ pledge to increase aid funding every year.

The government argued they simply returned to the kind of spending that preceded a historic boost in aid dollars during the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

While Canada is the seventh-largest donor among OECD countries in terms of the raw number of dollars spent last year, it is well below tenth place when the money is compared to the relative size of Canada’s economy.

Still, it was the most Canada spent on foreign aid in proportion to its gross domestic product since 1995, Legault said.

To the government’s credit, Canada has responded to the many crises that have erupted over the last several years, she said.

With governments more prepared to respond to emergencies, they appear less keen to invest in proactive development projects meant to make countries more resilient, she said.

Former prime minister Lester Pearson set a target for rich countries to spend 0.7 per cent of gross domestic product on foreign aid. Canada reached only 0.38 per cent last year.

International Development Minister Ahmed Hussen’s office stressed that the Liberals have ramped up funding targeted at fighting climate change and empowering women and girls.

“Under our government, Canada’s international development assistance envelope is at an all-time high, surpassing levels under any previous government,” wrote spokeswoman Olivia Batten.

She said Canadian funding works to “empower women and girls, address climate change at the local level, and invest in developing economies while reducing global poverty.”

Clark-Kazak said it’s important to not think of foreign aid as a “zero-sum game,” where dollars flow abroad instead of helping Canadians.

She argued that funding for refugees in Canada helps prepare them to be productive members of society during a labour shortage, pay taxes, and support the economy.

Both aid experts said Ottawa should be more upfront with Canadians about how and where the government spends aid money. As it stands, the spending is reported in several formats and the terminology is not consistent.

This spring’s budget didn’t include a consolidated figure for how much Ottawa plans to spend on aid. Hussen and his department did not provide a specific number in the immediate wake of the budget either.

It’s difficult for analysts to track whether Canada actually follows through on pledges made on the world stage, Legault said.

“Transparency is really important from the government, especially in an issue like foreign aid,” she said.

“Canadians have the right to know how much we plan to spend, how much we have spent, and on what.”


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
New bill would let Canadians to pass citizenship rights down to children born abroad
Author of the article:Canadian Press
Canadian Press
Alessia Passafiume
Published May 23, 2024 • Last updated 3 days ago • 3 minute read

OTTAWA — A new government bill tabled in the House of Commons on Thursday would allow Canadians to pass citizenship rights down to their children born outside the country — a move that would add an unknown number of new citizens.

In 2009, former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper’s government changed the law so that Canadian parents who were born abroad could not pass down their citizenship, unless their child was born in Canada.

Those who have not had access to citizenship rights as a result of the amendments are known as “Lost Canadians.”

The new bill looks to undo that change, which was struck down by a recent court challenge, and extend citizenship by descent beyond the first generation born outside of Canada.

The legislation would automatically confer citizenship rights to children born since 2009 who were affected by the Conservatives’ changes.

It would also create a new test for children born after the legislation comes into force.

Parents who were born outside of Canada will need to have spent at least three years in Canada before the birth or adoption of their child to pass on their Canadian citizenship.

The government has no idea how many people will be automatically granted citizenship if the legislation is passed.

“We’re a country that supports human rights, equality and respect for all people,” Immigration Minister Marc Miller said in the foyer outside the House of Commons after he tabled the bill.

“There’s no doubt that Canadian citizenship is highly valued and recognized around the world. We want a citizenship to be fair, accessible, with clear and transparent rules.”

Last year, the Ontario Superior Court found the current system unconstitutionally creates two classes of Canadians, and gave Ottawa until June 19 to fix the problem.

“This is an example of Conservatives having taken away Canadians’ rights and something they hold most dear to them, in their citizenship,” Miller said.

The implications of the change made in 2009 were hugely significant for families, NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan said. She helped to draft the new legislation alongside the Liberals.

“I’ve talked to family members who have been separated from their loved ones because of this unjust law that Conservatives brought in 15 years ago,” she said.

“I’ve talked to family members where their children are deemed stateless, lost in the system, because of this unjust, punitive, unconstitutional law that the Conservatives brought in.”

The government may have to request an extension from the court while the bill makes its way through the House of Commons, Miller said, but he doesn’t want to wait long to fix the issue because people are being prejudiced in the meantime.

Kathryn Burton, who was born in the U.S. to a Canadian mother and who is a member of Gesgapegiag Mi’kmaq First Nation in Quebec, was unable to pass her citizenship onto her children, despite them also having First Nations status.

She said she brought the issue to Miller, calling it an “unintended consequence” of the law, and he immediately understood what she was talking about.

“My mom always said, ’Never let the federal government define you,”’ she said at the news conference Thursday, celebrating the bill’s introduction. “But when they do, we forcefully and respectfully push back.”

With her sons standing steps away from her, she said she can’t wait for them to stand up at a citizenship ceremony and be seen as proud and rightful citizens.

“My son just said, ’Please don’t cry.’ But it is truly a moment for my family,” she said.

It’s not the first time federal politicians have attempted to fix the issue.

A private member’s bill from Conservative Sen. Yonah Martin sought to reinstate another category of “Lost Canadians,” who were stripped of their citizenship because of legislative change in 1977.

The bill made it nearly all the way through the legislative process, but when it was taken up by the House of Commons immigration committee in late 2022, the Liberals and NDP introduced wide-ranging amendments to grant citizenship to even more people.

The Conservatives said the changes would materially affect the Citizenship Act without appropriate study or due diligence.

Despite moving back to the House after the committee process, the bill has not been brought back out by the Conservatives for third reading.

In a statement on Thursday, Conservative MP Tom Kmiec, who serves as his party’s critic of immigration, refugees and citizenship, said Canada’s immigration system is “falling apart.”

“Common sense Conservatives will fix our immigration system that the Liberals have broken,” the statement reads.

“Justin Trudeau and his NDP coalition partners control the majority of seats in Parliament and have the power to block or pass what they want.

— With files from Laura Osman.

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
Regina, Saskatchewan
Canada has always been an outlier on immigration. That was true long before the Trudeau government. Compared to other rich countries, we had a relatively wide and open door. But around the door were walls, which were also higher than those in Europe or the United States.

Canadians were always concerned about controlling the border, yet very welcoming of immigrants. That sounds like a contradiction. It isn’t. Walls don’t block a door, they support it. No walls? No door.

That was Canada’s secret sauce. Immigration was relatively high and relatively popular. We were an exclusive club that also admitted a lot of new members – economic immigrants, family reunifications and refugees – but we chose the new members. Control over who got the door, and who got the wall, was key.

That’s a big part of why Canada had no significant anti-immigration movement demanding that we “take back control” of our borders. We had control. We had law-and-order, liberal immigration. The former created acceptance for the latter. It was a precondition, not a paradox.

All of which has largely broken down under the Trudeau government. It drove bulldozers through the walls, with little consideration of the long tail of consequences. Coming to this country without permission was difficult. Why difficult? Because of the bureaucratic walls. The ones holding up the door.

Since 2015, the number of temporary foreign residents in Canada has nearly quadrupled, to 2.7 million. Whether through what I’ll call the Tim Hortons Immigration Stream – which allowed employers to hire an unlimited number of “temporary” workers for permanent jobs – or through the Tuition-for-Residence Stream – pay $10,000 for a certificate from the Strip-Mall College of Management and get the right to cross the border – the system built new superhighways into Canada.

The number of visas on offer was effectively unlimited. The notion that Canada was vetting anyone went out the window. Bye-bye walls.

Previous governments devoted so much effort to the walls because they understood that, once someone crosses the border, the tools for compelling their departure are limited. That includes foreign students and temporary workers no longer eligible to live and work here, refugee claimants adjudged to be not genuine refugees, and even tourists who decided to never go home.
The rest of the article is at the above link. For the Trudeau government, the most compelling reason to tread carefully in this area may be political. Canadian citizenship as a reward for flouting immigration law is going to tick off a lot of Canadians. I suspect the most hardboiled and unapologetic will be those people who queued up, followed the rules and entered during daylight hours: immigrants.
  • Sad
Reactions: Taxslave2


Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
Washington DC
It was weird. It was almost like Canadians remembered that their ancestors were largely desperate Europeans searching for either a better life, or in many cases, life.

Nice to see them joining us in morally superior attitude of "Fuck you, Jack, I got mine."
  • Like
Reactions: Ron in Regina

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
Regina, Saskatchewan
It was weird. It was almost like Canadians remembered that their ancestors were largely desperate Europeans searching for either a better life, or in many cases, life.

Nice to see them joining us in morally superior attitude of "Fuck you, Jack, I got mine."
Sort of but not really. More like a life raft, that can be expanded and grown over overtime…but… if your throw too many into it at the same time, then it’s gone…& here we are.
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
Regina, Saskatchewan
That's true. Canada's population density is horrendous. Makes Hong Kong look like the wide prai-rie.
Canada’s population density is stretched over the 100 mile wide border with the US for all intents & purposes, which is irrelevant, & new Canadians aren’t settling in the unsettled portions, which is relevant.

There’s only so many hospitals and doctors and housing and so on and so forth…& that capacity can only be expanded at a certain rate with good leadership…& what we have coming is beyond that capacity and without good leadership, so here we are.

There is controlled growth for the betterment of all, and then there’s growth for the sake of growth which isn’t good for anyone in the end.

The link in post number 1533 is quite informative but long, & that’s the reason I quoted a little bit of it and posted a link.
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2


Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
Trudeau Liberals making moves to cheapen Canadian citizenship
Liberals looking to extend citizenship to grandchildren and illegals.

Author of the article:Brian Lilley
Published May 25, 2024 • Last updated 2 days ago • 3 minute read
Join the conversation

According to a report, the Canadian government is working on how to "provide a path to citizenship" for people in the country illegally.
According to a report, the Canadian government is working on how to "provide a path to citizenship" for people in the country illegally.
The Trudeau government appears to be doing everything it can to diminish the value of Canadian citizenship. After announcing they would extend birthright citizenship to two generations born out of Canada, the government is now looking at extending citizenship to people who are in the country illegally.

According to The Globe and Mail, Immigration Minister Marc Miller is preparing a proposal for cabinet to consider how to “provide a path to citizenship” for people in the country illegally. This would include failed asylum seekers who were ordered deported but didn’t leave, international students who have overstayed their visas or those who entered on tourist visas and simply never left.

The issue has long been a lightning rod in the United States, dividing the country. Canada, by comparison, hasn’t seen the same kind of heated debate over immigration.

That could change with this proposal which will be opposed by many in Canada, including many immigrants who followed the rules to come to this country. Of course, this being the Trudeau Liberals, anyone opposed to this proposal will be painted anti-immigrant in all forms if not an outright racist by a government desperate to scratch and claw its way back from irrelevancy.

On the issue of extending birthright citizenship, the Liberals made it sound like they had no choice, blaming a court decision last December. The truth is, it was a lower court ruling they didn’t appeal because as they stated clearly in their news release they liked it.

“The Government of Canada did not appeal the ruling because we agree that the law has unacceptable consequences for Canadians whose children were born outside the country,” the news release stated.

The court ruling was in response to a number of families who challenged a law which stated that you could only pass on citizenship to a Canadian born outside of the country by one generation. With this change, grandchildren of Canadian citizens will be extended full Canadian citizenship.

This isn’t standard practice in the United States, Britain, France, Italy or a number of peer countries, which with rare exception cap passing on citizenship to the first generation born outside of the country.

Yet when a number of families, some with stories similar to mine, challenged Canada’s citizenship laws, Justice Jasmine Akbarali found the law to be unconstitutional. In her ruling she found that the law violated section 6 mobility rights and section 15 equality rights.

In one of the cases, two Canadians who had moved to Switzerland to work and had a child while there, sued in the off chance that in the future their daughter also moves abroad and has a family that they could pass on citizenship. That’s deciding a case and overturning a law based on a hypothetical, something judges love doing but isn’t a serious way to determine court cases.

In another case, a man born in the United States to a Canadian mother got married and started a family while living in Asia. He wanted to pass on the citizenship to his child, but the law didn’t allow it.

When he moved back to Canada with his family, his daughter applied for and was granted Canadian citizenship.

Bottom line is that in all the cases before Justice Akbarali there were solutions, like applying for citizenship, that didn’t involve watering down our rules. She decided the first generation cut off was arbitrary.

But if a one generation rule is arbitrary, what’s to say a future court won’t find the second generation cut off arbitrary. Parliament must choose a cut off at some point, otherwise, why have citizenship, why have borders, why have rights and privileges open to citizens and not others.

This was a bad court ruling and it has now been followed by a bad government policy. It extends automatic citizenship to people who have little to no connection to Canada and cheapens the value of our citizenship.

Knowing now that the Trudeau Liberals want to extend citizenship to people in the country illegally, their moves shouldn’t be surprising.

The only question left is how far will the Liberals go in terms of devaluing what it means to be Canadian?
  • Like
Reactions: Taxslave2