Governments at all three levels in Canada should take note of the following immigration news:
(1) A note from a Chinese immigrant about current immigration abuse by Chinese immigrants who are bringing in retired parents under the pretence that the parents are needed to look after the immigrants' children. The real purpose is, within a few years, to get the parents into government-subsidized retirement homes.
(2) A press release from Migration Watch UK which points out that so many immigrants are entering the UK that at least 200 new homes will be required every day of the year for the next 19 years to house them. Migration Watch Chair Sir Andrew Green states that the UK is already the second most densely populated country in Europe and that the flood of immigrants is putting enormous environmental pressures on the country.
(3) A recent report from the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia ( http://www.sustainabilitycentre.com.au/ ) which states that it is a fallacy to think that Australia needs coal-fired plants to supply its electricity. By 2040, the country can transform itself from its current status as the world's highest per capita emitter of greenhouse gases by converting to renewable forms of energy such as geothermal energy, windpower, bioenergy, solar power, etc. By doing so, it would reduce CO2 emissions by 80%. In the longer term, renewable energy could reliably supply 100% of Australia's grid electricity. The barriers to a sustainable energy future are neither technological nor economic, but the political power of the polluters and high immigration.
Dr. Diesendorf also said that Australia's ability to supply its electricity needs will be undermined by high immigration. Australia has to develop a population policy.
In speaking to reporters, Dr. Mark Diesendorf noted that “everyone who comes to Australia as an immigrant is going to increase their greenhouse gas emissions on average so population policy is part of the whole scheme of controlling greenhouse gas emissions”.
“The issue is immigration, particularly immigration of business and professional people. We could have a situation where we increase our immigration of refugees but we would have to put a limit on our professional and business immigrants, which are quite large.” He said the Federal Government should also look at providing more funding for better training and education instead of trying to solve the skills shortage by importing labour.
In the conclusion to the report, Dr. Diesendorf writes: “Growth in demand has to be levelled off, or there will not be enough land for wind and bioenergy. In the long run, this would entail a change in the national economic structure and the stabilization of Australia's population.”
(1) NOTE FROM CONCERNED CITIZEN (CHINESE IMMIGRANT):
What I am very curious about is the many students from China and also Chinese working in Canada who get their retired mothers and fathers here on the excuse that they need a babysitter for their children. Then two or three years later the parents are suddenly living in their own government-paid-for accommodation, and are no longer doing any babysitting plus they receive government welfare or government pension. I think somehow the system must be being abused. The tax payers have to support these people but what contribution are they making to Canada? Perhaps this is all legal and OK. I don't know. …some people have figured out some clever loopholes in our immigration system.
(2) NOTE FROM MIGRATION WATCH UK: March 29, 2007
200 new homes a day needed to house new immigrants
At least 200 new homes will be required every day of the year for the next nineteen years to house England's rapidly growing immigrant population. Government projections just published, and analysed by think-tank Migrationwatch, show that a third of all new households in England will be the result of record immigration levels. This means that 73,000 new homes will be needed every 12 months – or 200 a day.
In the very short term the impact is reduced by the fact that some immigrants are in multi-occupation but Migrationwatch research shows that any such effect is short lived. The Treasury use a higher immigration forecast to determine the nations long-term trend economic growth rate; if their assumption is used the number of houses required rises to 250 per day.
These figures illustrate the enormous impact that current levels of immigration are having on one of the most fundamental aspects of life, said Sir Andrew Green, MigrationWatch chairman. We are already the second most densely populated country in Europe. This massive immigration puts yet more burdens on an already stressed infrastructure and diminishes the quality of life for everyone, particularly in the South East of England.
Indeed a recent report from the Environment Agency quoted in the Guardian (March 19) says “Accelerated development in the south and east of England will stretch the capability of some infrastructure to cope.” They say that the hidden cost of the Government plans to build 1.5m new homes in the South East is some 20bn.
The Migrationwatch report recognises that there are other important factors such as the growth in single households but says that immigration is the only factor which the government can directly influence. The report points out that, if migration to and from England were brought into balance, the need identified in the recent Barker report to build an additional 50,000 houses a year in England would be largely removed.
Furthermore, much of the planned building on greenfield sites would be rendered unnecessary because a much greater proportion of new housing could be built on brownfield sites. The groups report also shows that immigration has had a significant impact on house prices. The annual rate of increase in the housing stock in England in the period 2000 to 2005 has been close to the household formation rates projected in 2000.
So housing plans based on the 2000 projections would have been almost enough to meet demand had it not been for the massive increase in immigration in subsequent years. In fact, net migration rates in this period have been about 85,000 a year more than the rates used in those projections. This will have resulted in household formation rates exceeding additions to housing stock by 40-45,000 a year, thus adding to the pressure on house prices.
There could hardly be a better example of the failure of joined up government. Immigration has been massively expanded with no comparable increase in housing provision. The economic benefit to the host population is, at best, marginal. But the cost to our quality of life is very considerable, said Sir Andrew.
(3) ARTICLE FROM “THE AGE” IN MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA:
Renewed hope for renewables, but not business migrants
The Age (Melbourne)
April 2, 2007
HALF of Australia's electricity could be supplied through renewable energy by 2040, according to a report that also recommends limiting Australia's immigration in order to deal with our greenhouse gas emissions.
The report, to be released today by Mark Diesendorf, director of the sustainability centre at the University of New South Wales, states that a combination of renewable energy sources could power all of Australia's grid electricity in about 40 years without having to resort to brown coal or nuclear power.
Dr Diesendorf hoped the report, The Base Load Fallacy, would “blow open the myth that renewables were unable to provide Australia's base load electricity needs”, saying a mixture of bio-energy, solar thermal, geothermal and wind power could provide the answer.
“Some opponents of renewable energy are claiming that renewable energy cannot provide base load electricity but it is a myth put out there by the coal and nuclear industries,” he said.
“After 2050 there could be a situation where the vast majority if not all of Australia's electricity comes from renewable sources. Maybe 20 per cent from wind, maybe 20 per cent from bio-energy, maybe 30 or 40 per cent from solar thermal electricity and solar photovoltaic as well as some from geothermal.”
Dr Diesendorf said the Federal Government should also look at implementing a population policy and cap the number of business migrants.
“Australia has the world's highest per capita emissions of greenhouse gases and everyone who comes to Australia as an immigrant is going to increase their greenhouse gas emissions on average so population policy is part of the whole scheme of controlling greenhouse gas emissions,” he said.
“The issue is immigration, particularly immigration of business and professional people. We could have a situation where we increase our immigration of refugees but we would have to put a limit on our professional and business immigrants, which are quite large.”
An increased population would also limit the amount of land needed for wind farms and bio-energy if they were to provide enough energy to be able to phase out coal-fired electricity.
He said the Federal Government should also look at providing more funding for better training and education instead of trying to solve the skills shortage by importing labour. Dr Diesendorf said Australia needed to move past the cost argument if it was to significantly cut its greenhouse gas emissions.
Dr. Mark Diesendorf's “The Base-Load Fallacy” (6 pages and very readable) is available at the following links:
http://www.sustainabilitycentre.com.au/ or www.energyscience.org.au
Dr. Diesendorf can be contacted at firstname.lastname@example.org