Number 171)

Hire That Lawyer!
The pudgy grinning face of lawyer Raj Singh Gosal, B.A., LL.M., J.D. stares out from the prominent ad in the Indo-Canadian Voice. He’s wearing a hefty turban but, alas, as the ad in in black and white, the reader cannot determine what fetching colour is being sported by the Vancouver lawyer. Anyway, some of his clients seem quite taken with Gosal’s work. “The truck I was driving across the border had over $200,000 in cocaine, but Mr. Gosal got me out on bail,” says Anonymous (2004). Now, Zundel should have hired this guy! “ICBC said our claim was Low Velocity Impact and was giving us nothing. We hired Mr. Gosall and my wife got $14,500 and I settled my case for over $19,000,” enthuses Padda (2004). (Indo-Canadian Voice, October 23, 2004) Yet another happy client is one R.V. Sandhu (2002): “The alcohol machine said .23 & .21, but Gosal got my charges dropped after he made a constitutional argument.” (Indo-Canadian Voice, July 24, 2004)

Cargo Cult Compassion
Informed by two competing instincts, it was amusing to watch as Ottawa’s native parsimony wrestled with an aching need to be seen as the most compassionate kid on the block: A grudging $1-million pledge for tsunami relief would proceed by fits and lurches over the course of one dithering week, only to herniate itself at $80-million. Our federal masters were much quicker off the mark to proclaim the world’s biggest doormat open for business and eager to expedite the immigration (not refugee) process for 5,000 or so “victims” — but, according to an Immigration spokesman, “there is no discussion of a cap on the number of relatives who may be sponsored.” How characteristic to play god-of-the-salad-bowl, forever tossing disparate populations together, only to half-drown tsunami survivors (and everyone else) in oleaginous rhetoric. Meanwhile, advanced nations are prepared to give survivors a little credit along with the helping hand, evidently believing they might actually make something of their own stricken countries. The only possible justification for this extraordinary move — apart from 5,000 sure-fire Liberal votes — is to hasten the demographic imbalance prescribed for Canada. And just what is it Ottawa has in mind? Some of the hardest hit have been “members of some of the world’s most primitive tribes … who survive by hunting with spears, bows and arrows, and by gathering fruits and roots. They fashion clothing from tree bark and leaves.” (National Post, December 30, 2004) What a multicultural coup if we could lure over some Sentinalese, a surviving Palaeolithic tribe much given to firing on outsiders with poison-tipped arrows! In relatively advanced Indonesia, (conveniently, Aceh province has been under martial law since a 1976 separatist insurgency) survivors there were reported fighting in the streets over packages of noodles after just three days of privation. All this promises fresh enrichments for the millions upon millions of Canadians who feel badly short-changed in our persistent calls for ever more diversity. Meanwhile, Toronto is already home to the largest Tamil population outside of Sri Lanka, many thousand of whom, Toronto Police say, are trained and battle-hardened terrorists. And tsunami or not, it’s very much New Land — Same Old Tribalism: “Throngs of Sri Lankan Tamils gathered at a north-end Hindu temple Tuesday night to mourn kin who perished in a tsunami earlier this week and to demand answers from Canadian officials over widespread allegations of aid misappropriation. In the midst of their grief, mourners one by one voiced concerns that foreign aid being sent from places like Canada was being purposely diverted from hard-hit Tamil communities on the South Asian island nation where nearly 22,000 are known to have died. ‘The Sinhalese government doesn’t care for Tamils. They only give aid to their own people,’ said Devathasan Thambirajah. ‘They are showing their racism and discrimination against the Tamil community. I am also worried that foreign aid going to Sri Lanka will be used to buy weapons and ammunitions in the future against the Tamil people.’ Thambirajah and many others claim a centuries-old homeland rivalry between Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese Buddhist majority and its Tamil Hindu minority is thwarting foreign relief efforts in the Tamil-dominated north and eastern regions of the country — a consequence, they say, of their 20-year civil war. They cite both media reports and anecdotal evidence from family and friends in Sri Lanka as proof of the charges.” (Toronto Sun, December 28, 2004) The Tamils insist that the aid money should be “funnelled through on-the-ground organizations such as the Tamil Rehabilitation Organization. [This despite] a 1999 report on the Canadian Security Intelligence Service’s website claiming that TRO wings have acted as fronts for the [Tamil Tiger] rebels. … Although the U.S. government has deemed the LTTELiberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam] a terrorist entity, Ottawa has not.” (Globe and Mail, December 30, 2004) No, evidently the Tamil community wags the Ottawa [dog.

Refugee Tsunami from Asia Sweeping Toward Canada
We just can’t win for losing. A cynic warned me Sunday afternoon, when the death toll of the tsunami that slammed into a dozen Asian and African countries stood at just 3,000: “Watch, they soon will be flooding here as refugees.” No, I thought. Crazy and treacherous as our immigration authorities are, surely that won’t happen. Ai — and natural disasters are one of the few legitimate foreign aid expenditures — certainly, but bringing masses of Asians to Canada is no solution. They may be temporarily displaced a few miles from their shattered homes. By all means, send medicine, food, sanitary supplies, water and water purification equipment. Help them rebuild and get back on their feet The day after the tsunami, Canada pledged a million dollars. Tuesday that was upped to $4-million. “Ottawa announced it would contribute $40-million in aid to countries devastated by this week’s catastrophic tsunamis as the global community stepped up efforts to cope with a death toll that threatened to hit 100,000. The move, a tenfold increase in what had originally been pledged, came yesterday.” (Globe and Mail, December 30, 2004) And, of course, it has soared higher since. How can a natural disaster is Asia be solved by bringing hordes of the homeless here?

Nevertheless, that’s the current plan. At least 5,000 people who can claim relatives in Canada to sponsor them will soon he heading here. As “family class” they’ll have only to pass a medical and police check, but one suspects that their “expedited” entry may skip even that. Family class sponsorship imposes an obligation on the sponsor to look after the person sponsored for a period of time. However, large numbers simply renege on their obligations and let the taxpayers take care of them on welfare. Naturally, documentation will be skimpy. Many would-be newcomers may not be able to prove their identity. Their documents were swept out to sea, they’ll claim, and, in some cases, it will be the truth. I predict a brisk trade in sponsorships of persons who become sudden relatives, in exchange for some thousands of dollars being paid to their new “relative” sponsors.

Some may say that Ottawa just can’t get it right. No! This idiotic policy is entirely consistent with the long range goals of Canada’s immigration architects – the replacement of the European founder/settler population. The tsunami just provides a good excuse to bring in hordes more for “humanitarian” reasons, of course. Sadly, a good number of Euro-Canadians, their brains addled by multicult propaganda poison, may actually believe by snatching these Asians from their culture and home that we’re actually doing them such a favour. If memory serves, there was no suggestion over the past two decades when flood or hurricanes left people homeless in the Dakotas or in Florida or the Gulf Coast that we should bring in the American homeless, who might have relatives here. No, this is another backdoor method of pouring even more people our already overcrowded magnet cities – Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.

“’We think it will be most used in Sri Lanka, only because there are many Canadians [of] Sri Lankan descent living here,’ [an immigration spokesman] predicted. ‘There is no discussion of a cap on the numbers of relatives who may be sponsored. Things are so fluid, we really don’t know how many to expect.’” (Globe and Mail, December 30, 2004) There are a couple of timebombs buried here. In Toronto alone, there are over 6,000 people with Tamil Tiger terrorist training. With minimal screening, we may be getting a passel of terrorists to add to the already violent and considerable criminal Tamil element here. Oh, and the sheer breathless excitement of it all! The spokesthingy doesn’t know how many to expect. Well, it won’t be 5,000; it could well be 50,000. As former Immigration Department executive and whistle blower Kim Abbott predicted a generation ago of the 1979 flood of Vietnamese boat people – originally promised to number only a few thousand – they would end up sponsoring 35 or more each and we’d end up with entire villages. We did and it may soon look as if we’re host to half of Sri Lanka. Oh, yes, with 7.8% unemployment and these people having no proven skills but a relationship real or, I predict, purchased to some Tamil in Canada, we can look to a further strain on our welfare and social services (ESL, job training, daycare) budgets.

It’s important to have your bullshit metre finally tuned. “Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis, who has been urging Ottawa to assist those left homeless and destitute, estimated that more than 5,000 Asians will come to Canada. ‘It’s a wonderful thing,’ said Mr. Karygiannis,” Now Karygiannis virtually runs an immigration agency out of his offices as an MP. Assist the homeless and destitute. Yes, of course, we should through foreign aid and, particularly, their countrymen who are here should be making big sacrifices and sending over megabucks. The take from one Buddhist temple the day after the tsunami was an unimpressive $5,000 – most donations apparently $20 notes, according to a newspaper photo. Finally, while emergency foreign aid may be in order, we must insist on accountability. We don’t want local thieves running off and selling Canadian food aid. Also, nations like Thailand, Indonesia and India have large militaries; India has nuclear weapons and, like Red China, plans within a decade to involve itself in space travel. They are the primary custodians of their own people’s welfare. Finally, it must be noted that Thailand bears a great deal responsibility for the carnage. It had advanced warning of the tsunami and chose not to warn its coastal areas for fear of lawsuits from Western tourists. Many of these tourists were in flesh-spots (local underage whores of both sexes widely available) like the aptly named Phuket.

The evidence of the Thais’ greed and bad judgement, not apparently widely reported in North America, comes from the Swedish newspaper Expressen (December 28, 2004): Just minutes after the earthquake in the Indian Ocean on Sunday morning, Thailand’s foremost meteorological experts were sitting together in a crisis meeting. But they decided not to warn about the tsunami “out of courtesy to the tourist industry,” writes the Thailand daily newspaper The Nation. The experts got the news around 8:00 am on Sunday morning local time. An hour later, the first massive wave struck. But the experts started to discuss the economic impacts when they discussed if a tsunami warning should be issued. The primary argument against such a warning was that there had not been any floods in 300 years. Also, the experts believed the Indonesian island Sumatra would be a ‘cushion’ for the southern coast of Thailand. The experts also had bad information; they thought the tremor was 8.1. A similar earthquake occurred in the same area in 2002 with no flooding at all. … ‘We finally decided not to do anything because the tourist season was in full swing,’ the source said. ‘The hotels were 100 percent booked. What if we issued a warning, which would have led to an evacuation, and nothing had happened. What would be the outcome? The tourist industry would be immediately hurt. Our department would not be able to endure a lawsuit.’”
— Paul Fromm

The Up Side Of Gay Marriage
It was anything but a surprise when the Supreme Court came out for gay marriage. The decision (and the elegantly undemocratic means by which it was foisted on us) may have been deeply offensive, but from a strictly immigration reform perspective, it could mark the first turning of the tide. Enlightenment on the immigration file came to the Netherlands by way of an unlikely agent — homosexual activist Pim Fortuyn (a showier version of Svend Robinson, before the latter’s comic pratfall). Fortuyn’s warning that fundamentalist Islam was violently incompatible with Holland’s easy-going social mores, resonated with a wide cross-section of the population, the moreso when his call for restrictions prompted a pro-immigrationist to murder him in the street. By all accounts, Theo van Gogh was an abrasive loudmouth (his preferred term for Moslems was goatfuckers) who specialized in “quirky” pornography. For raising his head above the immigration parapet, he too would die in a pool of blood in the road. Neither man seems an obvious candidate for secular martyrdom, but, under the law of unintended consequences, their deaths would spur a continent-wide movement to immigration reform: If this carnage was visited on the obliging Dutch, what hope is there? What kind of trade off is it to endure invasive security measures, erosion of hard-won rights and airport purgatory to nurse domestic terror networks of unknowable magnitude? Newcomers expect and demand the freedom to reject and criticize, often with perspicacity, their hosts’ doctrines and customs, while demanding an exaggerated degree of respect and freedom from criticism for their own beliefs and practices. After 30 years, Europe is reluctantly coming to the conclusion that multiculturalism’s crowning achievement is endless accommodation on the one side and endless recrimination from the unassimilating other. Once-unassailable platitudes are up for review as people ask themselves what kind of tolerance they are willing to live with. And like it or not, the answer inclines sharply toward neologisms like gay marriage and away from fundamentalist rigidity: Britain’s National Centre for Social Research reports a new, “harder line on immigration contrasted with an increasingly liberal stance on other social and moral issues. The shift was particularly pronounced among the liberal intelligentsia.” (The Guardian, December 7, 2004) Just about the last group one might have expected to embrace immigration reform! While sanctioned unions for shirt-lifters may not top your personal wish list, it may be some comfort to know that, when Holland embarked on the same course, around 3% of gays registered to marry: In other words, 3 per cent of 1% of the population. If Ottawa has determined to launch us on a course of radical social liberalism, we would be wise to make that work FOR us. Others will not be able to: The indivisibility of any aspect of life from any other in Islam is a source of strength, but when all conduct, all custom, has a religious sanction and justification, change is a threat. Where compromise and accommodation constitute a direct contravention of the revealed word, it is apostasy. Islam is an absolutist creed rigidly dividing the world into “us” and “them”: Dar al Islam, or world of peace, encompasses Islamic states ruled by shariaDar al Harb, or world of war, is our world, one populated by lesser breeds, from Christians, Jews and Zoroastrians, (dhimmis) more or less tolerated as “people of the book,” through descending order to outright heathens (khaffirs, yes, the word is Arabic in origin). But the world can only be truly “peaceful” when all have submitted to Islamic precepts. Think of Maha Elsamnah’s harangue against the poisonous effect of Canadian values on her jihad brood. Think also of Mohammad el Masry: Before stepping in it by suggesting all Israelis are “fair game,” a national newspaper gave him ample column inches to ruminate at length about the need for Canadian universities to outlaw alcohol on campuses. Inflexibility and an ever-expanding arena for “our” ways to supersede yours is the Moslem way. How do Canada’s Moslems feel, 6 months after stampeding to endorse eternal Liberal reign? Well and truly hoodwinked we hope by all that twaddle about “our ethnic concerns mirroring your ethnic concerns”? And the sticking point (tolerance as a strictly one-way street) is already creating difficulties: “The Ontario government is urging Muslim parents not to take their children out of classes that discuss same-sex marriages. The response comes after some Muslim parents asked that their children be excluded from anti-homophobia education at a downtown Toronto school. On Tuesday night, the Toronto District School Board rejected the parents’ request, saying that allowing some students to be excluded from the class would violate the rights of children with same-sex parents. But Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty said: ‘It’s important that all our children have the opportunity to learn about those things that distinguish one of us from the other, and that they learn to respect those differences.’ [Not under multiculturalism, it isn’t — or at least, not when it goes the other way]. Education Minister Gerard Kennedy echoed McGuinty’s remarks, saying, ‘our public schools are there to engender respect, respect for people of different faiths and different sexual orientations.’ He said he didn’t think ‘there’s any harm done to parents who find their children exposed to ideas that are different than the ones they teach at home.’ The parents are upset that their children were shown videos during classes that depicted the feelings of children who get taunted at school because their own parents are homosexuals. The Muslim parents complained that the classes infringed on their religious beliefs.” (CBC, Nov. 17, law: 2004)

Well Naturally It’s A Swindle, But Of Whom?
With all eyes ogling The Great Ihor’s Girls!Girls!Girls! stage show, few noticed as the federal government quietly acceded to an out of court settlement with a group of disgruntled would-be immigrants claiming that they were “unfairly denied the chance to come to Canada.” If you thought the Singh decision (conferring full rights of citizenship on foreigners from the instant they petition our charity in person) was sick, here’s a whole new pathology extending Canadian chumpdom to every inhabitant of the globe: “The politically charged case dates back to December, 2001, when the government announced its new Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which includes a tougher points system to assess skilled workers and other economic class migrants. [In the event, Ottawa would actually downgrade standards to a new low of 67] Because many would-be immigrants had already applied under the older, more lenient [than the initially proposed, later revised] regulations, [Denis] Coderre announced the government would extend the deadline for processing old applicants under the old rules by three months, to March 31, 2003. … But in February, 2003, a Federal Court judge found the department provided ‘significantly incorrect numbers’ … and, when officials realized the backlog actually affected [not the 30,000 the department suggested, but] between 80,000 and 120,000 people, they ‘did not inform Parliament of this error.’ … Ottawa has agreed to cover the cost of the plaintiffs’ legal fees — $2.96-million — and spend millions more re-evaluating nearly 100,000 would-be immigrants who applied for visas under old entry rules [It was feared the threatened lawsuit could have approached the $10-BILLION mark in damages!]. … As part of the deal, Ottawa yesterday began to mail letters to at least 97,000 foreigners who submitted permanent resident applications before Jan. 1, 2002. The letter will inform them that, if they accept the terms of the draft settlement, their applications will be re-assessed under the old, more lenient, regulations.” (National Post, November 18, 2004) In a bygone era, would-be immigrants looked on the chance of a new life as a gift — not baksheesh. Still, Canada remains a land of opportunity for some. In a bygone era this would be a career-finisher. Where else could Denis Coderre skip on to his next bollocks-up while taxpayers dig deep?

Immigration: The Numbers Don’t Lie

1. HIV+ immigrants from endemic countries in provincial surveillance system, 1981-1995 : 2.9%

2. HIV+ immigrants from endemic countries in provincial surveillance system by 1997-98 : 14%

3. HIV infections – recent immigrants of African descent v. Canadians by 2000 : 60 times greater

4. Date the immigration department initiated mandatory HIV screening : January, 2002

5. Number of AIDS cases welcomed to Canada first year screening was in effect : 276

6. Number of AIDS cases welcomed to Canada 2nd year screening was in effect : 677

7. Cost to Canada’s health care system to treat a single HIV patient : $150,000

8. China’s annual HIV/AIDS rate of increase : 40%

9. Immigrants as a proportion of Denmark’s 5.4-million people : 5%

10. Immigrants as a proportion of Denmark’s welfare users : 40% +

11. Immigrants as a proportion of Denmark’s convicted rapists : 76.5%

12. Proportion of Denmark’s immigrants that are Moslem : four-fifths

13. Proportion of Moslem men in Denmark who say they would readily marry a Danish woman : 5%

14. Number of foreigners who marry Canadian citizens in an average year : 20,000

15. Ratio in 1981 – recent immigrants (high percentage of Europeans) married to a Canadian-born spouse : 40%

16. Ratio in 2002 – recent immigrants (high percentage of 3rd worlders) married to a Canadian-born spouse : 16%

17. Proportion of Britons who say they’ve never heard of Auschwitz : 45%

18. Proportion of British women who say they’ve never heard of it : 60%

19. Canadians who say improving aboriginal quality of life should be a high priority : 29%

20. Percentage of Toronto children with 2 parents in the home, Caribbean-born blacks : 38%

21. Percentage of Toronto children with 2 parents in the home, Canadian-born blacks : 39%

31. Number of immigration applications waiting for Canadian processing in 1999 : 379,000

32. Number of immigration applications waiting for Canadian processing today : over 679,000

22. Percentage of Toronto children with 2 parents in the home, English-speaking whites: 69%

23. Percentage of Canadians who say the nuclear family is the “ideal” family arrangement : 58%

24. Percentage of heterosexual (married) couples together for more than 20 years : 50%

25. Percentage of homosexual or lesbian couples together for more than 20 years : 05%

26. Estimated number of visits to Vancouver’s safe injection site over 6 months : 90,000

27. Number of referrals the site made for detox programmes over 6 months: 78

28 Foreign workers granted temporary work visas last year : 82,151

29. Foreign workers granted temporary work visas as strippers : 661

30. Foreign workers granted temporary work visas as cooks : 318

31. Number of immigration applications waiting for Canadian processing in 1999 : 379,000

32. Number of immigration applications waiting for Canadian processing today : over 679,000


1. Health Canada, May 26, 2004

2. Health Canada, May 26, 2004

3. CBC, March 6, 2000

4. National Post, May 13, 2004

5. National Post, May 13, 2004

6. National Post, May 13, 2004

7. National Post, May 13, 2004

8. National Post, November 24, 2004

9. New York Post, August 27, 2002

10. New York Post, August 27, 2002

11. New York Post, August 27, 2002

12. New York Post, August 27, 2002

13. New York Post, August 27, 2002

14. Globe and Mail, November 27, 2004

15. CBC, Becoming a Canadian, 2002

16. CBC, Becoming a Canadian, 2002

17. National Post, December 3, 2004

18. National Post, December 3, 2004

19. National Post, November 23, 2004

20. Globe and Mail, November 24, 2004

21. Globe and Mail, November 24, 2004

22. Globe and Mail, November 24, 2004

23. Globe and Mail, December 6, 2004

24. National Post, December 10, 2004

25. National Post, December 10, 2004

26. Vancouver Sun, December 4, 2004

27. Vancouver Sun, December 4, 2004

28. Globe and Mail, November 27, 2004

29. Globe and Mail, November 27, 2004

30. Globe and Mail, November 27, 2004

31. Globe and Mail, November 3, 1999

32. Hansard, November 24, 2004

Immigration And Environment
“The violent, record-setting rain and hail storm that hammered Edmonton last July 11 [water pressure blew manhole covers into the air] has been named the top Canadian weather story of 2004, [Environment Canada’s senior climatologist, David Phillips, says.] the spectacular Edmonton storm … beat out other events … from several points of view — from economic loss, from the interest in the storm itself, and the moral of the story.’ Mr. Phillips said. The moral, he explained, is that Canadians can expect floods like those in Edmonton and Peterborough to become more common as urban expansion continues to pave over undeveloped land. ‘We’ve created targets,’ he said, adding that rain droplets become ‘flood droplets’ when sewers, underpasses and roads can’t cope with a sudden deluge. By contrast, open prairies farmland or forest, can absorb large amounts of rain without flooding. Developers, city planners and residents need to learn from this type of disaster ‘or suffer the consequences,’ Mr. Phillips said.” (National Post, December 29, 2004) Ottawa appears to be noticeably absent from the list of those who need to learn from this type of disaster: The relationship between immigration and asphalt is irresistible when, as the feds are forever telling us, immigration is the sole factor driving Canada’s population growth — 78 per cent’s worth in Ontario alone between 1991 and 2001. As even Ottawa must know, immigrants continue to make a beeline for Canada’s major cities, and they’re clustering now in the suburbs rather than the downtown areas. Ontario’s “solution” — prohibiting suburban expansion to create Hong Kong-like urban densities — merely concentrates social, sewage and air pollution problems into a highly toxic localized stew. As the Fraser Institute pointed out, Ottawa taxes a married man supporting a stay-at-home wife and two children $4,600 on $50,000 earnings. That same $50,000 representing the combined earnings of a working husband and wife is taxed at $2,100. Conclusion? Whatever you do, you can’t afford kids. At the very least, Ottawa could make minute fiscal concessions to encourage and reassure Canadians, particularly rural and small town Canadians, that they can afford to have children again.

Safe Third Country Abomination
You might have thought the betrayal of the spirit of the Safe Third Country agreement betrayal enough, but that would be to underestimate Ottawa’s genius for mischief. Canadian taxpayers will soon be supporting those (murderers? drug dealers? terrorists?) admitted because they turn up at the border claiming they face serious or life-threatening charges at home, doling out decades worth of charity where unescorted minors are dumped at the US border and admitted to Canada, no questions asked, and, delightfully, paying freight on those who have managed to circumvent the family sponsorship rules, admitted precisely because they have relatives in Canada (relatives who are bound and determined that you won’t see them shelling out to support granny or cousin It). And, as so often happens in matters immigration, the true picture is just that little bit bleaker than our wallets had anticipated: “People who arrive at Canadian border crossings from the United States can still apply for refugee status if they … have relatives who are Canadian citizens, permanent residents, or whose refugee applications are already being processed.” (National Post, December 4, 2004) Get the picture? Because Canada alone has no front end procedure to remove “refugees” making manifestly unfounded claims, we shall henceforward be saddled with, not just the attendant needs and costs of supporting the original claimant over however many years legally finessed stall tactics and appeals processes may be spun out, but every subsequent family member (or purported family member) to arrive in their wake — whether or not that original claim has ever been settled. Approximately 11,000 refugees had been entering Canada at border points each year, and it’s difficult to imagine how this kind of “clamping down” could possibly reduce numbers. (Curiously, the Safe Third Country legislation does not apply to those platinum-class “refugees” launching claims at Canadian airports). “From each according to his (paying) abilities, to each according to his (and his extended family’s) needs.”

Health Watch

Avian Flu Outbreak After Tsunami?
We hope we’re wrong, but one of the long-term effects of Asia’s tsunami may well be to unleash the long-dreaded epidemic of avian flu that has been averted piece-meal on many (Asian) fronts for most of the last decade. Long before rebuilding gets into full swing, Asian priorities will focus on feeding people, and understandably, precautionary regulations may very well be waived in that gargantuan effort gets underway.

In the November issue of the Canadian Immigration Hotline (#169), we stated that, when immigrant/refugee cases are added to criminal cases featuring immigrants/refugees, newcomers and their concerns, they account for 85% of the Federal Court’s caselog. The actual figure is 88%!

Canadian Immigration Hotline Index

Canada First Immigration Reform Committee

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.