Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Categories: Capital Read, Inkless Wells

The times, they are a changin'

by Paul Wells on Thursday, July 16, 2009 4:00pm - 67 Comments

Windsor Star, Sept. 24, 2007:

With at least 25 new arrivals from Florida’s illegal immigrant population claiming refugee status at the Windsor/Detroit border over the weekend, local politicians are stepping up the campaign to have the federal government take action to stem the flow.

Federal New Democrat MPs and local Liberal members of the provincial legislature have added their voices to a chorus led by Mayor Eddie Francis, demanding the Conservative government do something about the sudden influx of hundreds of Mexicans claiming refugee status here….

MPs Joe Comartin (NDP — Windsor-Tecumseh) and Brian Masse (NDP — Windsor West) have written a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, federal Minister of Immigration Dianne Finley and Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier, asking that the government take action to help the city with the financial strain of hosting the claimants.

In addition, they are requesting the Department of Foreign Affairs meet with U.S. authorities to demand action be taken to discourage the northern migration, through a public information, advertising and media blitz aimed at correcting misleading information among illegal aliens in the U.S. that Canada is open to them.

“We’re supposed to be good neighbours,” said Comartin, referring to apparent U.S. indifference to the situation. “They scream about us being lax about security on our side. It’s hypocritical to not try and prevent people from leaving the U.S. with no rights to status in Canada.”

NDP communiqué, today:

OTTAWA – The number of Mexican tourists visiting Canada in May dropped by 25 percent from a year earlier, an alarming decline that will only accelerate because of the new visa requirements imposed this week, said New Democrat Industry and Border Critic Brian Masse.

“Mexicans spend over $300 million a year in Canada, and yet this government chose the height of tourist season to impose new rules on Mexican visitors,” said Mr. Masse. “Mexico one of the top six countries whose residents vacation in Canada. This is yet another example of how the Harper Conservatives have failed to help the struggling tourism industry in Canada.”

Masse and Comartin’s 2007 letter to the prime minister, which was provided to me by a government source, said the influx of “hundreds and potentially thousands of Mexican nationals” making refugee claims “has the potential to become a nation-wide problem at all border crossings.” Masse and Comartin said it was “crucial that in cooperation with American authorities that the Canadian goverment conveys the message that Mexican economic refugees will not be allowed to stay in Canada.” It did not call for visa requirements for all Mexican visitors. Still, the tone — outrage in every circumstance — is familiar.

Tags: Brian Masse, Joe Comartin, le flip le flop, Mexican visas

More by Paul Wells

http://intensedebate.com/people/M_to_the_T M_to_the_T

indeed it does seem ill-timed but we all know the CC only cares about the evangelical (racist) base.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/M_to_the_T M_to_the_T

indeed it does seem ill-timed but we all know the CPC only cares about the evangelical (racist) base.
Two Hats

More to the the point, visa requirements won't stop the problem decribed in the 2007 letter, since anyone who can make it to a land border crossing can claim refugee status, regardless of whether their paperwork is in order.
So there's a possibility that the NDP's outrage at both circumstances, while annoying, is not hypocritical. How many Mexican refugee claimants arrive by air instead of over the US border? Does the Conservatives visa strategy really solve a problem that is worth solving, considering the collateral cost? (Indeed, has anyone published a cost/benefit?)

Mulletaur

If they are Mexican nationals and they have no visa, the Yankees are not supposed to allow them to present themselves at the Canadian side of a land border crossing – they have exit controls (we don't). That's why Comartin says "It’s hypocritical to not try and prevent people from leaving the U.S. with no rights to status in Canada.”

herringchoker

The US has exit controls? That's news to me. They must be very new because they didn't have any as recently as March when I crossed back from Maine.

Mulletaur

They exercise them at airports and some land crossings, particularly those in Southern Ontario.

Mike514

Are you suggesting evangelical is synonymous with racist? Or are you trying to distinguish the racist evangelicals from the rest of the evangelicals? Just so we're clear.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

Are you sure you're posting to the right thread?
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

The new visa requirements seem like overkill, but I'm not sure what else the government could have done to deal with the flow of Mexican refugee claimants.

The solution proposed by Comartin and Masse in 2007 seems a bit silly. There are more than six million illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States, and only a tiny fraction of these (0.17%) have tried their luck in Canada. I'm not sure that a US government "public information, advertising and media blitz aimed at correcting misleading information among illegal aliens" would be very effective at reaching these individuals.

the Mexican "economic refugee" demographic conduct a "public information, advertising and media blitz aimed at correcting misleading information among illegal aliens".

Mulletaur

What misleading information ? You come to Canada, you say the magic word "refugee" and you get social assistance for two years until your claim is finally dealt with. Oh, and if you're smart, you work at the same time under the table. Then you go back to where you came from and have enough to buy a house if you've saved all your dough.

Please don't be so naive, CR – advertising would just raise the numbers of people trying to come across the border.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Please don't be so naive, CR – advertising would just raise the numbers of people trying to come across the border.

Huh? That's not my idea. It was proposed by Comartin and Masse. I was criticizing it.

Mulletaur

Sorry, my mistake.

http://www.intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

The new visa requirements seem like overkill, but I'm not sure what else the government could have done to deal with the flow of Mexican refugee claimants.

The solution proposed by Comartin and Masse in 2007 seems a bit silly. There are more than six million illegal Mexican immigrants in the United States, and only a tiny fraction of these (0.17%) have tried their luck in Canada. I'm not sure that a US government "public information, advertising and media blitz aimed at correcting misleading information among illegal aliens" would be very effective at reaching these individuals.
wilson

If you do the math, the problem is worth solving.

'Bogus refugee claims are costly–Kenney says processing just one claim sets Canadian taxpayers back $29,000.'

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/visa+rules+make…
http://intensedebate.com/people/M_to_the_T M_to_the_T

I'm not suggesting it – I'm saying it.

Getting tough with Mexicans and gypsies plays straight to that base.

Conservative religious loons are the base of the current CPC – no one else could possibly support their policies – not fiscal conservatives, not libertarians, not red tories.

Sorry buddy I call it like i see 'em – perhaps if the McVety's et al of the world would not seek armageddon, had not started prohibition based upon their racist hatred of Mexicans and uhh "Jazz" musicians (dem darkies)- hey hey hey – perhaps if that was acknowledged I would not be so quick to flip.

But yeah okay I'll be better – migraine day, today.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

You'll have more than a migraine when your IP is blocked for throwing around cheap accusations like that. Smarten up. Last warning.
Wayne

You do realize that you sound crazier than those so called religious loons you are ranting about don't you – or – you can't see it .. there is an old saying point your finger at someone and you have 3 pointing right back at you!!! think about it – try it – point at someone and look at your hand.
http://intensedebate.com/people/robert_mccl6309 Robert McClelland

Isn't that about the same cost as one round of ten percenters? Why don't the Cons stop sending those out and divert the money to processing the refugee claims.
Wayne

don't forget that when they arrive they have been advised to lawyer up and then appeal every decision for god knows how many years and in the meantime we pay shelter, mediacl etc etc etc – good grief where do I sign up?
Orson Bean

This is quite a revelation to me — apparently something like 35% of Canada's population is made up of conservative religious loons. Who knew?
http://intensedebate.com/people/M_to_the_T M_to_the_T

is anybody here saying this does not play well with a racist base?

that racism was not behind Prohibition? That an Evangelical did not start Prohobition and evangelical leadership has for decades kept up pressure and supplied political support to continue the destructive policy of Prohibition?

These are historical facts whether you are comfortable discussing them or not.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/M_to_the_T M_to_the_T

is anybody here saying this does not play well with a racist base?

that racism was not behind Prohibition? That an Evangelical did not start Prohibition and that the evangelical leadership has not for decades kept up pressure and supplied political support to continue the destructive policy of Prohibition?

These are historical facts whether you are comfortable discussing them or not.
Two Hats

That editorial states that 9000 mexicans made claims in 2008. The text implies most of these were in the US illegally, so presumably they presented themselves at a land border crossing. (If someone has a breakdown of these claims, split between land borders and airports, please post it!).
Over 270 000 Mexicans visited Canada in 2008 (http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/66-001-p/2008012/t00… Using the NDP's $300 million, they spend on average $1100 each. Maybe 2/3 came directly from Mexico (typically, about 1/3 of non-US foreign visitors in 2008 arrived here through the US; we could expect that proportion to be higher for Mexico but I have no better estimate). How many of these 180 000 visitors made refugee claims? The visa requirement discourages all 270 000 from visiting, but it will only affect a small portion of the potential refugee claimants (those arriving by air). I'm just going to guess that 50% of the 9000 claimed at land borders. If so, that means one in 60 mexican visitors might be a claimant affected by the visa requirement.
If everyone is equally discourage to visit by the requirement, we're turning away 60*$1100 = $66 000 for every $29 000 claim we stop.
So I'm not convinced the problem is worth solving.
(If someone has better data, I'm open to arguments.)
http://intensedebate.com/people/Inkless Inkless

M_to_the_T will not be commenting on Maclean's blogs again. Hey, folks? I mean what I say.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

I didn't appreciate his comments either, but why block them? Everyone can see them for what they are.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Ed_Sweeney Ed_Sweeney

If you let a public forum go totally unmoderated it quickly degenerates. Have a look at unmoderated forums. From what I have seen Macleans is extremely good with the lattitude they provide. I am glad Paul blocked him, in this case.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

ban/don't ban, your blog, your call. and, frankly i don't care. i do note though that i have seen a boatload of comments smear all libs as 'crooks', etc etc without this overt corrective, no?

Stephen

Try the new Paul Wells diet: Apples and Oranges only!
http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Curious that the only person to use a racist word here, darkies, is comfortable smearing others for their supposed racism. I think MTTT is projecting his beliefs onto others.
http://intensedebate.com/people/NotStephen Not Stephen Colbert

But the question is, is it worth solving in the particular manner the government has chosen, or would it be best to attempt to solve it in some other way?
http://intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Are the NDP arguing that our immigration policies should be based on tourism numbers? Seems like an odd argument to me. Does this mean that NDP would be comfortable with Fed gov't banning people because tourists from that country are negligible.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/NotStephen Not Stephen Colbert

But the question is, is it worth solving in the particular manner the government has chosen, or would it be best to attempt to solve it in some other way?

Note that this is a legitimate question to which I don't claim to know the answer.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Curious that the only person to use a racist word here, darkies, is comfortable smearing others for their supposed racism. I think MTTT is projecting.
http://www.intensedebate.com/people/jolyon jolyon

Are the NDP arguing that our immigration policies should be based on tourism numbers? Does this mean that NDP would be comfortable with Fed gov't banning people because tourists from that country are negligible. Seems like an odd/weak argument to me.