Majority of Canadians are in favour of our current immigration system

[marcus]

A growing majority of Canadians reject the idea that their country is accepting too many immigrants. This view is due in part because eight in ten believe that immigration is helping Canada’s economy.

According to a recent survey by Environics Institute, done in October 2019 on Canadians' attitude towards immigration, there are some interesting findings, which I thought was important to post considering that it contradicts some of the participants on this forum. Here are some of the findings:

---
Most important issues facing Canada today

Environment: 24
Economy: 22
Healthcare: 9
Poor Government/Leadership: 8
Unemployment: 4
Taxes: 4
Crime/law and order: 2
Immigration/Refugees: 2

---
Agree-Disagree: “Overall, there is too much immigration in Canada.”

Agree: 34%
Disagree: 63%

A positive view of current immigration levels is most widely expressed by Liberal Party (74%) and NDP (79%) supporters, followed by those who say they will vote for the Green Party (69%) or Bloc Quebecois (64%). Conservative Party supporters are more divided, with 51 percent agreeing that immigration levels are too high, compared with 45 percent who disagree.

---
Agree-Disagree: “Overall, immigration has a positive impact on the economy of Canada.”

Agree: 80%
Disagree: 16%

As on past surveys, attitudes about immigration and refugees differ across the population. Positive sentiments are most prevalent among younger Canadians and those with a university education. Negative views are most evident in Alberta, among Canadians ages 60 and older, and those without a high school diploma. In Quebec, despite the recent controversy over its new legislation banning religious dress, public opinion about immigrants is as positive if not more so than in other parts of the country.

---
Agree-Disagree: “There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values.”

Agree: 50%
Disagree: 43%

---
Agree-Disagree: “Canada accepts too many immigrants from racial minority groups.”

Agree: 29%
Disagree: 64%

Some portion of public resistance to immigration stems from negative attitudes towards newcomers with specific racial and ethnic backgrounds (predominantly non-white or racialized). This continues to be evident in current public sentiment, but much less so than in previous generations.

Agreement with the statement is the minority view across the country, but most notably among Canadians 18 to 29 (21%), those with a university degree (19%) and supporters of the Federal NDP (13%). The view that Canada accepts too many immigrants from racial minorities is most evident among Canadians without a high school diploma (42%) and household incomes of less than $30,000 (40%).

 

[QuebecOverCanada]

LOL as if the number 1 priority for most Canadians was the environment. Are you dumb?

Edited November 7, 2019 by QuebecOverCanada

[QuebecOverCanada]

1 hour ago, marcus said:

Agree-Disagree: “There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values.”

Agree: 50%
Disagree: 43%

 

Oh.

[dialamah]

6 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

LOL as if the number 1 priority for most Canadians was the environment. Are you dumb?

It was a survey, not a random claim made by the OP.    From the survey:  The most significant trend dating back 12 months is the rise in mentions of the environment and/or climate change (now identified by one in four Canadians, up from only 10% one year ago)

Regarding the statement: There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values the report notes that "The most recent survey reveals that half (50%) of Canadians agree with this statement about “too many immigrants not adopting Canadian values”, down just one point since April and now at the lowest level recorded since this question was first included on Focus Canada surveys in 1993."

It looks to me like the survey picked up the opinions of the quiet, center-of-the-road majority, not the vocal fringe.

[Guest PPC2019]

5 minutes ago, dialamah said:

It was a survey, not a random claim made by the OP.    From the survey:  The most significant trend dating back 12 months is the rise in mentions of the environment and/or climate change (now identified by one in four Canadians, up from only 10% one year ago)

Regarding the statement: There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values the report notes that "The most recent survey reveals that half (50%) of Canadians agree with this statement about “too many immigrants not adopting Canadian values”, down just one point since April and now at the lowest level recorded since this question was first included on Focus Canada surveys in 1993."

It looks to me like the survey picked up the opinions of the quiet, center-of-the-road majority, not the vocal fringe.

This is how Justin Trudeau won the election. He had Greta get thousands of students to skip school, in order to make the case that he was the best politician to fight climate change. When in reality, the liberals might reduce less than 0.1% of the global emissions.

Why weren't the extinction rebellion protesters arrested in Edmonton? Who controls the RCMP?

[dialamah]

8 minutes ago, PPC2019 said:

Why weren't the extinction rebellion protesters arrested in Edmonton? 

Because we aren't China, and don't arrest protesters for protesting, even if they do interfere with traffic?

10 minutes ago, PPC2019 said:

He had Greta get thousands of students to skip school

Right, Trudeau "controls" Greta. Too bad he didn't have enough control to get her to gush over him, instead of criticizing him.

[Guest PPC2019]

13 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Because we aren't China, and don't arrest protesters for protesting, even if they do interfere with traffic?

Right, Trudeau "controls" Greta. Too bad he didn't have enough control to get her to gush over him, instead of criticizing him.

Even in a democracy, It's illegal for the police to help protesters barricade bridges. The police were breaking the law, and should be prosecuted.

 

Edited November 7, 2019 by PPC2019

[Argus]

This reads like a propaganda piece rather than an unbiased report. And it's clearly wrong in several ways. For example, it says:

n Quebec, despite the recent controversy over its new legislation banning religious dress, public opinion about immigrants is as positive if not more so than in other parts of the country.

Oh really? Repeated polls have shown 70% support for Quebec's plan to cut immigration and restrict the publicly displayed religious sentiments of immigrants.

It also says"

For more than a decade a clear majority of Canadians have rejected the notion that their country is accepting too many immigrants, and this perspective has strengthened over the past year.

Ah yes, Canadians love mass immigration! Except maybe not. An earlier Environics survey showed 65% of Canadians believe too many immigrants are not adopting Canadian values. An Ipsos poll found 56% of Canadians thought Canada was too welcoming to immigrants, 54% wanted immigration lowered and borders tightened, and 48% said immigrant are changing canada in ways they didn't like. A more recent Ipsos poll found 63% of Canadians wanting immigration lowered. An Angus-Reid poll found 68% of Canadians felt immigrants needed to do more to fit in, while an Ipsos poll last year found the same number wanted Quebec's face covering ban enacted in their province. Meanwhile, a CBC Crop poll found 75% in favour of values testing for immigrants. All of that demonstrates a grave doubt about the wisdom of the current immigration system.

I do agree there is widespread support for immigration, and I agree it is largely based on the belief they aid the economy and are needed because of an aging population. Those beliefs are wrong, though. Canadians have become indoctrinated into these beliefs over the years because anyone who contradicts them is attacked. And there's certainly no profit for politicians to deny it. There's no evidence that immigration will help aging demographics, nor that it helps the economy, though, and plenty of evidence it causes trouble. It's just that the media never reports the trouble, or never associates it with immigration. The media reports constantly on a housing crisis but never suggests that might in any way be related to immigration, or to the hundreds of thousands of temporary foreign workers or foreign students (many of whom only come here to work).

I might also mention that internal government report to cabinet reported by the CBC where the bureaucrats warned that support for immigration went down once those surveyed were informed how many immigrants were actually coming in.

Edited November 7, 2019 by Argus

[Argus]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

Because we aren't China, and don't arrest protesters for protesting, even if they do interfere with traffic?

We do arrest people for interfering with traffic. I guarantee you if me and a few buddies go stand in the middle of the road and refuse to leave we'll be arrested. The police are responding to the direction of local political authorities who are left of centre and sympathize with the protestors.

 

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, PPC2019 said:

Even in a democracy, It's illegal for the police to help protesters barricade bridges.

Earlier, commuters threw protesters' bikes over the guardrail and in the clip one man is heard threatening to run his car through the protesters.  The police are there to ensure nobody gets hurt or killed, not to "help" protesters.

1 hour ago, PPC2019 said:

The police were breaking the law, and should be prosecuted

What law could the police be prosecuted under, then?

[Argus]

2 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Earlier, commuters threw protesters' bikes over the guardrail and in the clip one man is heard threatening to run his car through the protesters.  The police are there to ensure nobody gets hurt or killed, not to "help" protesters.

The way to do that would be to remove the protestors, who were breaking the law. The way they did it was to side with the protestors, and prevent citizens from upholding the law.

[dialamah]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

The way they did it was to side with the protestors, and prevent citizens from upholding the law.

From Edmonton Journal

"A line of Edmonton police officers placed themselves between the protesters and the motorists to keep the peace, while a duty officer negotiated an end to the protest.

Police said in a Monday morning news release that the protesters were planning on continuing the blockage until 9 a.m., but a resolution was agreed upon and the protest officially came to a close at 8:09 a.m.   "While no charges were laid at the scene, the incident is now under investigation and it is possible that charges could be laid at a future date,” police said in the news release. “In Canada, all people have the right to gather peacefully. There are, however, limitations on peaceful assembly contained in various sections of the Criminal Code."

The cops attended, persuaded the protesters to leave early and are considering charges.  You might want to consider taking off your tin-foil "progressive conspiracy" hat.

[Goddess]

In all the cities where these bridge  protests were, Edmonton's police shut it down the fastest and without any violence.  I have  no issue with that.

[Nefarious Banana]

35 minutes ago, Argus said:

We do arrest people for interfering with traffic. I guarantee you if me and a few buddies go stand in the middle of the road and refuse to leave we'll be arrested. The police are responding to the direction of local political authorities who are left of centre and sympathize with the protestors.

 

Road block by the Hell's Angels . . . . or some FN group.  Let's guess who is arrested.

[Argus]

40 minutes ago, dialamah said:

From Edmonton Journal

"A line of Edmonton police officers placed themselves between the protesters and the motorists to keep the peace, while a duty officer negotiated an end to the protest.

Police don't need to 'negotiate' anything with people breaking the law. You simply arrest them, put them into police wagons, and take them away. End of story.

[Argus]

34 minutes ago, Goddess said:

In all the cities where these bridge  protests were, Edmonton's police shut it down the fastest and without any violence.  I have  no issue with that.

Ottawa's was blocked nearly all day, while police protected the airhead protestors from being beaten.

[Shady]

 

Agree-Disagree: “There are too many immigrants coming into this country who are not adopting Canadian values.”

Agree: 50%
Disagree: 43%

This one is really the most important, and needs to be addressed in some way.  That's why it's the only  question that's almost 50/50

 

[dialamah]

9 minutes ago, Argus said:

Ottawa's was blocked nearly all day, while police protected the airhead protestors from being beaten.

So ... it's ok if people beat-up (progressive) "air head protesters", but not right-wing demonstrators?  Anti-fa is horribly violent, but commuters who don't want to be held up are justified in attacking people?

No bias here, LOL

[Guest PPC2019]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

From Edmonton Journal

A line of Edmonton police officers placed themselves between the protesters and the motorists to keep the peace, while a duty officer negotiated an end to the protest.

But there not keeping the peace, by wasting peoples time. Delay tactics just puts more people at risk.

As soon as the police showed up, they should of been on the megaphone and said "Anyone who doesn't move to the side within 60 seconds will be arrested." Let them know they could be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and this could mean some prison time.

I wonder how many protesters would stay on the bridge, if they thought they could be facing a 30 day incarceration.

As soon as the police got there, the place should of been cleared within 5 minutes.

[Guest PPC2019]

31 minutes ago, dialamah said:

So ... it's ok if people beat-up (progressive) "air head protesters", but not right-wing demonstrators?  Anti-fa is horribly violent, but commuters who don't want to be held up are justified in attacking people?

No bias here, LOL

You don't see right-wing protesters closing major bridges. No bias there.

[Guest PPC2019]

45 minutes ago, Argus said:

Ottawa's was blocked nearly all day, while police protected the airhead protestors from being beaten.

This is why you give a 60 warning, and then immediately arrest the protesters. No one gets beaten.

[marcus]

10 hours ago, QuebecOverCanada said:

LOL as if the number 1 priority for most Canadians was the environment. Are you dumb?

You should pay attention to what you are responding to.

The number 1 priority for 24% of Canadians is the environment.

[SkyHigh]

The problem with our immigration system is not how many we let in, it's the point system we have in place, that attracts those with higher education to get here and have their credentials (education, work experience) not recognized. If all the doctors, engineers, etc... weren't driving taxis but using their skills, ( most likely meaning higher wages therefore paying more into the system) we'd have more money making our capacity to welcome those that didn't grow up with the same opportunities as us much easier

[QuebecOverCanada]

3 hours ago, marcus said:

You should pay attention to what you are responding to.

The number 1 priority for 24% of Canadians is the environment.

As if 24% of the population really had that as a top priority. Yeah right.

And you don't doubt that for a second.

[Moonlight Graham]

8 hours ago, dialamah said:

Because we aren't China, and don't arrest protesters for protesting, even if they do interfere with traffic?

You have a legal right to peacefully protest.  You have no legal right to interfere with traffic.  Peaceful protestors should be allowed a voice.  People holding up traffic should move for be arrested.  It's disturbing the peace.  Your freedom to protest should not interfere with someone's right to use a public road.