With overpopulation in Africa and consequent ruination of the environment there, the long-suffering Canadian taxpayer might wonder why the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) is spending our tax dollars on research into AIDS in Kenya. If protection of Canadians is a concern, why does the Canadian Immigration Department not even test prospective immigrants for HIV? Surely, it is enough that Canadians have their own problems with this epidemic that originated in Africa. A study of Nairobi, Kenya prostitutes by the University of Manitoba is costing $450,000, paid for by CIDA, the Medical Research Council of Canada, and the International Development Research Centre, another taxpayer-funded Ottawa-based body.
(Globe and Mail, September 7, 1996) Canadian researchers, under Dr. Frank Plummer of the University of Manitoba, are examining 1,800 prostitutes in the vast AIDS-ridden slums of Nairobi. Earning $0.50 to $2.50 a trick, each services up to 20 clients a day, and, according to Dr. Plummer, they are at risk for other sexually-transmitted diseases as well. The misguided humanitarian motive behind Canadian-funded research into Kenyan AIDS is that some of the African prostitutes have apparently acquired resistance to the disease, although they get repeated infection from syphilis or gonorrhea, which they also spread to clients, the families of clients, and the general population. So, what is the point of this expenditure of hard-earned Canadian tax dollars? By most accounts, Canada now has about 10,000 HIV-positive cases, each of which, it is estimated, when they become full-blown AIDS cases will end up costing the Canadian taxpayers $100,000 a year for several years. That works out to a toral of $1-billion a year. Of course, this figure is an underestimate and is likely to increase as AIDS proliferates. Surely, it would be better to spend oru tax dollars at home. — John Morgan, M.A. (Oxon) M.B.A.
Toronto Mayor Knuckles Under to Beijing Pressure
When it comes to throwing a finger of contempt at the U.S., Canadian leftists love to flaunt our alleged independence. However, let the tyrants in Red China object and the oh-so-independent leftists hop to it. “Members of Toronto’s Taiwanese community say they feel betrayed after permission to raise the flag of the Republic of China (Taiwan) at city hall was withdrawn under pressure from mainland [Red] China The Chinese consulate objected last year to the flag raising for Taiwan’s National Day, and threatened to formally complain to Ottawa if it happened again, said Rob Moore, spokesperson for Mayor Barbara Hall. The consulate repeated the threat recently. … A staff poll of city council’s executive committee found a majority in favour of the event, and permission was granted. However, Hall, upon later learning of the poll results, intervened, — persuading councillors Kay Gardner and Mario Silva to switch their votes after pointing out Canada doesn’t recognize Taiwan. The switch changed the vote. … Gardner said Hall ‘came and told me it was inappropriate. I figured I better follow the federal policy.’ Moore said Ottawa indicated it was against the flag raising. ‘We’ve been in touch with foreign affairs (officials) and they have confirmed they would prefer we respect Canada’s policy of one China.,’ he said.” (Toronto Star, October 4, 1996) Mayor Hall has a thing for totalitarians. She backed a Metro Council grant this July of $8,000 to the terrorist anti-free speech group called Anti-Racist Action (ARA), which CSIS agents, in a tape in our possession, called ” a collection of anarchists, Trotskyists, Stalinists.” (See C-FAR #301) In the same tape, the CSIS agents state that ARA “firebombed Ernst Zundel” on May 7, 1995.
Canada’s Aid Spending Far Higher Than Most Western Allies
Overtaxed, debt-ridden Canada continues to pump far more aid into the Third World than most other developed nations. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in Paris “said the average aid budget for the 21 main donor countries now amounts to only 0.27 per cent of GDP, a far cry from the target adopted by the United Nations in 1970 of 0.7 per cent.” (Globe and Mail, September 20, 1996) Canada is the fifth most generous of the top 21 donors, spending 0.39 per cent of GDP or 44 per cent more than the average. In contrast, Britain spends .29 per cent of its GDP on aid, while the U.S. spends just 0.10 per cent. Wealthy Japan gives 0.28 per cent and thriving Switzerland, just 0.34 per cent. Canada “lends” money to Third World countries. These often are “loans” in name only. “Over the past decade, Canada has forgiven debts to the poorest countries totalling the equivalent of $1.4-billion at current exchange rates.” (Toronto Star, September 27, 1996)
John Bryden, MP’s Study Slams Special Interest Group Funding
John Bryden, a Liberal MP for Hamilton-Wentworth, is a former journalist and has been a steady critic of government funding of a host of special interest groups. C-FAR has long argued that such funding of so-called women’s groups, the pro-foreign aid lobby, the whole snakepit of multicult groups, and the new anti-free speech anti-racism industry has skewed political debate in this country. Miniscule groups of radicals, often virtually entirely dependent on government funding, are able to make a great deal of noise and create the appearance of public demand for a host of leftist policies. Canadian Ethnocultural Council. “In its 1992-93 annual report, the Canadian Ethnocultural Council (CEC) describes itself as springing from a group of ethnocultural organizations to provide ‘an advocacy group that would give them a voice that would be heard in the policy making process.’ Its specific activities are all to do with conferences, publications and lobbying ‘decision makers.’ The CEC, a non-profit organization, collected only $770 in donations for 1993 and nothing in 1992. Almost all of its funding has been in the form of grants from the former Department of Multiculturalism and Citizenship. Looking back 10 years, CEC is a group which appears to have directly benefitted from the ipcoming federal election of 1988. In 1987, its government grants totalled $164,500; in 1988, they were $200,000; in 1989, they climbed to $321,015 — plus. Throughout the recession of the early 1990s, the CEC consistently enjoyed high sustaining funding supplemented by smaller grants from the Department of the Secretary of State’s Women’s Programme and for bilingualism initiatives. Government grants, in fact, have consistently accounted for 80 to 90 per cent of the CEC’s revenues year after year. The Canadian Ethnocultural Council is an umbrella organization of umbrella organizations. Its annual report lists 38 ethnic organizations as members, with these groups in turn supposedly representing provincial and local chapters and, ultimately, thousands upon thousands of multicultural Canadians. It is difficult to see why these organizations annually contribute only $8,250 [out of 1993 revenues of $292,538] in membership fees. That’s only two per cent of the CEC’s revenue. Given the thousands — even millions — of individuals the member organizations claim to represent, surely they could afford to give the CEC all the financial support it needs. … The lack of financial support from member organizations and the Canadian ethnic community at large suggests that the CEC does not really have a constituency. A group that cannot get the backing of its public is not likely to have its finger on the pulse of that public.” (John Bryden, Special Interest Group Funding, 1994, p.24-25) National Association of Canadians of Origins in India. “The national headquarters of this organization, representing a well-established group of ethnic Canadians, received a total of $860,400 over the past ten years, almost all of it in the form of annual operating grants fixed at $68,000. The National Association of Canadians of Origins in India (NACOI) also has a number of provincial branches which have independently received money from the former Department of the Secretary of State. The Montreal branch, for instance, received $421,125 over the same period. This, surely, is a classic case of an organization that should not need sustaining funding. NACOI claims to consist of “39 chapters across Canada which combined represent over 750,000 Canadians of origins in India.” Yet, according to its annual report, it could raise no more than $4,881 in ‘membership, donations and other revenue.’ [This was the only non-government portion of its 1993 revenue of $72,881 or just 6.6 per cent!] NACOI justifies receiving government funding on the basis that it is an ‘umbrella’ organization able to speak for all associations of Canadians from the Indian sub-continent. Considering the many religious and cultural differences of people from that part of the world, this seems rather surprising. NACOI does not claim actually to be in contact with these other groups. There is a danger here. NACOI’s annual reports and its membership on the Canadian Ethnocultural Council … show that it has been very successful in its contacts with government. It has been consulted on a wide variety of issues over the years. This gives it great power in terms of speaking for a large number of Canadians of great cultural diversity. NACOI operates from a tiny, one-room office in Ottawa. Annual rent is $5,939.” (p.43-44)
The Diversity Front: Witches, Cheating & Penis Snatchers
Multicult flack Andrew Cardozo enthuses: “Canada has had the sophisticated and open-minded multiculturalism policy for 25 years. … [However,] when it comes to cultural, raciual or religious diversity, countries all over the world just don’t get it. Most have not accepted that the era of the nation state — made up of ‘one nation’ or ‘one people’ — is long gone.” (Toronto Star, October 7, 1996) “More than 40 elderly people accused of witchcraft have been put to death, sometimes by burning, by members of their family in the Congo this year, a Congo human-rights group said [October 1]. .. More than 60 people had been burned or buried alive after similar accusations between 1990 and 1996.” (Globe and Mail, October 2, 1996) “Last year at the virtually semi-annual student cheating riots in Bangladesh, students were so adamant and blatant about the right to receive outside help when taking national placement exams that they sparked a rampage in which more than 500 people were injured. This year, in March, in Kanpur, India, all high school final examinations had to be taken barefoot to discourage students from carrying notes in their shoes. And in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, in July, hundreds of children scaled walls to pass notes to their friends taking high school entrance exams.” (Toronto Star, September 7, 1996) Finally, in the Cameroons, “angry mobs lynched three men accused of using evil powers to cause male genitals to disappear, a newspaper reported.Several other “penis snatchers” who allegedly caused male genitals to vanish by a simple handshake have been severely beaten in the last week, the Cameroon Post said.The newspaper said most penis snatchers are Nigerian .” (Toronto Sun, September 14, 1996.) The “diversity” that so thrills Cardozo involves bringing in radically dissimilar people to Canada. Will such “diversity” really enrich Canada?
Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform Inc. The C-FAR Newsletter is P.O. Box 332 Stn. B. published monthly. Rates Etobicoke, Ontario are $16/Year for subscription M9W 5L3 *firstname.lastname@example.org* or $38/Year for Associate Fee