Sometimes the best approach to dealing with unwanted guests is to hand them an apple and a roadmap:
A controversial policy that will enable Ottawa to buy airline tickets for failed refugees and give them up to $2,000 each to leave Canada is slated to take effect in June next year.
But it’s so expensive:
(A similar) program sparked controversy in the U.K. when it began from people who accused the government of doling out taxpayers’ money in times of economic restraint.
Actually, it’s a bargain at thirty times the price.
I have written to Kenney but no answer so far. Why, with a majority government, does the CPC not change the Singh decision to refuse any refugee access to Canadian benefits and rights upon landing on Canadian soil?
Has anyone heard whether the CPC is looking at this or heard back from the party as they never seem to respond to any form of communication but are constantly contacting me for more money?
Dave, you make an excellent point. I know of no other country that grants anyone setting foot on its soil all the rights of its citizens except perhaps voting. This is another case of judicial activisim that merited the non withstanding clause.
“The initiative has been met with applause by lawyers and immigration workers”
And that folks, is absolute proof that implementing this nonsense will be counterproductive in every respect.
The problem is that we will start receiving “no-hopers”for asylum but thank you very much for the 2000$.
Just ship them out empty handed.
I’d say there should be some strings attached. If, and only if, these folks have been duped by some unscrupulous fraudster, should we be doling out such benefits and even then, only if the victims give useful info to authorities about the scam artists who are behind these human trafficking operations.
A one way ticket back to where they came is all they should get if they can’t or won’t spill the beans on their overlords and exploiters. And the information they give has to be something that can be used to bring said human traffickers to justice.
But even if it’s a ticket and cash, it is still far, far cheaper than allowing these people to collect welfare and live off the state for untold months while waiting for a hearing to take place. Do we not have a list of countries which are prime producers of people who could be genuinely seeking refuge, economic migrants excluded?
I’d rather ship them COD…to their place of origin.
That would discourage a lot of this…the $2000…Whiskey Tango Foxtrot.
This will cause a deluge of illegal immigrants to land looking for their payoff.
I imagine half of California will jump another border for an easy payday. Nothing happening down there anymore anyway.
John Baird’s department ought to deal with these predatory a-holes at the source. Elites from every country have investment in Canada. It’s time they feel some heat and become motivated to clean up fraudulent immigration facilitators at their end.
Does this mean I can go to the UK (one way of course) and get a flight and $2000 spending money from them? What else will they give me? Is this limited to one-a-year or anything?
If I promise not to go to the UK, will they send me a $2000 + an airline ticket good for anywhere?
As Alain already pointed out, application of the notwithstanding clause regarding the Singh decision would be step one.
Do they have a site set up to accept donations?
What of Randy Quaid … what of Randy?
Look out!!!! a star wacker!!!!
Refugee hopefuls from from Pakistan, or Lithuania, or Sand Pile, Botswana are in all likelihood going to have to spend a lot more than $2,000 to fly to Canada, what with the connecting flights and stopovers and so on. Not all fly in, of course; some spend a nauseous month in the stinking hold of a merchant vessel after paying a human smuggler $20,000 or more. Point is, few people are going to come here in order to collect (*up to*) $2,000 en route to their fast-track trip back home, because in the majority of cases it will be far less than the cost of their trip here.
The price of a plane ticket, plus a trivial (in governmental terms) amount of money — the proverbial apple and a roadmap, and spare change — is a seriously small price to pay for the ability to politely fast-track bogus claimants out of here in short order, especially when you compare it to the cost of endless litigation, lawyers, welfare payments, health care, etc., etc.
Whats cab fare? Twenty bucks?
That and the flight “HOME” is sufficient.
Two fricken grand?? WTF!
EBD – the point is that we will still be up for endless litigation, lawyers, welfare payments, health care, etc., etc. before we stick them on the plane … if we ever do.
They are attempting to fast track. Give them $2000 in carbon credits … which should be just about enough to fly their asses back.
Here in Britain we can deport people and they just return from France anyway.
Not that you have to leave if you don’t want to
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/8612931/Human-rights-farce-meet-the-serial-criminal-who-cannot-be-deported.html
The thing I like about this story is that the man wants to be a security guard.
Aren’t airlines supposed to return the illegals to the point of departure for free anyway?
I don’t mind $2000/refugee to leave as long as it only buys them a one-way ticket.
It’s Mexico that supplies the bulk of refugees to Canada!
Then there are the MILLIONS of US illegal’s who have only have one more undefended border to jump.
No airfare needed to get here, all the third world troubles arrive in buses and cars. Does anyone here like to go hang out in East LA when they travel to the US?
http://www.canadavisa.com/mexico-is-canadas-biggest-source-of-refugees.html
Here’s more from the NP, good story about some Mexican’s using the “system” to pay for a honeymoon in Montreal (by claiming refugee status).
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/08/26/roy-green-ottawa-offers-2000-sweetener-to-refugee-claimants/