What amount of immigration do you support?

[Moonlight Graham]

What amount of immigration do you support?

[Bonam]

It's not about the quantity it's about the quality.

[scribblet]

Agreed !!!

[Machjo]

None of the above. If they meet the criteria, they should be allowed in. However, those criteria ought to be skills-based and character-based, and not based on any kind of prejudices, be they racial, ethnic, religious or otherwise.

[Machjo]

It's not about the quantity it's about the quality.

Ditto. One or a million, it doesn't matter. If one comes in and he can't integrate, that's one too many. If a million come in and they can all integrate, then I say let more in.

Scrap the quotas and make our immigration system completely points-based.

[Pliny]

If someone wants to be Canadian we should define it for them and ask them if they want to be Canadian.

The trouble is in defining a Canadian. Often it is the type of government and the concept of a nation's government that attracts immigration. What it means to be a citizen contributing to the identity is different.

[eyeball]

What amount of immigration do you support?

All of it. We've got a virtually borderless world for corporations but not human beings. I mean, we're still people too for Christ's sakes aren't we?

None of the above. If they meet the criteria, they should be allowed in. However, those criteria ought to be skills-based and character-based, and not based on any kind of prejudices, be they racial, ethnic, religious or otherwise.

What about prejudices towards unfettered greed or a lack of concern for the environment? I'd rather see character-based criteria used to determine which corporations should be allowed in and especially any that we allow to roam the world at will, resource companies in particular.

Perhaps if we treated corporations more like they were the aliens the world might be a little more livable for human beings and reduce the compulsion to move.

We have a Universal Declaration of Human Rights, now we just need a Universal Declaration of Corporate Responsibility and a Code of Responsibility for Governments probably wouldn't be a bad idea either.

[Muddy]

I have no problem with immigration no matter their colour or religion. I do have a problem with immigrants who are not willing to integrate and work. I don`t believe we should create public housing for immigrants because that only creates ghettoization and alienation from the rest of Canadian society. This creates fear of the group. Fear creates prejudice and hate.That is human nature .

Our immigration should also be tied to our needs. We will always have a shortage of professionals in some fields. We definately can not afford huge amounts of old, feeble and sick individuals.

I can not answer the poll because it is skewed to create an impression of intolerance and is unfair.

Edited April 18, 2010 by Muddy

[Handsome Rob]

I support a dynamic number based on what the market is dictating, unemployment figures, quota of application, and a whole host of other things.

Only skilled people of white/European descent should be allowed to immigrate

Absurd.

[justme]

Stop me if this sounds familiar:

In Britain:

After all, a deliberate policy of mass immigration would have amounted to nothing less than an attempt to change the very make-up of this country without telling the electorate.

There could not have been a more grave abuse of the entire democratic process. Now, however, we learn that this is exactly what did happen. The Labour government has been engaged upon a deliberate and secret policy of national cultural sabotage.

This astonishing revelation surfaced quite casually last weekend in a newspaper article by one Andrew Neather. He turns out to have been a speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.

In its 1997 election manifesto, Labour promised 'firm control over immigration' and in 2005 it promised a 'crackdown on abuse'. In 2001, its manifesto merely said that the immigration rules needed to reflect changes to the economy to meet skills shortages.

... The Government's 'driving political purpose', wrote Neather, was 'to make the UK truly multicultural'.

It was therefore a politically motivated attempt by ministers to transform the fundamental make-up and identity of this country. It was done to destroy the right of the British people to live in a society defined by a common history, religion, law, language and traditions.

It was done to destroy for ever what it means to be culturally British and to put another 'multicultural' identity in its place. And it was done without telling or asking the British people whether they wanted their country and their culture to be transformed in this way.

Spitefully, one motivation by Labour ministers was 'to rub the Right's nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date'.

Even Neather found that particular element of gratuitous Left-wing bullying to be 'a manoeuvre too far'.

And the fact is that, despite his blithe assertions to the contrary, schools in areas of very high immigration find it desperately difficult to cope with so many children who don't even have basic English. Other services, such as health or housing, are similarly being overwhelmed by the sheer weight of numbers.

It also conveniently guaranteed an increasingly Labour-voting electorate since, as a recent survey by the Electoral Commission has revealed, some 90 per cent of black people and three-quarters of Asians vote Labour.

In Neather's hermetically sealed bubble, the benefits of mass immigration were so overwhelming he couldn't understand why ministers had been so nervous about it.

They were, he wrote, reluctant to discuss what increased immigration would mean, above all to Labour's core white working class vote. So they deliberately kept it secret.

They knew that if they told the truth about what they were doing, voters would rise up in protest. So they kept it out of their election manifestos.

This more than any other reason is why Nick Griffin has gained so much support. According to a YouGov poll taken after Question Time, no fewer than 22 per cent of British voters would 'seriously consider' voting for the BNP.

That nearly one quarter of British people might vote for a neo-Nazi party with views inimical to democracy, human rights and common decency is truly appalling.

The core reason is that for years they have watched as their country's landscape has been transformed out of all recognition - and that politicians from all mainstream parties have told them first that it isn't happening and second, that they are racist bigots to object even if it is.

Condemned out of its own mouth, it is New Labour that is responsible for the rise of the BNP - by an act of unalloyed treachery to the entire nation.

The outrageous truth slips out: Labour cynically plotted to transform the entire make-up of Britain without telling us

The article includes 465 comments from people that are furious about this.

In Australia:

Figures from demographic consultants Macroplan Australia show record overseas migration and an ageing population mean migrant families will overtake the number of locally born residents by 2025 - far sooner than previously imagined.

We'll be a nation of new migrants

Sound like Statistics Canada?

Again, this article has many comments by people that are furious about it. What's interesting is that the comments on these articles are actually allowed while most dissenting views on this subject in Canada are censored by Canadian media -- I know from experience.

Multiculturalism, and political correctness that goes hand-in-hand with it, is actually Cultural Marxism, and no, I don't support that. I do not support politicians bringing in people for the purpose of creating voting blocks so that they can stay in power either.

Therefore, without apology, I support immigration that gives higher priority to countries that are most similar to Canada -- this is what Australia does (at least until recently).

[eyeball]

The browning of the world is inevitable. Pink people are doomed.

At least we could go out with a little more grace. I mean, its not like we didn't give global domination our best shot.

[Bonam]

The browning of the world is inevitable. Pink people are doomed.

Interesting. You sit there and cheer on the end of the civilization that you are a part of and that made all of your modern comforts possible. Typical of a modern guilt-ridden liberal that wants to see the Western world in ruins, I suppose.

At least we could go out with a little more grace. I mean, its not like we didn't give global domination our best shot.

Actually the West has spent the last 20 years doing everything possible to undermine its own leadership position.

[Wild Bill]

White's only? What a rigged poll!

Conspicuously missing is the option:

"Only people of ANY descent with skills necessary to Canada's immediate needs should be allowed in!"

Really, that would be the only criteria that matters. Race is irrelevant in today's "Star Trek" society. Besides, it's far harder today to get white Europeans to WANT to come to Canada! It's no longer 1952, when Europe was so badly war-damaged. Most of them enjoy a higher living standard than Canada can provide! Many of us would kill for European mandatory paid holidays!

We no longer have the luxury of being so fussy.

Still, we only need people who can help create wealth. Wealth which is not defined as simply spending a government cheque backed by tax money. That's an economic tautology which leads to bankruptcy. You can't make a country rich by having everyone do government services to each other!

Those immigrants from the 1950's BUILT all those homes and apartment buildings! You cannot create the same strong economy by modern immigrants who simply come here and LIVE in them! And you need young working men and women, not old grandparents here by family unification.

[dizzy]

The browning of the world is inevitable. Pink people are doomed.

Yup. My pink lady and I had a son. He's brown.

At least we could go out with a little more grace. I mean, its not like we didn't give global domination our best shot.

You gave us 600 yrs of amazing innovation and progress on your last run. I look forward to seeing how the next groups follow up.

[Moonbox]

This is a terrible poll. As has already been mentioned, it's quality that counts. I'd support a million immigrants a year if they were going to be productive and fit in with society. I support zero immigration if they're going to be illiterate refugees from butthole countries.

[Michael Hardner]

Interesting. You sit there and cheer on the end of the civilization that you are a part of and that made all of your modern comforts possible.

This civilization was built by ideas, not by races or religious beliefs.

[justme]

Besides, it's far harder today to get white Europeans to WANT to come to Canada! It's no longer 1952, when Europe was so badly war-damaged. Most of them enjoy a higher living standard than Canada can provide! Many of us would kill for European mandatory paid holidays!

We no longer have the luxury of being so fussy.

What's different? "Most houses have basements for a start," said Hayley Wallstead. "The houses are so much bigger than we would have been able to afford in England."

For the first time in a decade, the number of British citizens immigrating to Canada is way up, with nearly 8,000 arriving in the first nine months of last year alone.

And they keep coming. More than 12,000 British citizens applied to emigrate to Canada over the same period, according to Citizenship and Immigration Canada.

They're skilled professionals and tradespeople with young families pining for more sunshine and snow, better schools and cleaner cities.

In immigration consultants' offices in Britain, the phone calls and emails keep pouring in from people trying to escape scary food prices and unemployment numbers.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/592699

You were saying?

[dizzy]

You were saying?

We've posted our home on house exchange websites and days later have had many French suitors. The biggest reasons we get for the exchange are not for vacation but because they want to test the soil for future immigration. They want to live with wide open space and employment opportunities for their children.

Edited April 18, 2010 by dizzy

[Wild Bill]

You were saying?

Hmm. It seems we've had a very recent change, at least as far as Britain goes. Have you seen anything similar for Germany, France, Italy and the rest of "white" Europe?

I do admit to a preference myself for Brits, since that was a founding and until recently a core culture of Canada. I enjoy some ethnic foods but that's about my limit as far as participating in changing our culture. To me, it will always be "Merry Christmas" (even though I'm a devout agnostic!), "God Save the Queen" and Yorkshire pudding at Sunday dinner.

[Muddy]

This civilization was built by ideas, not by races or religious beliefs.

Well Michael ,I must disagree with you. If you ever get to France or Belgium, I suggest you visit Canadian war graves. You will find that the pedestals over the graves of the fallen are largely inscribed with a cross with a few Stars of David mixed in between. You will also notice that the names are steeped in British descent.Yes Canada was a part of Christiandom and yes it had a founding in British law and character. Thank goodness!We sure are a lucky bunch we Canadians. But alas we are working at destroying the heritage that created a freedom for people from all over the world to immigrate and make a better life for themselves and their families.

[Bonam]

This civilization was built by ideas, not by races or religious beliefs.

Ideas had an impact on the form of our civilization but you are being very insulting by suggesting that the physical individuals who built our civilizations did not matter.

[Michael Hardner]

Ideas had an impact on the form of our civilization but you are being very insulting by suggesting that the physical individuals who built our civilizations did not matter.

They very much mattered. They were builders and practitioners of a philosophy. They did not say `we are building this for the future people of our religion that will inherit it`.

[Bonam]

They very much mattered. They were builders and practitioners of a philosophy. They did not say `we are building this for the future people of our religion that will inherit it`.

First, I have nowhere mentioned religion. Secondly, an obvious US example that illustrates that they were in fact very much thinking about their descendants who would inherit their civilization:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Edited April 18, 2010 by Bonam

[Michael Hardner]

Thank goodness!We sure are a lucky bunch we Canadians. But alas we are working at destroying the heritage that created a freedom for people from all over the world to immigrate and make a better life for themselves and their families.

Our past is not just a museum of old faces, and the races and religions of our grandparents. They fought for an ideal that makes Canada a place to come to.

How are we destroying the heritage that allowed people to immigrate ?

[Smallc]

Really, that would be the only criteria that matters. Race is irrelevant in today's "Star Trek" society. Besides, it's far harder today to get white Europeans to WANT to come to Canada! It's no longer 1952, when Europe was so badly war-damaged. Most of them enjoy a higher living standard than Canada can provide!

Any proof you could provide would be helpful. I get the feeling you see youself as living in some kind of inferior hellhole, when in fact, Canada is no such thing.