Bank Profits Promote The Cultural Make-Over Of Canada

This bulletin was written by B.C. environmentalist, Tim Murray.



In a recent news item, Hong Kong's chief executive proclaimed that his city's optimum population was 10 million. Hong Kong's population is currently 7 million. Its area (about 1000 Sq. km.) is about one-third that of Metro Vancouver. It is already a congested area.

Is it any wonder then that Canadian arguments against growth and increasing population density find less and less receptivity in a Canadian culture that is being re-made in the image of Hong Kong and other places by the vast influx of people from those areas in the last two decades? How can we break through the consciousness of people who, coming from Hong Kong (or Singapore, or a dozen other sardine cans) see urban Canada as spacious, immensely affordable and even laid-back?

Bluntly put, many Asian immigrants, like Hong Kong's chief executive, lack a conservation ethic, an outlook that in Germany or Britain, for example, has been cultivated and transmitted by a long-standing cultural tradition of nature appreciation. The most aggressive out-reach policies by conservation and environmental groups have, so far, not recruited many Asian immigrants. These people are largely invisible on hiking trails, provincial wilderness camp sites or in rural Canada in general. Their outstanding contribution to our society in other areas—their work ethic, their cuisine, their commitment and investment to education, their respect for teachers and scholarship, their academic achievements, their prominence in so many professions, their introduction of new medical treatments and so forth, in my judgment, does not defray this disturbing cultural deficit or the ecological impact of their numbers.

The Metro Vancouver of four decades ago consisted of a Chinese population of around 5%. According to Census figures, now it is close to 20% and the Chinese continue to make up a vastly disproportionate slice of the incoming 40,000 immigrants that land at Vancouver International Airport each year. In less than a decade, they and other Asians will comprise 12% of our national population, concentrated more or less in 5 major cities, magnifying their political leverage. More and more, immigration policy is being customized for them. Although the Royal Bank, Scotia Bank and other major credit institutions say they like multicultural mass immigration, they are really saying that they prefer Asian mass immigration. Their policy for Canada is the inverse of a White Australia policy.

Why do the banks have this policy? The answer is that they are not only trying to capture the patronage of an emerging new client base, but are also promoting a larger base as well. While they are setting up branch offices all over parts of Asia to develop customer loyalty among prospective immigrants to Canada, they are lobbying Ottawa to jack up immigration levels beyond even their now stratospheric heights. Although Canada has the highest population growth rate in the G8, Royal Bank Chairman Gordon Nixon has publicly called for up to a 400,000 immigrant a year intake, 150,000 above the current regular immigrant inflow. In many parts of Canada, the current intake has already converted farmland to subdivisions at an alarming rate. But Nixon and other big bank CEO's make their outrageous proposals because they realize that these people out-save people of rival cultures and commit to high mortgages which they can be trusted to pay off. This is a self-interested scheme and its victim is Canada and the Canadian population.

To cover their flanks, the Royal Bank has draped itself in green colours, implementing green living practices in its own buildings and supporting similar cosmetic changes outside them by making influential donations to key environmental groups like the David Suzuki Foundation and Nature Conservancy. The TD bank and Canada's largest credit union, Vancouver City Savings, have made equivalent donations to the Sierra Club. By amazing coincidence then, no environmental NGO has complained about immigrant-driven or even Canadian-born population growth encouraged by environmentally irresponsible child benefits from government, The smart land-use policies that they advocate are supposed to render all growth ecologically benign. This is a convenient, but intellectually dishonest position. Smart growth measures of this kind will NEVER have their proclaimed effects—in spite of the claims of local governments that are responsible for such planning. That is because many municipal councils are bought and paid for by developers .

In Canada, the dominoes fall like this: (1) Big Banks and the real estate industry > (2) mass immigration selectively drawn from certain regions, but showcased as a policy of cultural diversity > (3) hush money to the environmental NGOs > and (4) a growing political constituency that supports this demographic shift.

How can we make voters connect the dots? How can we expose the vile corruption of the environmental movement? We need a media forum and impartial journalism. We are not getting it, especially from Mother Corp, CBC Pravda, the voice of our secular theocracy of multicultural growthism. I can see the ghost of the UK's Jack Parsons (described as the Thomas Malthus of the new millennium) shaking his head in commiseration and frustration. If, as he stated, there was a Treason of the BBC (the BBC's refusal to broadcast information on the population issue) , there is certainly treason in the CBC. And Australians can certainly locate treason in their ABC. State broadcasting offers much promise and potential, but it is a double-edged sword that has proven to be a lethal weapon for growth-promoting propaganda, always couched in the vocabulary of diversity.

One high profile Canadian environmentalist, a national celebrity, confided to me that he was worried that soon this demographic reality will push immigration debate beyond a tipping point where no politician can afford to advocate shutting the door to mass immigration of the catastrophic scale that we have suffered since 1990. Trouble is, we have no immigration debate of any great scope. And it may only come when a number of foreign-born Canadians realize that an unsustainable population level makes their quality of life more miserable than can be offset by dwelling in the congenial comfort of their own self-contained ethnic colonies. They are the nearly 20% of Canadians that form the demographic tail that wags the Canadian dog, and the tail is getting bigger. Native North Americans, native Hawaiians and so many other indigenous peoples of the world have seen this movie before. I think it is called Silent Takeover, Silenced Resistance.

It doesn't have to be this way.



(1) Jack Parsons , author of several population-related books including “Human Population Competition : A Study Of The Pursuit Of Power Through Numbers”, “The Treason Of The BBC” . (According to Ray Thomas—of the UK's Open University—who wrote the obituary for Jack Parsons, “The Treason of the BBC” deals with the BBC's neglect of the population issue in spite of its own guidelines which, notably, specify that “No significant strand of thought should go unreported”.)

(2) For details on the David Suzuki Foundation/RBC scandal, see : (Note Suzuki's “Nature Challenge List” list, compliments of Wikipedia, which includes such trivialities as “Eat meat-free meals one day a week” and “Reduce home energy use by 10%”, but no mention of much larger issues such as immigration reduction , population reduction or population stabilization.)

(3) For details on the 'RBC Submission To The Competition Policy Review Panel' where the Royal Bank of Canada asked for Ottawa to increase immigration intake levels up to 400,000 immigrants annually, see page 14 of$FILE/Royal_Bank_Canada.pdf

(4) For details on RBC's and RBC Dominion Securities' contributions to The David Suzuki Foundation , see the David Suzuki Foundation's annual reports for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007: