Full Update – October 9, 1999 http://www.canadaunderinvasion.com

Where’s the will to stop human smuggling operations when the odious buying and selling of infants merits nothing more than a 5-year slap on the wrist? Of course it’s an immigration issue – which means that no matter how repugnant it seems, we must take it on faith that participants were guided only by the highest humanitarian principles.

Hungarian mom Timea Molnar had a newborn daughter to sell. The buyer, an adoptive parent in the U.S. paid Vancouver lawyer Heather Barnett $2,500 US to facilitate the sale, U.S. authorities say. Now Barnett, 38, has been indicted by a U.S. grand jury on a charge of conspiracy in a complex baby-selling racket.

As many as 40 poor Hungarian women are thought to have sold their babies through the scheme, which ended with the arrest of California lawyer Janice Doezie in Orange county, south of Los Angeles, on Sept 23. She’s charged with nine counts related to smuggling mothers and babies into the U.S. and is free on $100,000 bail. Authorities say moms who were UNABLE TO GET U.S. VISAS CAME TO CANADA and were then slipped across the border. Barnett’s indictment alleges that Timea Molnar came to Vancouver with her baby after Doezie struck a deal in California with the prospective adoptive parents. The adoptive parents were to pay Doezie $10,000 down and another $10,000 on delivery. They were also to pay $2,000 to Molnar after they got the baby.

The indictment says Doezie wrote to Barnett on March 22, 1996, asking her to act for Molnar. On April 16, Barnett phoned Doezie to say the adoptive parent who had arrived in Vancouver could not cross the border because baby Molnar had no visa. “On or about April 16, 1996, from Canada, defendant Barnett’s husband, at defendant Barnett’s direction, drove adoptive parent #8 [no name provided] and the Molnar baby across the border into the United States,” said the indictment. On April 18, it says, Doezie received a message from the adoptive parent that said: “Adoptive parent #8 had made it over the border with the baby girl.” The indictment says that in March 1995, Barnett was paid to facilitate the smuggling of mom-to-be Krisztina Trinacz into the U.S.

The grand-jury indictment against Doezie named Barnett as a conspirator. U.S. authorities would not say yesterday if Barnett picked will be arrested. “According to the indictment, associates of Doezie would recruit women in Hungary,” said a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s office. “Those women, who were either pregnant or had small children, were OFFERED MONEY IN EXCHANGE FOR THEIR CHILDREN. “Doezie is charged with conspiring with Barnett in the scheme.” The mothers have returned to Hungary and are facing charges there. The adoptive parents, who still have the babies, also face charges. If convicted, Doezie faces 70 years in prison.

[For her part in selling human beings] Barnett would face A MAXIMUM OF FIVE YEARS. Barnett, whose office is in the West End, did not return telephone messages yesterday.”

(Vancouver Province, Thursday 7 October 1999)

“Barnett suggested in one case that the Hungarians could slip into the United States by walking along the beach during low tide at dusk. … Barnett’s husband drove a Hungarian baby across the U.S.-Canada border in April 1996, according to the indictment. The baby was offered to an adoptive parent in California for $22,000. The Los Angles Times reported that Hungarian babies fetched as much as $80,000.”

(Seattle Post Intelligencer, Tuesday, October 5, 1999)

“Vancouver lawyer Heather Barnett, indicted by a U.S. grand jury on a charge of conspiracy in an international baby-smuggling scheme, says she’s innocent. “She denies these allegations emphatically,” her lawyer, Michael Bolton, said yesterday. “It’s a total shock to her.”

(Vancouver Province, Friday 8 October 1999)

____________________ Back to the cargo people: notice that in a subtle shift of the power base; it is now most credible when Chinese claim the debate is not about racism

But it seems that cultural differences DO EXIST

What Canadian would “settle” for them working off their servitude in a sweat shop? That SHOULD NOT be a viable “solution” to the boat people problem


Debate over migrants is not about racism

The arrival of boatloads of illegal migrants in the last few months has created tense debate within the Chinese community. Preston Manning’s outspoken words of tough action opened the door for more heated argument and the word “racism” has finally surfaced. Are all those who are opposed to taking in the hundreds of migrants racists? How do we define racism when the Chinese turn against Chinese?

The Chinese community is forced to deal with this controversy when most of us have already formed our opinion. Ninety per cent of the Chinese want the illegal migrants deported. Canadians, even at their worst, are not heartless. Many demonstrate compassion towards the oppressed and the downtrodden. The Chinese in this country, however, tend to be more self-righteous, pragmatic and selfish towards each other. For the Chinese community, the boat people represent an element of disgrace. We are embarrassed that the Chinese bought their ways into this country as criminals. We are embarrassed that they are handcuffed, looked upon as cargo; even the dog found aboard received a better reception. We are ashamed of their lies and despicable behaviour. Some of us are embarrassed because we cannot find it in our hearts to be compassionate and sympathetic towards them.

We would like to see them deported because there is no war, no famine in Fujian and they are not persecuted by the government for their political beliefs. IT IS SAFE TO ASSUME THAT THEY HAVE NO POLITICAL BELIEFS, AS MOST OF THEM ARE ILLITERATE FARMERS.

They left China to pursue dreams of prosperity. For that alone they are willing to risk everything. Their lies and foolish behaviour make almost every Chinese uncomfortable. The exception, perhaps, is Victor Wong who genuinely believes they are persecuted and deserve our help. The Chinese are also uneasy because of the sentiments the boat people have incited. It is a social problem rather than a racial problem.

The boat people are self-made victims who fell prey to smugglers because of greed. One cannot find fault in their ambition to amass wealth; it is, after all, everyone’s ambition in this society. What makes the event so inflammatory is the manner in which they entered the country, the huge burden they have placed us. The fact that they are all Chinese makes it a racial issue. People are angry not because they are racist — they are mad for the reasons that have been repeated many times: human smuggling, queue-jumping, bogus refugee claims and taking advantage of our generous system. It is a system that seems to take care of criminals much more efficiently than those who pass through proper channels.

To wage another war over race will only compound a difficult situation and leave the central issue unresolved. What needs to be done urgently is to reform the cumbersome immigration system. The constitution that entitles everyone entering this country to a hearing and legal counsel must be modified. If one enters the country as an outlaw, our generous law should remain outside his reach. Self-serving lawyers who place tremendous roadblocks, to a speedy solution must be disciplined.

Many Chinese are indignant and many would like to find a safe place to hide until the whole ordeal blows over. It is not so much that we don’t want to be reminded of our humble beginnings; we are not ashamed of a “low” beginning, but we like to think our ancestors did not sneak into this country with the help of a crime boss. On the other hand, some of us feel that this helpless bunch deserve a helping hand. If not for the smuggling ring, they would never have a chance of crossing the ocean to North America, where opportunities abound. Now that they are here, they should be given the opportunity to start new life; ALTHOUGH THEY MAY END UP IN SWEATSHOPS, THEY WILL BE WORKING TO SUPPORT THEMSELVES and those at home. Do we need to ruthlessly slam the door in their faces?

We do not have answer to all the problems, that is what we elect our government to do. And do it they must, for more boats are coming. Dr. Hwee Lim is a Vancouver dentist.

(Vancouver Sun, Tuesday 5 October 1999)


News from the Ethnic Press

These two letters appeared in the Bilingual Forum of Ming Pao


Speaking as a B.C. taxpayer, it is bad enough to have hundreds of uninvited boat people crushing our shore and exploiting all the benefits that Canada offers to genuine refugees. What upsets me more is having Victor Wong of the Association of Chinese-Canadians acting as an “official spokesman,” legitimizing all the boat people’s actions.

As a Chinese immigrant, I have a few points to clarify. The association, with fewer than a handful of people, certainly does not represent the views of most Chinese in B.C., let alone Chinese across Canada. Canada is not a wealthy country, but Canadians would like to do our part to help those fleeing from persecution. I would not like to see Canada’s good and genuine intentions being taken advantage of, nor would I like to see Vancouver or Toronto’s Chinatowns resemble New York’s Chinatown

Several years ago, when I visited New York, I noticed there were thousands of illegal immigrants camped in a vacant park that took up three square blocks. Every day they would set up a marketing booth selling fish, fruits and vegetables. Within this area, everything was very dirty and crowded. Many of these people from Fu-jian do not even speak Mandarin and they mingle only with their own kind.

The only solution is to have China make a commitment to stop all illegal emigration. This would be difficult because corruption is widespread from top to bottom in China and throughout most developing countries. On a longer-term basis, the solution would be to improve government structure, stop one-party rule, replace rule by people with rule of law, and give people more democracy and freedom. These measures would surely dissuade people in China from taking such a life-risking adventure. Michael Zee


Judging from what Prime Minister Jean Chretien recently said about the issue of illegal migrants, it seems that the federal government has no intention of seriously dealing with the problems in Canada’s refugee policy.

The long, drawn-out processing and the inability to deport unqualified refugee claimants are already real headaches. What is more, some claimants denied refugee status after due process are granted immigrant status because “they have been in Canada for a long time.” This amounts to encouraging unqualified claimants to procrastinate.

On the other hand, the definition of refugee is too lax, little short of being ridiculous. There have been cases of women from Middle East countries claiming refugee status on the ground that “there was inequality between the two sexes in their countries” and their applications were approved.

After the federal government has vacillated for some time, the refugee policy finally remains unchanged. I suspect it is partly because the government is intoxicated with Canada being recognized as a “superb, humane country,” but it is more likely that it has been lobbied by immigration lawyers and agencies providing services for immigrants. If the policy is changed, their interests will certainly be damaged. Chak Au

(Vancouver Sun, Monday 27 September 1999)


Bail cancelled for Korean crew of migrant ship UN investigates Canadian facilities

VICTORIA (CP) – Bail was cancelled Thursday in B.C. Supreme Court for five South Korean crew members of the second boatload of Chinese migrants to arrive on the West Coast during the summer. The Crown also suggested outside court that a second review will be sought of bail granted to the four other crew members which was upheld on the first review on Sept. 1.

All nine South Koreans have remained in custody because cash bail was not raised. They are being held on a separate immigration warrant.

… The nine South Koreans are charged with disembarking 131 Chinese from the driftnet fishing boat Ryong Pusan No. 705, contrary to the Immigration Act. Conviction carries a maximum 10 years in prison, $500,000 fine or both. Their preliminary hearing in Victoria provincial court, which will decide if there is evidence for a trial, is set to start Nov. 18. The Chinese were left on a remote beach in the Queen Charlotte Islands in wet weather and only the clothes they were wearing until rescued. The boat turned and headed toward the high seas until it was intercepted by Canadian authorities.

Details given at the two reviews and the two initial bail hearings, as well as the reasons by the four judges, are covered by a DEFENCE-REQUESTED PUBLICATION BAN pending trial.

The decision on Thursday was by Justice Allen Melvin who reviewed the Sept. 3 decision by provincial court Judge Robert Higinbotham to grant $5,000 cash bail to the five South Koreans, who have been characterized as deckhands.



Suzanne Duff’s report is an internal UN document, so no one in the corrections department has seen the contents, Green said. ALL THE FACILITIES where illegal Chinese immigrants have been held or are being held HAVE BEEN INSPECTED BY THE UN, Green said. The 45-year-old Prince George jail, which holds about 200 people, ceased operations in 1996 though it was used briefly for inmates in 1997. It is on the same grounds as a new regional correctional centre.

(Calgary Herald, October 8, 1999)


With Parliament (finally) about to face the opposition on the boat people fiasco, the “installation” of Madame Clarkson is a less than subtle reminder, NOT that anyone can achieve anything as it might in the US, but that back in the late Jurassic era when her family immigrated from Hong Kong – Canada was a “racist” country. Some of Canada’s surviving Hong Kong vets might argue that detention in Japanese PoW camps was something of a “racist” experience in itself. Over many years in many rarified CBC incarnations – Mme. Clarkson’s “race” seemed never to be an issue – until now – and it has evolved into a cudgel. Given her fairy tale career, (Ontario cultural attache to Paris 1982-87) it is difficult to adjust to idea of her as a “victim” – her chronically deprived family includes Senator Vivienne Poy.

“I learned to be a Canadian,” she said in her speech, “through a series of eternally virginal public-school teachers, who treated me only as bright – and not bright yellow.”

(Globe and Mail, October 8, 1999)

At any rate, the important thing is to create a mini-chill whereby the opposition must shuffle into Parliament under a cloud, feeling well and duly ashamed of itself for questioning word one of Canada’s promiscuously degraded refugee policy.


If you thought that recent revelations of KGB archivist Colonel Vasili Mitrokhin concerning the KGB’s role in the FLQ crisis, direct Moscow subsidies to the Communist Party of Canada, and assorted links, leaks, blueprints for sabotage, espionage and spying might embarrass the extreme left into laying off the incessant braying (at least temporarily) – you’re out of luck –

Lurking refugee rhetoric

Although he took a while to find his voice, Reform Leader Preston Manning was the only Canadian politician to offer a constructive proposal for dealing with the boatloads of Chinese migrants who have washed up on Canada’s West Coast. Mr. Manning proposed a policy of automatic detention, followed by a fair but expeditious (within seven days) hearing designed to sort out genuine refugees from opportunistic queue-jumpers. Many Canadians will think his proposal too little, too late, but if you want to know why other politicians kept silent, consider this reaction to Mr. Manning’s suggestions.

In the current issue of Law Times, Professor Dianne Martin of Osgoode Hall Law School in Toronto writes: “I suspect this is intended to guarantee no refugees will ever be accepted, while appealing to THE LURKING THUG in each of us. The part of humanity that takes part in lynchings and supports ideas like slavery and apartheid.”

In contrast to the silence from the Liberal government, the leader of the Opposition makes a modest, eminently sensible proposal to expedite the determination of refugee claims, and for this he is accused of appealing to lurking thuggery and wanting to bring back lynch mobs, slavery and apartheid. Ah, how refreshing to hear the calm, dispassionate voice of the academy. Had Preston Manning made comments half as inflammatory as Ms. Martin’s he would by now have had a visit from the “official straighteners” (C. S. Lewis’ term) at the Canadian Human Rights Commission. Indeed, he might well be facing criminal prosecution for “hate crimes.” But Mr. Manning is white, male, and a Western politician; therefore neither the protections of the law nor the canons of civilized discourse apply to him.

Ad hominem aside, Ms. Martin advances two arguments, both of them spurious. First, she disputes that anyone can possibly know that these recent arrivals are illegal, since no judicial determination of their status has yet been made. To say otherwise is “prejudging” and, according to Ms. Martin, “a civilized country, governed under law, does not prejudge.” No, other civilized countries (the United States, for example, or Australia) send naval gunboats into international waters to turn back the rusting hulks before they ever reach their shores. But perhaps, according to Ms. Martin’s frenzied ideology, the United States and Australia are not “civilized countries”? It would be interesting to know exactly which countries qualify for Ms. Martin’s encomium. In any case, her point is meaningless because Mr. Manning did not propose “prejudging” but rather “expeditious judging,” and surely there is sufficient difference between those two positions to be recognized even at Osgoode Hall.

Although Ms. Martin asserts that we are all know-nothings about the legality of the migrants, we do know something conclusively: We know “absolutely and without any doubt that injustice is done when bureaucratic processing is used to replace due process.” Whatever can she mean? Was it bureaucratic processing to herd the new arrivals to an army base? Was it bureaucratic processing to interview them, to try to separate the (perhaps blameless) dupes from the controlling minds (the “snakeheads”) of international people-smuggling? I have seen no evidence of bureaucratic injustice, and if Ms. Martin is doing more than blowing smoke perhaps she will bring the evidence of bureaucratic injustice to the attention of the authorities.

Second, Ms. Martin complains there has been no reporting about the real villains — “namely the entrepreneurs who will employ them illegally to great profit and the consumers who will use and purchase the products of their indentured labour.” No problem pre-judging prospective future employers without due process. After all, these are capitalists who will seek to turn a profit; and then, of course, we are all guilty because as consumers “we receive the benefits of their misery.”

Mr. Manning objects to migrants who bypass Canada’s immigration laws and this is thuggery. The running dogs of capitalism, who may eventually give these people jobs, are the true villains. And we voracious consumers who keep the capitalist Moloch devouring the indigent are not blameless. After the collapse of the Berlin Wall it used to be said that one could no longer find a Marxist anywhere in the Soviet Union. But Marxist rhetoric survives at Osgoode Hall. Law students of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but your reason! Ian Hunter is professor emeritus in the faculty of law at the University of Western Ontario.

(National Post, Thursday, October 07, 1999)

Speaking of the lynch mob mentality Margaret Thatcher warned on October 7, 1999: “We must pay heed to the implications of an international lynch law which UNDER THE GUISE OF HUMAN RIGHTS now threatens to subvert British justice and the rights of sovereign nations.” But perhaps Ms. Martin knows best.


34 more sent to Prince George

The ranks of illegal Chinese immigrants being held at the Prince George Regional Correctional Centre have grown to 192 after 34 more illegals arrived here Tuesday night.Sheldon Green, a spokesman for B.C. Corrections in Vancouver, said the illegal immigrants were moved here from the Vancouver and Surrey Pretrial Centres to free up space there for ordinary inmates. Illegal immigrants are being held in Prince George and at the Vancouver Island and Alouette River regional correctional centres, he said. Green said Prince George is on the list for more transfers, but for security reasons, information on how many Chinese are being moved, and when or where will be kept confidential until the transfers are complete. Green said he did not know how long the illegal immigrants will be held here in Prince George. In the meantime, existing staff is handling guard duties and work continues on getting a program up and running here soon to train about 25 new guards. Lois Reimer of Immigration Canada in Vancouver said the policy is to continue detaining the Chinese until after their refugee claims are heard. The concern is if they’re released they won’t show up for their hearing, which may not happen until January, she said.

(Prince George Citizen, Thursday, October 7, 1999)


Immigration Canada Joke:

“A passenger on the first boatload of Chinese migrants to hit Canadian waters this summer – who has been detained for two months – may soon be walking the streets after offering a $20,000 bond. … The lawyer said his client told him “relatives” would come up with the substantial sum.”

(Globe and Mail, September 23, 1999)

“Releasing a migrant from detention on a $20,000 bond, which will be forfeited if he does not appear for futher hearings, after he paid smugglers $40,000 to enter Canada illegally seems like a mathematically challenged decision.”

(Globe and Mail, letter)


“This is just the tip of the iceberg. All the numbers aren’t in yet”

The RCMP spent at least $2-million on high-speed boats, helicopters and police dogs chasing down the Chinese migrants who arrived aboard smuggling ships this summer in B.C. These latest figures bring the total bill for receiving the 600 migrants to more than $5-million, an expense shared by four government agencies: the RCMP, Citizenship and Immigration, the Department of Defence and the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

…”This is just the tip of the iceberg. All the numbers aren’t in yet,” said Corporal Grant Learned, spokesman for the RCMP’s E Division in B.C. “This was a major police operation. We weren’t in a position to budget for the bevy of ships coming in.”

… Cpl. Learned said the RCMP and Citizenship and Immigration Canada — which has spent more than $2-million hosting the four boatloads of migrants — will make a joint submission to the Treasury Board to be reimbursed.

[Try not to laugh – the late, unlamented Lucienne Robillard now heads Treasury]

The financial pressures on the 5,500-member B.C. division of the RCMP have been so severe that last year the force grounded its air fleet, docked its boats and banned overtime except in emergencies. Today, the boats are back in the water, but there are still 315 vacancies, and another 200 temporary vacancies on the B.C. force. The B.C. government has been embroiled in a disagreement with Ottawa about the underfunding and accused the federal government of jeopardizing the safety of British Columbians.”

(National Post, October 08, 1999)


… After the second intercepted boat had dumped its cargo of 140 people, a search of the region turned up a cache of blankets and clothing that indicated a previous landing.

Still, notwithstanding the summer flotilla, fully 95% of Canada’s illegal immigrants arrive by plane, a fact long known by the Liberal government. The ships, however, are too obvious to be ignored. Meanwhile, THE SNAKEHEAD CONFEDERATES OPERATING IN CANADA HAVE BEEN UTTERLY IGNORED, although smuggling operations would fail without their onshore preparations.

.. John Thompson, executive director of the Mackenzie Institute, argues that it matters not whether a migrant ship is off-loaded by criminals, or whether Canadian officials do the off-loading for themthe snakehead has completed his mission. “The key is just to get them here,” he says. “After that, the immigrant owes them money or in some cases has already paid them money. Either way, for the snakehead it’s money in the bank.”

… [In Australia] 85% of those who arrive by ships and claim refugee status are rejected. Canada’s rejection rule is 46%.

… Shane Molyneaux, who represents five women detainees from the first ship, said in a Vancouver Sun column that detention “is an attempt to stigmatize and criminalize entire groups of people simply because of the region where they are coming from.” However, an Immigration Department profile of the Fujian migrants notes they are likely to flee before their claims are heard; 70% of all Chinese refugee claimants in Vancouver fail to appear at hearings.

Mr. Mercier, Ms. Caplan’s press secretary, says CANADA HAS NOTHING TO LEARN FROM AUSTRALIA OR THE U.S. “This country has a unique situation,” he says. “We have a Charter of Rights to respect.” Nothing in the Charter, however, prevents Canada from indicting migrant ships in international waters.

The Liberals may brandish the Charter as a kind of talisman, but the public is not appeased, especially in B.C. A Global News poll of 500 British Columbians conducted by McIntyre and Mustel and released September 17 reveals that only 32% believe the boat people should be allowed to claim refugee status, while 57% say they should be deported immediately. Popular opinion is being translated into political action. Last week Reform Party leader Preston Manning demanded that refugee determinations of migrants be concluded within a week of arrival and that failed claimants be deported without appeal. He added that if this is found to contravene the Charter, the notwithstanding clause should be used. Progressive Conservative leader Joe Clark demanded that all migrants should be held in detention. And it is accepted wisdom that the return of Parliament has been delayed until October because the Liberals are deathly afraid of the immigration issue.

And nothing short of profound reform will halt the migrant ships, argues Daniel Stoffman, an Ontario journalist who has written on the immigration question for both the right-wing C.D. Howe Institute and the left-wing Toronto Star. While the Liberals treat the migrant crisis as a supply problem, he considers it a demand problem. “It’s what experts call the ‘pull factor,'” he says. “We have the world’s strongest pull factor for immigration.”

Rejecting accusations of racism, he points out that the Chinese are better represented among immigrants to Canada than any other race. He blames the migrant crisis on the so-called stakeholders: “We have a lot of people who want to come and a big industry here who feed off it. The government listens to the industry; it doesn’t listen to the polls, which call for a more moderate, traditional policy like we used to have in the ’50s or ’60s.” … “When the Immigration and Refugee Board was just getting going, the acceptance rates was 80%, 90%, 70%, compared to 10% everywhere else,” he says. “Now it’s about 50%, still about five times higher than anywhere else.”

Ultimately, however, “Because Canada is not a country of first asylum, it’s really illegitimate for people showing up here to make refugee claims.” For example, “If you’re a legitimate Sri Lankan refugee, you go across the street, which is India.” As he puts it, if your house is burning, you run across the street for safety you do not jump a plane, or sail a boat, to another country thousands of miles away.

… Mr. Thompson doubts the weather will much affect the human cargo trade. “They have access to weather reports just like everyone else,” he says. “They’ll have a good idea where the storms are. So what if people get a little seasick.”

(B.C. Report September 27, 1999)


Immigrants enter Britain ‘sewn into sides of trains’

ASYLUM-SEEKERS are being sewn into the canvas sides of Channel Tunnel freight trains and smuggled into Britain by Italian gangsters. Hundreds of Romanian immigrants, many of them gypsies, are paying as much as £15,000 each to be brought illegally into the country. Immigration officials fear that as many as 200 trains may have already been used by the smugglers. The trade is dangerous, but can be so lucrative that some organised criminal gangs often prefer it to drug running.

The migrants, who begin their journey in Milan, are sewn into the sides of freight trains using “invisible” stitching and are barely able to move during the 48-hour trip to Britain. Once they have reached their destination, they escape by cutting a hole in the ceiling of the train. At least three of them have been badly burnt after touching overhead cables.

Many of the asylum-seekers leave the trains when they arrive in London because they want to join the growing Romanian community in the borough of Brent. Others have travelled as far as Scotland. Immigration officials recently spotted a group of 50 refugees trying to escape from the Willesden freight terminal in north London. Between March and May, officials had to deal with 268 migrants arrested at the terminal.

IN ADDITION TO THEIR PASSAGE, THE IMMIGRANTS ARE GIVEN INFORMATION ON WHAT TO DO ON ARRIVAL IN BRITAIN. A spokeswoman for the National Criminal Intelligence Service said: “Those being smuggled will be sold a package including travel, fraudulent visas and INFORMATION ON HOW TO DEAL WITH IMMIGRATION AUTHORITIES AND ON CLAIMING BENEFITS WHEN THEY ARRIVE. To pay off the cost of the trip, they will be expected to work for tiny wages for jobs arranged for them in restaurant kitchens, as waitresses or even as prostitutes.”

Once the trains arrive in Britain, they are sent to freight terminals across the country. … Inspector Dave Farrelly, a crime prevention officer with the British Transport Police, said: … “ONCE THE PEOPLE HAVE ARRIVED HERE THEY HAVE ACHIEVED THEIR OBJECTIVE. Our concern then becomes a primarily humanitarian one. The worrying thing is that there have been a number of incidents where people smuggled in from Italy have been seriously injured while trying to escape from the trains. Some people have suffered severe burns after coming into contact with the overhead cables and have had to be hospitalised for a number of weeks.”

Insp Farrelly continued: “On some days we have had reports of evidence of three wagons a day being used. But often the only trace of the immigrants is the mess that has been left behind. It is not always possibly to say where they left the train.” Baciu Sorinbaciu, a spokesman for the Romanian embassy in London, said: “We are aware that an increasing number of gypsies are being smuggled into Britain.”

(London Daily Telegraph, October 3, 1999)


With Parliament poised to face our own debacle at last, e-mail, write, phone, fax.

Listed below, members of the House Standing Committee on Immigration. Is it significant that, ALL THREE of the female Liberal persons on the committee were parachuted into selected ridings by the prime minister?

Ditto the Immigration Minister herself, Elinor Caplan.




By an equally strange coincidence, fully eleven of the 28 committee and associate members charting the course of Canada’s immigration policy hail from (of all places) Quebec. Of the eleven, 8 are Bloc Québécois. In other words, at least eight are fully committed, first last and always, to Quebec’s welfare.

With few and notable exceptions, it’s a miasma of favouritism, compromise and partisan politics, but nevertheless, they should be made aware that Canadians want to see some real and enduring changes made to push-me pull-you pot-licking patsy politicking.

CHAIRMAN: Mr. Rey Pagtakhan, Liberal, Winnipeg North–St. Paul first elected Nov. 21, 1988 Telephone:(613) 992-7148 Fax:(613) 996-9125 Email: Benoit.L@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: P.O. Box 300 Mannville, AB, T0B 2W0 Phone: (403) 763-6130 Fax: (403) 763-6132 VICE CHAIR: PARACHUTED CANDIDATE Ms. Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval West, Quebec first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone:(613) 992-2659 Fax:(613) 992-9469 Email: http://www.ci.gc.ca/english/press/96/9614-pre.html MEMBERS: Mr. Mark Assad, Liberal, Gatineau, Quebec first elected November 21, 1988 Telephone: (613) 992-4351 Fax: (613) 992-1037 Email:
PARACHUTED CANDIDATE Ms. Jean Augustine, Liberal, Etobicoke–Lakeshore, Ontario first elected Oct. 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 995-9364 Fax: (613) 992-5880 Email: DeVillers.P@parl.gc.ca toll free line for constituents. 1-800-265-6228 Riding offices: (Orillia) 55 Nottawasaga St. Orillia, ON, L3V 3J5 Phone: (705) 327-0513 Fax: (705) 327-8310 (Midland) 361 King St. Midland, ON, L4R 3M7 Phone: (705) 527-7654 Fax: (705) 527-7668 Mr. Steve Mahoney, Liberal, Mississauga West, Ontario first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 995-7784 Fax: (613) 996-9817 Email: Martin.Pd@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 892 Sergent Ave. Winnipeg, MB, R3E 0C7 Phone: (204) 984-1675 Fax: (204) 984-1676 Equates immigration reform with a “hate crime” Mr. John McKay, Liberal, Scarborough East, Ontario first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 992-1447 Fax: (613) 992-8968 Email: McNally.G@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 32558 McRae Ave. Mission, BC, V2V 2L7 Phone: (604) 826-1592 Fax: (604) 820-5100
Ms. Jocelyne Girard-Bujold, Bloc Québécois, Jonquière, Quebec first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 992-2617 Fax: (613) 992-6069 Email: Leung.S@parl.gc.ca Mr. Réal Ménard, Bloc Québécois, Hochelaga– Maisonneuve, Quebec first elected October 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 947-4576 Fax: (613) 947-4579 Email: Power.C@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 337 Freshwater Rd., Ste. 100 St. John’s, NF, A1B 1C4 Phone: (709) 739-1511 Fax: (709) 739-5895 Mr. Jack Ramsay, Reform, Crowfoot, Alberta first elected October 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 947-4608 Fax: (613) 947-4611 Email: Telegdi.A@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 22 King St. S. Waterloo, ON, N2J 1N9 Phone: (519) 746-1573 Fax: (519) 746-6436
Mr. Claude Bachand, Bloc Québécois, Saint-Jean, Quebec first elected October 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 992-5296 Fax: (613) 992-9849 Email: Bigras.B@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 2105, rue Beaubien Est Montréal, QC, H2G 1M5 Phone: (514) 729-5342 Fax: (514) 729-5875 Mr. Pierre Brien, Bloc Québécois, Témiscamingue, Quebec first elected October 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 996-3250 Fax: (613) 992-3672 Email: Cardin.S@parl.gc.ca Ms. Libby Davies, NDP, Vancouver East, B.C. first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 992-6030 Fax: (613) 995-7412 Email: Earle.G@parl.gc.ca
Ms. Monique Guay, Bloc Québécois, Laurentides, Quebec first elected October 25, 1993 Telephone: (613) 992-3257 Fax: (613) 992-2156 Email: Hardy.L@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 307A Wood Street Whitehorse, Yukon Y1A 2E7 Phone: (403) 668-3030 Fax: (403) 668-3029 Mr. Deepak Obhrai, Reform, Calgary East, Alberta first elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 947-4566 Fax: (613) 947-4569 Email: Sauvageau.B@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 1025, montée Masson, bureau 205 Lachenaie, QC, J6W 5H9 Phone: (514) 961-0300 Fax: (514) 961-0304 Ms. Diane St-Jacques, Conservative, Shefford, Quebec First elected June 2, 1997 Telephone: (613) 992-5279 Fax: (613) 992-7871 Email: Turp.D@parl.gc.ca Riding Office: 83-B Champlain Valleyfield, QC, J6T 1W4 Phone: (514) 377-6633 Fax: (514) 377-2822


It is enlightening to see where Canada’s much vaunted compassion ceases: an awful lot of familiar Liberal names voted AGAINST compensating hepatitis C victims. In other words; we cannot and must not keep OUT foreigners with tuberculosis, AIDS, or leprosy, but we simply REFUSE to compensate our own homegrown victims?


The Hon. Elinor Caplan, Liberal, Thornhill, Ontario Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Telephone: (613) 992-0253 Fax: (613) 992-0887 Email: Caplan.E@parl.gc.ca

“Caplan was one of four women chosen to contest ridings in a contentious March decision that bypassed the usual nomination process.” (CP, June 03, 1997)

The Hon. Allan Rock, Liberal, Etobicoke Centre, Ontario Minister of Health Telephone: (613) 947-5000 Fax: (613) 947-4276 Email: Rock.A@parl.gc.ca

The Hon. Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, B.C. Secretary of State (Asia-Pacific) Telephone: (613) 996-1995 Fax: (613) 996-1560 Email: Chan.R@parl.gc.ca

Be advised that most politicians regard e-mail from voters as unsolicited junk mail which they treat accordingly. Your sentiments may be tallied, but don’t expect a response. A fax is more effective.

Letters are best, particularly if you ask for answers to specific and legitimate questions. Remember, no postage required:

c/o House of Commons Parliament Buildings Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6