waldo Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 Actually, forgetting for a moment the whole phobes thing, what else would you expect civil servants to say in response to government policy directives? I mean really? Do you expect them to tell the truth about the actual chances of effective screening? do you expect the heads of both the RCMP and CSIS to compromise the integrity of their agencies, to outright lie about something as serious as security screening, to effectively set themselves (and their agencies) up for failure... just to, supposedly, appease a target policy set out by a new government barely in office weeks when the RCMP/CSIS statements were made? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 do you expect the heads of both the RCMP and CSIS to compromise the integrity of their agencies, to outright lie about something as serious as security screening, to effectively set themselves (and their agencies) up for failure... just to, supposedly, appease a target policy set out by a new government barely in office weeks when the RCMP/CSIS statements were made? Their agencies are already set up for failure. It only takes one, and they've failed. I don't expect them to tell the whole truth. I don't expect any politician or senior bureaucrat to tell the whole truth unless it suits them. I do expect them to say they will meet the goals set for them by the government. Even if they can't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 Their agencies are already set up for failure. It only takes one, and they've failed.In that case, they've already failed, eh? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 They're already having problems finding 5,000 let alone 50,000. What further incentive will be needed to fill those chairs? More money? A free house? What? I saw a piece in a UK newspaper the other day. It was from a bishop and was complaining that the UK government's decision to accept only UN refugees from the refugee camps (the same decision Canada's government has made) excludes Christians. The reason is that Christians are not welcome in these camps, do not feel safe, and tend to go to camps run by Christian missionaries and aid groups instead. I would suggest that Christians would be a lot more likely to want to relocate to Canada than others, and we should be approaching Christian aid groups about finding them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 Most people will see it as a good thing that he's trying to be different than Harper. The immigration issue was one of the few the Harper government was actually making steady progress with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 do you expect the heads of both the RCMP and CSIS to compromise the integrity of their agencies, to outright lie about something as serious as security screening, to effectively set themselves (and their agencies) up for failure... just to, supposedly, appease a target policy set out by a new government barely in office weeks when the RCMP/CSIS statements were made? Absolutely. In a blazing instant, without remorse, conscience or second thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 In that case, they've already failed, eh? They have? I haven't been keeping up, what with Christmas and all. What happened? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dialamah Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 They have? I haven't been keeping up, what with Christmas and all. What happened? If the purpose of CSIS and RCMP to keep us 100% free of extremists in Canada, then they've already failed with the Khadrs and with Zehaf-Bibeau. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 If the purpose of CSIS and RCMP to keep us 100% free of extremists in Canada, then they've already failed with the Khadrs and with Zehaf-Bibeau. Oh, I see. No, we were just discussing the official response to JT's immigration/refugee goals. I don't think the organizations that intend to keep us safe actually have a clue, and Waldo was sure that they are being honest with us. I expect them to lie if it suits them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 And yet they whine because of the slow down in admittance to this country. Can't win for losing. I'm certainly not whining. I'm glad they decided against their reckless and irresponsible original plan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 And yet they whine because of the slow down in admittance to this country. Can't win for losing. Let me help you out. The Conservative camp has always advocated for a slow, methodical process whereas the Liberals campaigned on lofty numbers that could only be achieved by rushing the system. Now that they are in they realize their goals can't be met due to the details involved. The problem is they campaigned and won based on getting this large number in. Conversely the Conservatives were made out to be the bad guy with their lower yet realistic numbers. I'm not saying Trudeau would have lost the election if he had lower numbers but the point is that he used his lofty targets to pander to the crowd. That's dishonest and needs to be addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 The problem is they campaigned and won based on getting this large number in. Conversely the Conservatives were made out to be the bad guy with their lower yet realistic numbers. I'm not saying Trudeau would have lost the election if he had lower numbers but the point is that he used his lofty targets to pander to the crowd. That's dishonest and needs to be addressed. just who from the Trudeau Liberals made the Harper Conservatives out to be the bad guys vis-a-vis refugee numbers? Seems to me Harper Conservatives did their own, as you say "pandering" by moving up their own target of 10,000 by 15 months - to Sept 2016. Just like that... 15 months! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 All this has proved is the liberals lied thru their teeth. They ran on this knowing harper would come out with real number and timeline, so they came our with numbers that could not be done and a lot of people fell for it and probably got them many votes. They lied pure and simple, used a dead boy to get power. It was a disgusting move on their part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted December 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 so you keep repeating... how many is a "large number"... as you say, "already in the works"? . the waldo calls bullshyte! Here's a media peep: since 2009... not "well over" 20,000... with a like focus on government versus private sponsorship. Since 2009 - wow... that's huuuge Simple. as for this continued nattering about Syrian refugees not wanting to come to Canada... that's all based on one lame NP article! Seems the UNHCR sent out some 44000 text messages to potential candidates to "gauge interest"... turns out 28000 numbers actually worked... didn't "bounce back"! From that about 3000 text replies were received... interviews proceeded and some 1800 agreed to relocate to Canada. Blind text messages, with no follow-up... given some 4 million refugees, does anyone here seriously believe 25K... 50K refugees won't be "found"? . Let's not lose track of my main message - the promise was reckless and flew in the face of reality - especially for this new "evidence-based" government - and why you choose to blather to the contrary is beyond me......but to your misguided points: On how many privately-sponsored refugees were "in the works".......as of November 24th, here's what the CBC said - and also what the Conservatives said at the time. Either way, only the wilfully blind would ignore that a large number of the initial refugees were already "in the works" Thousands of applicants now being processed for privately sponsored refugees will be included as part of that commitment. "Approximately 10,000 refugees had either been processed or were in the final stages of processing. That work gives the current government a tremendous head start in aiding Syrian refugees," said immigration critic Michelle Rempel, following the government's announcement. Government officials told reporters in a briefing today that the bulk of the 10,000 refugees set to arrive here by year's end will be privately sponsored. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-plan-syrian-refugees-1.3333623 On my statement that well over 20,000 Iraqis had been re-settled since 2011 - you were right - it was since 2009 but as your article also states, the number was about 22,000 as of July - and counting. Is surpassing by 10% or more "well over" 20,000? I happen to think so. On my statement that there was a focus on privately-sponsored refugees - the Harper government's goal was that 60% of Iraqi/Syrian refugees would be privately-sponsored - however that was ramped up as more Canadians and supporting organizations stepped up to the plate - leading to this: Government officials told reporters in a briefing today that the bulk of the 10,000 refugees set to arrive here by year's end will be privately sponsored. As to the 6% figure of Syrians wanting to come to Canada - it was not a "single NP article". It was information provided by UNHCR and reported by all media. As for using text messages - if you were a true refugee fleeing conflict, would you not at least be curious as to how you could be helped? I agree it's not scientific - but the point was well-made in the media....that there are valid reasons why a huge majority of Syrian refugees would prefer other destinations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 (edited) It's all about holding them accountable for making ridiculously mis-informed decisions in the first place. You mean like cutting GST revenue? If you say so. I'm pretty sure I recall you or someone like you saying this was a really bad economic decision but a really good political one. Making a commitment to responsibly increase and prioritize the inflow of Syrian refugees is honourable. Completely ignoring the human consequences in making commitments that bear have no semblance of reality is not. It is a crisis right? The truth is, the vast, vast majority of Syrian refugees do not want to come to Canada - they want to stay closer to home and hopefully, one day return. That's only one element of this misguided attempt to shoehorn 25,000 government-sponsored Syrian refugees into an election promise that was made only to score points against the more practical approaches of the other two parties. I can only marvel at the amount of good political reasoning that's behind the decisions that helped create so many refugees in the first place. Edited December 28, 2015 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 (edited) The ones coming n ow are harper refugees, ones that were already primed to go by the harper government. Trudeau or his handlers lied about this, knowing it would sway voters. Edited December 28, 2015 by PIK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 Let's not lose track of my main message - the promise was reckless and flew in the face of reality no - your main message is to continue to whine/harp about a target number/timeline changing, with your incessant "broken promise' nattering. . On how many privately-sponsored refugees were "in the works".......as of November 24th, here's what the CBC said - and also what the Conservatives said at the time. Either way, only the wilfully blind would ignore that a large number of the initial refugees were already "in the works" that Rempel quote is priceless... particularity framed against the much ballyhooed presser from former Harper Conservative Immigration Minister, Chris Alexander... moving up the commitment to relocate 10,000 Syrian refugees by Sept 2016. How the hell does Rempel claim 10,000 processed (mid November 2015) when Alexander announces moving up the prior commitment of 10,000 a full 15 months to Sept 2016? Conservative government aims to resettle 10,000 Syrian refugees by September 2016 . On my statement that well over 20,000 Iraqis had been re-settled since 2011 - you were right - it was since 2009 but as your article also states, the number was about 22,000 as of July - and counting. Is surpassing by 10% or more "well over" 20,000? I happen to think so. you didn't know the numbers... how after-the-fact and self-serving of you to now declare 10% as "well over"! Of course you, "happen to think so". . On my statement that there was a focus on privately-sponsored refugees - the Harper government's goal was that 60% of Iraqi/Syrian refugees would be privately-sponsored - however that was ramped up as more Canadians and supporting organizations stepped up to the plate - leading to this: as I pointed out, you were wrong about this... wrong about something you repeated ad nauseaum! There was no effective difference between the number of private versus Harper Conservative government sponsored refugees. . As to the 6% figure of Syrians wanting to come to Canada - it was not a "single NP article". It was information provided by UNHCR and reported by all media. As for using text messages - if you were a true refugee fleeing conflict, would you not at least be curious as to how you could be helped? I agree it's not scientific - but the point was well-made in the media....that there are valid reasons why a huge majority of Syrian refugees would prefer other destinations. it's a reeediculous point to keep harping on... again, out of 4 million refugees, do you maintain there will be any difficulty in relocating 25,000 of them to Canada? 50,000 of them? . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted December 28, 2015 Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 All this has proved is the liberals lied thru their teeth. They ran on this knowing harper would come out with real number and timeline, so they came our with numbers that could not be done and a lot of people fell for it and probably got them many votes. They lied pure and simple, used a dead boy to get power. It was a disgusting move on their part. I realize you are upset your boy Harper got such an ass whuping, but to suggest that happened by the Liberals taking advantage of a tragedy is really stooping pretty low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted December 28, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 28, 2015 no - your main message is to continue to whine/harp about a target number/timeline changing, with your incessant "broken promise' nattering. . Wrong again (still) - it's the ridiculousness of the promise - I have always called it reckless. It was never about breaking his promise - it was about the stupidity of making such an outlandish promise in the first place. that Rempel quote is priceless... particularity framed against the much ballyhooed presser from former Harper Conservative Immigration Minister, Chris Alexander... moving up the commitment to relocate 10,000 Syrian refugees by Sept 2016. How the hell does Rempel claim 10,000 processed (mid November 2015) when Alexander announces moving up the prior commitment of 10,000 a full 15 months to Sept 2016? I provided two sources - one directly from the CBC that referred to "thousands" - the second from Rempel. As I said - either way, a significant number were "in process" - something that you continue to ignore..... . you didn't know the numbers... how after-the-fact and self-serving of you to now declare 10% as "well over"! Of course you, "happen to think so". I knew the numbers - that's why I stated well more than 20,000. I don't feel the need to scrounge around looking for the exact number. . as I pointed out, you were wrong about this... wrong about something you repeated ad nauseaum! There was no effective difference between the number of private versus Harper Conservative government sponsored refugees. No Waldo - actually you are clearly wrong. The goal of the previous government was a 60/40 split in favour of privately-sponsored refugees and the last year has seen an increase over that. . it's a reeediculous point to keep harping on... again, out of 4 million refugees, do you maintain there will be any difficulty in relocating 25,000 of them to Canada? 50,000 of them? Calm down Waldo. The point is that there are many good reasons why Syrian refugees would prefer other destinations - and the UNHCR findings came as a surprise, regardless of the methodology. Can we find 25,000 refugees? Sure we can - but we'll have to sift through many, many more to find that total. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted December 29, 2015 Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 I realize you are upset your boy Harper got such an ass whuping, but to suggest that happened by the Liberals taking advantage of a tragedy is really stooping pretty low. The Liberals did stoop pretty low to take advantage of it, eagerly, joyfully, gleefully. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted December 29, 2015 Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 No Waldo - actually you are clearly wrong. The goal of the previous government was a 60/40 split in favour of privately-sponsored refugees and the last year has seen an increase over that. more... yet more... of your declared 'after-the-fact' numbers. Before any of these numbers came forward... and only as a result of me calling BS on your repeated claims, you were all about the need to leverage private sponsorship, as in they're the most successful... and "don't the Trudeau Liberals know that"!!! I read references to that 60/40 split in regards to an intended Harper Conservative target split for Syrian refugees... not for the Iraqi refugees where the cite I provided for actual relocated private-versus-government numbers doesn't align with that ratio. Interestingly, you never qualified this split before but you sure had no problem in continually making claims about the need to go the private route... gee, and Harper Conservatives only could manage a 60/40 intent split here... surely, given your ongoing spiel that number should be... what... something more like 90/10! I also think you're confusing that same 60/40 split in regards to the split among private sponsorship, where, "typically, 60% of sponsors are Sponsorship Agreement Holders and their Constituency Groups... and 40% are the so-called G5 groups where 5 or more Canadian citizens (or permanent residents) can sponsor privately." But who knows for sure with you... all your declared numbers are now 'after-the-fact' as you scramble to try to provide cover for your failed and/or called-out statements. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo Posted December 29, 2015 Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 The Liberals did stoop pretty low to take advantage of it, eagerly, joyfully, gleefully. are you sure you're not confusing media coverage with campaign policy-type statements? but hey, if you want to reminisce about past low stooping by Harper Conservatives, how about... the purposeful mixing of refugee and immigration statistics (Harper did it repeatedly on the campaign trail to attempt to gain advantage with numbers)... or where Harper Conservatives lumped Syrian numbers in with prior relocated Iraqi numbers but failed to mention/qualify this... or the best one yet where Harper Conservatives gave a number for actual Syrian refugees relocated by the government and more than half that number weren't refugees as a part of any resettlement program but actually persons who came to Canada on their own and claimed asylum. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted December 29, 2015 Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 All this has proved is the liberals lied thru their teeth. They ran on this knowing harper would come out with real number and timeline, so they came our with numbers that could not be done and a lot of people fell for it and probably got them many votes. They lied pure and simple, used a dead boy to get power. It was a disgusting move on their part. PIK, I think it's more a case that the Liberals got caught with their pants down when they realized they could not possibly meet their target. They've been scrambling ever since and they keep digging themselves further in a hole as they continually change their numbers. A senior bureaucrat, Gerry Van Kessel who was the director general, refugees, for the immigration department addresses this very issue. As he watches his former colleagues go all out to resettle thousands of Syrian refugees by the end of this year, the civil servant who helped run Canada's last major refugee resettlement program says he's concerned that politics is getting in the way of policy. Gerry Van Kessel says he's frustrated by the game he feels the Liberal government is playing by constantly affixing and changing targets for their Syrian refugee program. "There is an element of make believe in all this that keeps the focus on the make believe and not the substance," he said in an interview. "And to what purpose? That's the thing -- they are doing something that the public approves of. And yet the public focus is not going to be on what they are doing but on the manipulation around it." Van Kessel was the director general, refugees, for the immigration department when the Canadian government evacuated 5,000 Kosovars and fast-tracked the resettlement of more than 2,000 others over a period of several months in 1999. Van Kessel said as soon as he, and other former immigration officials, saw the government's Syrian plan, they knew bringing over more than three times that number of people in just four months couldn't be done. What's happened since has been nothing but politics, he said. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/too-much-make-believe-in-syrian-refugee-program-former-top-bureaucrat-says-1.2716158 Van Kessel also speaks to the fact that deploying all those officers to work on the Syrian refugee file causes other programs to suffer. I made that very point a few days ago. It was that apparent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted December 29, 2015 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 But who knows for sure with you... all your declared numbers are now 'after-the-fact' as you scramble to try to provide cover for your failed and/or called-out statements. I think you've been schooled enough on the topic. Good luck with the rest of your idol's promises. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted December 29, 2015 Report Share Posted December 29, 2015 PIK, I think it's more a case that the Liberals got caught with their pants down when they realized they could not possibly meet their target. They've been scrambling ever since and they keep digging themselves further in a hole as they continually change their numbers. A senior bureaucrat, Gerry Van Kessel who was the director general, refugees, for the immigration department addresses this very issue. http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/too-much-make-believe-in-syrian-refugee-program-former-top-bureaucrat-says-1.2716158 . Great article Capricorn. This really drives the point home that for the Liberals this was a political/election issue. Now that they are in lower the urgency is gone and reality has set it. Again, I don't think this was the key issue that made people vote for Trudeau but it certainly speaks volumes about what he will say or promise just to get in Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.