True Confessions And Truly Olympian Resolutions For 2010

In this bulletin, we imagine that we have overheard different individuals and groups confessing their immigration sins and promising to restore sanity to Canadian immigration policies. We present their confessions and their Olympian resolve to change.



(1) From Federal Politicians : “We confess that we have supported a perversion of Canada's traditional immigration policy. That traditional policy, in effect from the 1920's to 1990, was a “Canadians First” policy. The current policy which began in 1990 and which we have supported is a virtual “Canadians Last” policy. When the current policy was introduced by the Progressive Conservatives in 1990, its purpose was to pursue the immigrant vote. It abandoned the traditional policy of protecting Canadians and introduced high immigration levels so that new immigrants would regard the Progressive Conservatives as their friends. Since then, high levels have become virtually institutionalized. We confess that all parties now support the policy despite the fact that this abnormality has marginalized Canada's border controls, the job prospects of Canadians, the protection of our environment and the general interests of the mainstream population. By placing our electoral interests and the interests of immigrants before those of Canadians, we have become like Canada's immigration industry. Canada's post-1990 immigration policy has brought in over 5 million people, most of whom Canada did not need. We confess that this was a very serious mistake. We will lead a movement to take back Canada from the immigration industry.

“We will implement immigration policies that will dramatically reduce immigration levels for the indefinite future in order to compensate for the blunder of the past 20 years. By doing so, we hope to dramatically reduce unemployment among Canadians. We will continue to have some immigration, but it will be very limited. We will do our part to help internationally. But we will recognize that Canada cannot be a job-finding agency for the world's unemployed.

“We will also recognize that the legendary 'better life' for immigrants can often mean a 'worse life' for Canadians. We will abolish Employment Equity for visible minority immigrants and their offspring, recognize that there was no justification for this programme, calculate the job displacement it has caused for many Canadian-born, and compensate for it. Finally, we confess that bringing in large numbers of immigrants in any recession is a clear demonstration of a 'Canadians Last' policy.”

(2) From Provincial Politicians: “We confess that we have pressured for perpetual de-regulation of federal immigration rules (as U.S. business institutions successfully lobbied for disastrous de-regulation of the U.S. financial system). We will now admit that there is a need for a strongly-regulated national immigration policy. We will make strong efforts to have the national Minister of Immigration show some backbone in developing one. We will recognize that the resources that we administer are finite and that the philosophy of extracting them quickly and of importing foreign labour to do so will lead to population increases that our remaining resources can never support. Although the federal gov't, not Provincial gov'ts, has the ultimate say in approving Temporary Foreign Workers (TFW's), we know most TFW's are low-skilled and that employers are using the programme to import cheap labour. We are abetting this scam by allowing employers to bring in employees through out Provincial Nominee Programmes. According to our Auditor General, Canada allowed almost 370,000 Temporary Foreign Workers into this country in 2008.This is more than Canada brings in through its regular immigration programme. Since we are much closer to the job markets in our provinces, we concede that we have been aware that the Temporary Foreign Worker programme was being abused and is out of control. We also suspected that this was, for a number of employers, a license to commit outright fraud. We should have communicated our serious concerns to Ottawa. We bear considerable responsibility for the abuse of the TFW and PNP programmes.”

(3) From Municipal Politicians: “We confess that we have often used the excuse that we, as a third level of government, are powerless to change immigration policies. We have done that because we lazily accepted the simplistic idea that more people would mean more municipal tax revenue and better communities. We confess also that we didn't have the courage to stand up against the federal government's corrupt immigration policy. We have seen that even though our populations and tax bases have increased, we continue to cut services and increase taxes. Most embarrassing, we see our homeless numbers continue to rise. We believed that we could keep increasing our population indefinitely, but we are becoming crowded, polluted and grid-locked. We now concede that there are limits to our carrying capacity. We cannot reduce our footprint if we keep adding new feet. We will use our influence with federal and provincial politicians to demand that the immigration tsunami be stopped. We will cease proclaiming the nonsense that we have become enriched and vibrant because of mass immigration.”

(4) From Mayors Who Attended the Copenhagen Conference, Particularly Toronto Mayor David Miller: “We confess that it is hypocritical for us to pressure Ottawa for a strong Canadian environmental commitment when we have cheerled significant ecological destruction in our municipalities for many years by unquestioningly supporting mass immigration. We have elevated nonsense such as diversity and multiculturalism above environmental concerns. We will get our priorities right.”

(5) From School Boards: “We confess that the immigration industry has duped us into passively accepting a gross abnormality in our immigration history. As guardians of a system that should have given our youth great pride in Canada, many of us have complied with federal multiculturalism policies which have tried to erase Canadian history or to emphasize only the so-called injustices. Many of us were not even aware of a 1990 major change in Canada's immigration policy. We have merely repeated the statements of federal politicians whose parties have institutionalized high immigration levels. We have allowed these people to condition and intimidate us. Some of us have been so conditioned that we like to present ourselves as great humanitarians who look after newcomers. In reality, we have ignored the interests of Canada. We occupied virtual ground zero when the mass immigration flood began and we should have raised concerns. We could have done so by encouraging our teachers to promote discussion of whether high immigration in times of high unemployment made sense, of whether the difference in numbers between current and past immigration was a cultural concern and a form of colonization, and of whether environmental limits existed to mass immigration, etc. But most of us gave in to peer pressure and did almost none of these important things. In fact, most of us have cheerled the flood. We will reform.”

(6) From Academics in Our Universities and Colleges: “We confess that we could have researched a large number of immigration-related issues which questioned immigration policies. By doing so, we could have led some much-needed public discussion of the effects of mass immigration. However, we have chosen to devote our efforts only to those safe topics that promoted the immigration status quo. We have done this because we knew that we could easily get grants for such projects. We have been weak and politically correct. We will get our act together.”

(7) From Our Environmental Organizations: “We have pretended to be the protectors of the environment, but almost all of us have refused to state that immigration is a serious environmental issue. In many cases, we have accepted money from corporations in exchange for not speaking up about the environmental consequences of immigration. By acting in these ways, we have undermined any of the good that we may have done in the past. We will restore honesty to our movement.”

(8) From Ethnic Groups: “We confess that increasing our numbers so that we can eventually challenge the political power of the current mainstream majority is a dangerous game which will result in serious future civil conflict. In return for fair treatment, we will accept minority status and cease to lobby for continued mass immigration. We will co-operate in bringing to justice the large numbers of those among us who have committed fraud and we will work to have those people removed.”

(9) From Our Labour Movement: “We have a proud tradition of defending the interests of Canadian workers. About 125 years ago, we were major supporters of measures such as the Chinese Head Tax whose purpose was to prevent cheap Chinese labour from entering Canada. Not long after, we supported measures to stop exploitive American labour and the importing of impoverished, cheap UK labour. We also worked to restrict low-wage Japanese and East Indian labour. We were instrumental in institutionalizing Canada's “TAP ON–TAP OFF” immigration policy which started in the 1920's and continued to 1990. In the time since 1990, we confess that we have been cowed by the immigration industry. We have abandoned our tradition of protecting Canadian workers. Our priority has been to increase our membership by recruiting recent immigrants. That was a serious mistake. We now concede that supporting high immigration for the past two decades has contributed significantly to the stagnation of real wages in Canada. We will do all we can to return to our traditional policy and to stop mass immigration.”

(10) From The CBC : “Of all the media, we (with notable exceptions) have grovelled the most on the immigration issue. We confess that we have betrayed Canada by turning Canada's publicly-owned broadcaster over to Canada's private immigration industry. We have been lazy about our true responsibilities to Canada but fervent in our efforts to propagandize for the immigration industry. One of our favourite techniques is to present Canadian history as if it were an endless tale of white people's sins. Our presentations are almost always sloppily researched, but that has been irrelevant to us. We have always implied with great moral certainty that Canada's majority population has no right to raise concerns about high immigration levels or to any immigration policy that puts immigrants first. We have done an enormous amount of economic, cultural and environmental damage to Canada. Our institution deserves to be thoroughly cleansed. Starting immediately, we will begin to show respect for the Canadian public who pay for our existence, but whom we have treated with contempt. We will co-operate in documenting the propaganda work we have done for the immigration industry and we will present our record to the hands that have fed us for so many years.”