Alright.
Into the first week of the campaign, and Michael Ignatieff has betrayed his ignorance (or his dishonesty) again.
As blogged earlier this week, the Liberal Plan to increase corporate taxes to "save money" will, in fact, do the opposite. It will result in a net loss of tax dollars.
Well, today we see Ignatieff stumbling again, this time respecting immigration.
In his most recent ads and announcements, Ignatieff suggests that the government should be admitting more immigrant parents and grandparents under the family reunification program, clearly suggesting that the Harper Government is anti-immigration.
The problem betrays Michael Ignatieff's ignorance in two major respects:
a) He is lying when he suggests the Harper Government is anti-immigration; and
b) He is just wrong when he suggests that it would be good policy to increase the "sponsorship" of parents and grandparents as immigrants.
First point.
a) The Harper Government Supports Immigration
The Harper government has, in fact, increased immigration generally, continuing a broad trend of increased immigration over the last decade. As reported in the China Daily this past May, "The data showed that Canada admitted 252,124 permanent residents in 2009, well within the government's planned range of 240,000 to 265,000 new permanent residents for the year, and about 30,000 higher than the average annual intake in the 1990s." Canada has admitted 3.5 million new immigrants to our country in the last 15 years. Think about that for just a moment. Our current population is approximately 34 million people. Over 10% of our population are immigrants admitted in the last 15 years. Does that seem like a government hostile to new Canadians?
In fact, between 1994 and 2004, Canada had the highest net immigration rate of all G8 member countries.
So.
On the first point, Ignatieff is either ignorant of the basic facts that a 5 minute "Google" could disclose, or the master of "ethics" is, well, just being dishonest.
b) Increasing "Family Reunification" Immigration is bad policy and will hurt Canadians
Today's Vancouver Province reports the completely misleading headline that "Ignatieff promises to reverse cuts to Immigration", implying that the Harper Government is cutting immigration rates. Which, as indicated above, is patently false. In fact, the Harper Government has attempted to increase the admission of new working immigrants, but to put limits on "Family Reunification" Immigration.
What is that?
Well, it's allowing people to immigrate who do not possess the ability to establish that they can support themselves - primarily parents and grandparents of new immigrants.
Does that seem harsh?
Well, consider that the most daunting challenge of our time will be managing sky-rocketing health care costs.
In October of this past year, the Canadian Institute of Health Care Information reported that total health care spending in Canada will reach $192 BILLION dollars this year, amounting to $5,614 per person.
Now also consider that when a person agrees to "sponsor" their family member - what they are talking about is assisting them with food and shelter. Not paying their share of a burgeoning health care budget.
And also consider that when we are talking about admitting older immigrants - we are talking about admitting people who, on average, cost significantly more than the average Canadian respecting health care:
Among seniors, per capita spending jumped to :So, then.
- $5,589 for those aged 65 to 69
- $7,732 for those 70 to 74
- $10,470 for those 75 to 79
- $17,469 for those 80 and older (CBC Report, Nov. 19,2009)
A new immigrant who is permitted to bring his parents and grandparents into the country will be adding $55,878 to our health care costs each year of their lives. Are we going to ask that THOSE costs be covered in their sponsorship? No.
No one is talking about denying all family reunification applications, but the Harper government is talking about maintaining and even increasing working immigrants, but controlling the pace of admission of immigrants who cannot pay their own way and who, with respect, will rely on the tax payer for their care.
Ignatieff's suggestion that we do not do this is just another example of Liberal extravagance with your tax dollars, and it's wrong.
So - as the campaign continues, we see, more and more, the very distinct differences between the "stay the course" efforts of the Conservative government and the tax and spend policies of Michael Ignatieff.
The choice is yours.
3 comments:
Nice post. Some very useful information to club lying, deceitful, ethically and economically challenged Liberal deadbeats with.
I suspect most Canadians would not agree with this either, but the one's who do support increased family re-unification are more likely to have it as a major issue for them while those who oppose it, it likely ranks far down their list in terms of priorities and won't have much impact on how they vote, thus the reason. It may not be good policy or even popular, but it is good politics and when it comes to winning elections often good politics trumps everything else.
I'm an immigrant myself and I do have issues with the family re-unification slow down.
I do accept the point that our parents will likely cost the Canadian tax payer health dollars. It's a matter of timelines. Right now, it takes more than a decade to bring our parents to Canada. A decade is a long time. We would not have trouble with, say 5 years, and we are entirely sympathetic to income requirements (which we must provide) in order to bring our parents here, to show that we pay taxes (and sufficient taxes -- we immigrants, as a population, pay far, far more than what our parents are likely to cost).
Also, this isn't a decade after we come to Canada. This is a decade after we turn Citizen of Canada, itself a process that can take many years, a decade if we begin as students (as many of us do). Give a few years to establish ourselves, and we're looking at twenty odd years being separated from our parents (our grandparents probably won't make it).
I find that kind of waiting cruel.
Canada has become the vibrant country it is, economically and otherwise, because of immigrants. I believe that denying modern immigrants reunification with our family is to seriously harm one of the foundations of Canadian prosperity.
Consider a country like China, with its single born policy. Chinese immigrants (and I was also born in China)e, do not have siblings in China to support our parents in their old age. If a separate clause can open legally for single-child families, or proof that our parents are unduly suffering in our home countries because of our absence, I would be most pleased.
I disagree with Ignatieff on a lot of things, but I take serious issue with the Conservative stand on this one. Yes the Conservatives have increased immigration over time, skilled immigrants (people just like Ignatieff!), so I won't suggest Harper is anti-immigrant -- but if we are to believe that a host country appreciates us and welcomes us into a new home (as opposed to have a permanent feeling of guesthood), then policies like family reunification very seriously matter.
Immigrants simply hope that our host countries do not merely consider us in terms of dollars and cents. We do not wish to be brought in simply to maximize the tax-base of a country -- we don't resent that, we understand it, but not MERELY for that purpose.
Post a Comment