The federal government hopes to crack down on human smuggling by reintroducing a bill that was criticized by opposition parties last fall.
Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and Public Safety Minister Vic Toews held a news conference Thursday afternoon to announce the bill's reintroduction and said it contains the same measures as C-49 that was tabled in October.
Toews said Canada has one of the most generous refugee and immigration systems in the world and that it has "come under attack by human-smuggling networks."
He cited the arrivals of the Sun Sea and Ocean Lady ships in 2009 and 2010 that brought hundreds of refugee claimants as evidence that Canada's laws need strengthening in order to deter human-smuggling operations.
"Clearly we cannot sit and wait for the next incident. The time to act is now," said Toews.
Canadians want the borders to remain open to those who play by the rules and who are legitimate refugees, said Toews
"But Canadians have been clear that we must protect our borders against those who abuse our generosity for financial gain, threaten the integrity of our immigration system and pose a risk to our safety and security," he said.
When Bill C-49 was originally introduced in October 2010, it drew criticism from the opposition parties and other critics who said it punishes the victims of human smuggling, not the criminals. They also predicted that if the bill became law it would be subject to a court challenge.
Toews said the bill does not target legitimate refugees and that he's not worried about Charter of Rights and Freedoms challenges.
"I'm confident that the measures are charter-compliant," he said.
The previous bill didn't get to a second reading in the last session of Parliament before the spring election was triggered. It's now among the first pieces of legislation the Conservatives have brought back since winning a majority government on May 2.
The bill proposes a number of controversial changes to existing laws. It creates a new designation for the arrival of a group of people as an "irregular arrival" and makes them subject to the human-smuggling laws. It imposes mandatory minimum prison sentences for those convicted of human smuggling and would allow prosecutors to go after ship owners and operators armed with greater penalties for involvement in smuggling.
The bill makes it mandatory to detain those deemed to have arrived in an irregular manner for up to one year or until a decision is rendered by the Immigration and Refugee Board, whichever comes first. It prevents people from applying for permanent resident status for five years if they successfully obtain refugee status and those people are also prevented from sponsoring family members for five years, according to the proposals.
The NDP's immigration critic, Don Davies, denounced the bill's reintroduction and said it is full of flaws and likely contravenes international refugee laws and Canadian laws.
He said it gives the public safety minister too much power and that it confuses human smugglers with legitimate refugees.
Davies said the NDP was hoping the government would have modified the bill given the criticism it faced earlier.
"We are disappointed that it looks like they have not done so," he said.
Toews said the proposed legislation does not unfairly target legitimate refugees and Kenney said its measures are needed to address both the supply and demand sides of the trafficking business.
"As long as someone is willing to pay upwards of $50,000 to be smuggled to Canada there will be people in the black market willing to provide the service," said Kenney. "What we need to do is reduce the demand side of the equation."
The bill's reintroduction comes days after arrests were made related to the Ocean Lady ship that brought 76 refugee claimants from Sri Lanka.
Friday, June 17, 2011
Thursday, June 16, 2011
UN visit aims to get Abdelrazik off terror watchlist Canadian has been on list since 2006 but The Sudanese government, the RCMP and CSIS have exonerated him of all accusations of terrorism, but he remains on the list..
A delegation representing a Canadian who is trying have his name removed from a United Nations terror watchlist will meet with the group's representatives in New York Thursday.
Abousfian Abdelrazik is the only Canadian on the UN's 1267 al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee blacklist. He spent six years in forced exile in Sudan, some of which was spent in prison where he said he was tortured.
His name was placed on the UN blacklist in 2006 because of allegations he was a possible al-Qaeda operative. He was allowed to return to Canada in 2009.
The Sudanese government, the RCMP and CSIS have exonerated him of all accusations of terrorism, but he remains on the list.
Abdelrazik said his life has been "frozen completely" because of this, as he is not allowed to travel outside of Canada, nor can he have a job or a bank account.
He said he is hopeful, however, that his name will eventually be removed from the list.
"I see myself [as an] innocent person," he said, adding that he wants to "live my life normally with my kids, like everybody else."
Dolores Chew, who is with the South Asian Women's Centre and is a member of the delegation travelling to the UN, said the goal is clear.
"We want to ask the 1267 regime to take Abousfian Abdelrazik off the list," she said. "That's a very basic demand, it's very clear to us it can be done and we want it to be done."
Chew said she is optimistic that they will succeed.
"With all the community support, the mainstream support from Canada's own intelligence agencies, we feel he needs to be taken off the list. There is absolutely no reason for him to be there," she said.
The delegation is made up of a wide range of support groups, including labour organizations, community groups and faith-based groups.
Abousfian Abdelrazik is the only Canadian on the UN's 1267 al-Qaeda and Taliban Sanctions Committee blacklist. He spent six years in forced exile in Sudan, some of which was spent in prison where he said he was tortured.
His name was placed on the UN blacklist in 2006 because of allegations he was a possible al-Qaeda operative. He was allowed to return to Canada in 2009.
The Sudanese government, the RCMP and CSIS have exonerated him of all accusations of terrorism, but he remains on the list.
Abdelrazik said his life has been "frozen completely" because of this, as he is not allowed to travel outside of Canada, nor can he have a job or a bank account.
He said he is hopeful, however, that his name will eventually be removed from the list.
"I see myself [as an] innocent person," he said, adding that he wants to "live my life normally with my kids, like everybody else."
Dolores Chew, who is with the South Asian Women's Centre and is a member of the delegation travelling to the UN, said the goal is clear.
"We want to ask the 1267 regime to take Abousfian Abdelrazik off the list," she said. "That's a very basic demand, it's very clear to us it can be done and we want it to be done."
Chew said she is optimistic that they will succeed.
"With all the community support, the mainstream support from Canada's own intelligence agencies, we feel he needs to be taken off the list. There is absolutely no reason for him to be there," she said.
The delegation is made up of a wide range of support groups, including labour organizations, community groups and faith-based groups.
Wednesday, June 15, 2011
Good news The Conservative government now says it will not introduce new user fees to help kill the federal deficit.
OTTAWA — The Conservative government now says it will not introduce new user fees to help kill the federal deficit.
Treasury Board President Tony Clement says there are many ways to balance the budget without additional taxes.
Last week, Clement put user fees on the table in a speech to senior government executives charged with finding $4 billion a year in savings as part of Ottawa's deficit-elimination plan.
He told officials to develop a full range of options, including business consolidation and user fees.
Now Clement says the government does not believe Canadians should be "user-feed to death."
In the election campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged to eliminate the deficit in four years.
To accomplish the feat, Ottawa is counting on a combination of increased revenues from a growing economy and the most stringent spending controls since the cuts of the mid-1990s.
Treasury Board President Tony Clement says there are many ways to balance the budget without additional taxes.
Last week, Clement put user fees on the table in a speech to senior government executives charged with finding $4 billion a year in savings as part of Ottawa's deficit-elimination plan.
He told officials to develop a full range of options, including business consolidation and user fees.
Now Clement says the government does not believe Canadians should be "user-feed to death."
In the election campaign, Prime Minister Stephen Harper pledged to eliminate the deficit in four years.
To accomplish the feat, Ottawa is counting on a combination of increased revenues from a growing economy and the most stringent spending controls since the cuts of the mid-1990s.
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
The Canadian government rejected advice from Health Canada that asbestos be added to a global list of hazardous materials in 2006, see UN treaty known as the Rotterdam Convention.
The Canadian government rejected advice from Health Canada that asbestos be added to a global list of hazardous materials in 2006, CBC News has learned.
According to documents obtained under Access to Information, a senior Health Canada bureaucrat wrote that the agency believed that chrysotile — a form of asbestos that has been linked to cancer — should be added to a UN treaty known as the Rotterdam Convention.
"[Health Canada's] preferred position would be to list — as this is consistent with controlled use — i.e. let people know about the substance so they have the information they need, through prior informed consent, to ensure they handle and use the substance correctly," wrote Paul Glover then director general of Health Canada's safe environments program, in 2006.
The 2006 Rotterdam Convention comprises a list of hazardous substances that require countries to disclose any restrictions imposed for health or environmental reasons by exporting countries. Importing countries would then decide whether to import the substance, ban it, or restrict it, something known as prior informed consent.
More than 50 countries ban the use of asbestos. But Canada, one of the leading exporters of the material, lobbied to keep asbestos off the Rotterdam list with the support of purchasing countries such as Iran, Zimbabwe and Russia. Ultimately, chrysotile asbestos did not make the list and remains off it.
Canada exports $90 million of asbestos, all of it from Quebec, every year.
While Glover noted in his email that Health Canada cannot say that chrysotile is safe, he said the agency does feel "there is science and evidence to support that chrysotile is less dangerous than other forms of asbestos."
"We also feel that the risks associated with chrysotile can be managed by using a controlled use approach — i.e. know the substance its properties and hazards, and handle and use it accordingly."
He also acknowledged that "the final decision will not be made on the basis of health alone."
In 2006, just prior to the Rotterdam Convention, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated that "the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos related diseases is to stop using all types of asbestos." The agency also said that "more than 40 countries, including all members of the European Union have banned the use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile."
Canada’s Department of Natural Resources also supported keeping asbestos off the Rotterdam list. "Listing of chrysotile alongside the world’s most toxic substances will be perceived as encouraging a ban of the substance" it stated on its website.
It also says on the website that inclusion of chrysotile to the Rotterdam Convention "is inappropriate because it is widely recognized that chrysotile fibre can be used safely and responsibly."
Canadian officials have long held that Canada’s approach to asbestos is a responsible one. By pursuing a policy of controlled-use and working with developing countries to minimize exposure, officials have asserted that the risks associated with chrysotile can be minimized.
The Chrysotile Institute, which speaks for the industry, and has received millions in government funding, said there's no need to say anything about chrysotile before selling it, because it’s less harmful than other kinds of asbestos.
"The declared objective of the people who are pushing for inclusion on the convention is to ban the substance worldwide and this would be a move in that direction which is totally unwarranted," said institute spokesman Guy Versailles.
But for years, Canada has been scraping asbestos out of buildings, including those on Parliament Hill and at 24 Sussex Dr., the prime minister's residence.
Asked during the recent election campaign how Canada can justify the contrast, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said as long as countries are willing to buy it, he won’t stand in the way.
"This government will not put Canadian industry in a position where it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted," Harper said.
But criticism of this policy has been fierce.
"Canada is the only Western democracy to have consistently opposed international efforts to regulate the global trade in asbestos. And the government of Canada has done so with shameful political manipulation of science," the Canadian Medical Association Journal stated in an editorial in 2008.
The Canadian Labour Congress has also accused the Canadian government of "ignoring expert advice indicating that chrysotile asbestos is not safe and is causally linked with various forms of cancer."
"The government has failed to consult with labour and other stakeholders on steps that Canada could take to comply with international conventions calling for a ban on asbestos," the congress has stated.
A decision by the International Labour Organization’s Committee on the Application of Standards last week demanded that the Canadian government adopt the “strictest standard limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos.”
It also asked Canada to “take into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology … as well as the findings of WHO, the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of the exposure to asbestos.”
"If you have any information about this story, or other investigative tips, please email investigations@cbc.ca"
Officials from the countries that agreed to the Rotterdam Convention will meet on June 20, but Canada remains undecided on its strategy.
Despite the fact that the government has had years to co-ordinate its position on this issue, an official from Environment Canada recently told CBC News that "Canada's position for the upcoming meeting is under consideration."
But Kathleen Ruff, the co-ordinator of the Rotterdam Convention Alliance which represents environmental and health organizations criticized this position.
"There’s no excuse for the government’s refusal to tell the public the position we as a country will take at the UN environmental conference in a few days. This is not transparency."
According to documents obtained under Access to Information, a senior Health Canada bureaucrat wrote that the agency believed that chrysotile — a form of asbestos that has been linked to cancer — should be added to a UN treaty known as the Rotterdam Convention.
"[Health Canada's] preferred position would be to list — as this is consistent with controlled use — i.e. let people know about the substance so they have the information they need, through prior informed consent, to ensure they handle and use the substance correctly," wrote Paul Glover then director general of Health Canada's safe environments program, in 2006.
The 2006 Rotterdam Convention comprises a list of hazardous substances that require countries to disclose any restrictions imposed for health or environmental reasons by exporting countries. Importing countries would then decide whether to import the substance, ban it, or restrict it, something known as prior informed consent.
More than 50 countries ban the use of asbestos. But Canada, one of the leading exporters of the material, lobbied to keep asbestos off the Rotterdam list with the support of purchasing countries such as Iran, Zimbabwe and Russia. Ultimately, chrysotile asbestos did not make the list and remains off it.
Canada exports $90 million of asbestos, all of it from Quebec, every year.
While Glover noted in his email that Health Canada cannot say that chrysotile is safe, he said the agency does feel "there is science and evidence to support that chrysotile is less dangerous than other forms of asbestos."
"We also feel that the risks associated with chrysotile can be managed by using a controlled use approach — i.e. know the substance its properties and hazards, and handle and use it accordingly."
He also acknowledged that "the final decision will not be made on the basis of health alone."
In 2006, just prior to the Rotterdam Convention, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated that "the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos related diseases is to stop using all types of asbestos." The agency also said that "more than 40 countries, including all members of the European Union have banned the use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile."
Canada’s Department of Natural Resources also supported keeping asbestos off the Rotterdam list. "Listing of chrysotile alongside the world’s most toxic substances will be perceived as encouraging a ban of the substance" it stated on its website.
It also says on the website that inclusion of chrysotile to the Rotterdam Convention "is inappropriate because it is widely recognized that chrysotile fibre can be used safely and responsibly."
Canadian officials have long held that Canada’s approach to asbestos is a responsible one. By pursuing a policy of controlled-use and working with developing countries to minimize exposure, officials have asserted that the risks associated with chrysotile can be minimized.
The Chrysotile Institute, which speaks for the industry, and has received millions in government funding, said there's no need to say anything about chrysotile before selling it, because it’s less harmful than other kinds of asbestos.
"The declared objective of the people who are pushing for inclusion on the convention is to ban the substance worldwide and this would be a move in that direction which is totally unwarranted," said institute spokesman Guy Versailles.
But for years, Canada has been scraping asbestos out of buildings, including those on Parliament Hill and at 24 Sussex Dr., the prime minister's residence.
Asked during the recent election campaign how Canada can justify the contrast, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said as long as countries are willing to buy it, he won’t stand in the way.
"This government will not put Canadian industry in a position where it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted," Harper said.
But criticism of this policy has been fierce.
"Canada is the only Western democracy to have consistently opposed international efforts to regulate the global trade in asbestos. And the government of Canada has done so with shameful political manipulation of science," the Canadian Medical Association Journal stated in an editorial in 2008.
The Canadian Labour Congress has also accused the Canadian government of "ignoring expert advice indicating that chrysotile asbestos is not safe and is causally linked with various forms of cancer."
"The government has failed to consult with labour and other stakeholders on steps that Canada could take to comply with international conventions calling for a ban on asbestos," the congress has stated.
A decision by the International Labour Organization’s Committee on the Application of Standards last week demanded that the Canadian government adopt the “strictest standard limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos.”
It also asked Canada to “take into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology … as well as the findings of WHO, the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of the exposure to asbestos.”
"If you have any information about this story, or other investigative tips, please email investigations@cbc.ca"
Officials from the countries that agreed to the Rotterdam Convention will meet on June 20, but Canada remains undecided on its strategy.
Despite the fact that the government has had years to co-ordinate its position on this issue, an official from Environment Canada recently told CBC News that "Canada's position for the upcoming meeting is under consideration."
But Kathleen Ruff, the co-ordinator of the Rotterdam Convention Alliance which represents environmental and health organizations criticized this position.
"There’s no excuse for the government’s refusal to tell the public the position we as a country will take at the UN environmental conference in a few days. This is not transparency."
Monday, June 13, 2011
Hackers exploit Flash bug in new attacks against Gmail users but Adobe has patched vulnerability that attackers use to steal Web email usernames, passwords
Adobe today confirmed that the Flash Player bug it patched Sunday is being used to steal login credentials of Google's Gmail users.
The vulnerability was patched yesterday in an "out-of-band," or emergency update. The fix was the second in less than four weeks for Flash, and the fifth this year. A weekend patch is very unusual for Adobe.
"We have reports that this vulnerability is being exploited in the wild in active targeted attacks designed to trick the user into clicking on a malicious link delivered in an email message," said Adobe spokeswoman Wiebke Lips in response to questions today. "The reports we received indicate that the current attacks are targeting Gmail specifically. However, we cannot assume that other Web mail providers may not be targeted as well."
According to Adobe's advisory, the Flash vulnerability is a cross-site scripting bug.
Cross-site scripting flaws are often used by identity thieves to hijack usernames and passwords from vulnerable browsers. In this case, browsers themselves are not targeted; rather, attackers are exploiting the Flash Player browser plug-in, which virtually every user has installed.
Adobe said that Google reported the Flash Player flaw to its security team.
Targeted attacks that try to steal account information are commonplace, but they've been prominent in the news since last Wednesday, when Google accused Chinese hackers of targeting senior U.S. government officials and others in a long-running campaign to pilfer Gmail usernames and passwords.
China has denied Google's allegations. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is looking into Google's charges.
The attacks aimed at stealing Gmail account information using the Flash Player vulnerability, however, are different than those Google acknowledged last week. Those attacks, which have been active since at least February, did not rely on an exploit, and instead duped victims into entering their username and password on a fake Gmail login screen.
Adobe updated the Windows, Mac OS X and Linux versions of Flash Player Sunday, and said it would follow that with a patch for the Android edition sometime this week.
Google, which bundles Flash Player with Chrome, also updated its browser on Sunday, refreshing all three of its distribution channels -- stable, beta and dev -- to include the patched version of Flash.
Adobe rated the bug as "important," the second-highest ranking in its four-step threat scoring system. In Adobe's scheme, that rating indicates that attackers may be able to access data on the victimized computer, but cannot plant malware on the machine.
Although most Flash vulnerabilities can also be exploited using specially-crafted PDF documents -- Adobe's Reader includes a component named "authplay.dll" that renders Flash content in PDFs -- Adobe said it wasn't sure whether its popular Reader contained the flaw.
"Adobe is still investigating the impact to the Authplay.dll component," the company's advisory stated. "Adobe is not aware of any attacks targeting Adobe Reader or Acrobat in the wild."
While Adobe did not say whether Reader -- and the for-a-fee Acrobat -- will be patched, the programs are slated for an update June 14 to fix other flaws the company has previously acknowledged in authplay.dll.
Users running browsers other than Chrome can download the patched version of Flash Player from Adobe's site.
The vulnerability was patched yesterday in an "out-of-band," or emergency update. The fix was the second in less than four weeks for Flash, and the fifth this year. A weekend patch is very unusual for Adobe.
"We have reports that this vulnerability is being exploited in the wild in active targeted attacks designed to trick the user into clicking on a malicious link delivered in an email message," said Adobe spokeswoman Wiebke Lips in response to questions today. "The reports we received indicate that the current attacks are targeting Gmail specifically. However, we cannot assume that other Web mail providers may not be targeted as well."
According to Adobe's advisory, the Flash vulnerability is a cross-site scripting bug.
Cross-site scripting flaws are often used by identity thieves to hijack usernames and passwords from vulnerable browsers. In this case, browsers themselves are not targeted; rather, attackers are exploiting the Flash Player browser plug-in, which virtually every user has installed.
Adobe said that Google reported the Flash Player flaw to its security team.
Targeted attacks that try to steal account information are commonplace, but they've been prominent in the news since last Wednesday, when Google accused Chinese hackers of targeting senior U.S. government officials and others in a long-running campaign to pilfer Gmail usernames and passwords.
China has denied Google's allegations. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is looking into Google's charges.
The attacks aimed at stealing Gmail account information using the Flash Player vulnerability, however, are different than those Google acknowledged last week. Those attacks, which have been active since at least February, did not rely on an exploit, and instead duped victims into entering their username and password on a fake Gmail login screen.
Adobe updated the Windows, Mac OS X and Linux versions of Flash Player Sunday, and said it would follow that with a patch for the Android edition sometime this week.
Google, which bundles Flash Player with Chrome, also updated its browser on Sunday, refreshing all three of its distribution channels -- stable, beta and dev -- to include the patched version of Flash.
Adobe rated the bug as "important," the second-highest ranking in its four-step threat scoring system. In Adobe's scheme, that rating indicates that attackers may be able to access data on the victimized computer, but cannot plant malware on the machine.
Although most Flash vulnerabilities can also be exploited using specially-crafted PDF documents -- Adobe's Reader includes a component named "authplay.dll" that renders Flash content in PDFs -- Adobe said it wasn't sure whether its popular Reader contained the flaw.
"Adobe is still investigating the impact to the Authplay.dll component," the company's advisory stated. "Adobe is not aware of any attacks targeting Adobe Reader or Acrobat in the wild."
While Adobe did not say whether Reader -- and the for-a-fee Acrobat -- will be patched, the programs are slated for an update June 14 to fix other flaws the company has previously acknowledged in authplay.dll.
Users running browsers other than Chrome can download the patched version of Flash Player from Adobe's site.
Tories reject leadership vote rule changes resolution take away citizenship from anyone who takes up arms against the Canadian Forces or their allies was also defeated.
Conservative delegates rejected a motion on Saturday that proposed changes to how the party chooses its leaders after a challenge from the floor and a debate between party stalwarts.
Supporters of the current points system mounted a successful challenge to hearing the resolution at the party's Ottawa convention, despite the "balanced leadership" proposal's author MP Scott Reid collecting the required 100 signatures from 100 ridings.
The proposal pitted Reid and other high-profile Conservatives such as Jason Kenney against Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who negotiated the current rule of equality of ridings when he helped create the Conservative Party.
The delegates also voted down a motion to enshrine riding equality into the party's constitution, meaning it's possible the "one member, one vote" battle will be back at the next convention two years from now.
In a separate vote Saturday, the final day of the three-day convention, delegates passed a resolution saying the party supports the freedom of religious organizations to refuse to perform same-sex marriages or allow the use of their facilities for events incompatible with their faith and beliefs.
The resolution changed the wording of an existing party policy on gay marriage, which said the Conservative "government" supported legislation saying marriage is between one man and one woman, with delegates voting to change it to say the Conservative Party supports the move.
The resolutions set party policy but are not binding on the government.
Gay marriage has long been a thorn in the side of the party and an issue opposition parties have used to paint the Tories as behind the times. Canadian courts started the process of allowing gay marriage in 2003 and the Liberal government in 2005 passed a law making it legal.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper allowed a free vote on a motion whether to re-open the same-sex marriage debate in the House of Commons soon after the Conservatives took power in 2006. After the motion was defeated, Harper said he didn't want to revisit the issue.
But the ability of religious organizations to be able to say no to performing the ceremonies has been an irritant to the party's grassroots supporters.
Divisive battle over ridings
On the ridings debate, Reid said the delegates reserved the right to keep looking at the issue by defeating the motion.
"The fact that this particular version wasn't accepted by delegates today doesn't necessarily mean that there can't be a better design," he said. "And one should always leave that option open."
Resolutions defeated:
C-111 — to allow Conservative Fund board members to vote at conventions
C-104 — to keep riding associations "well-informed" of National Council decisions
C-128 and C-132 — to put one representative from each territory on the party's national constitution and policy commissions
Motion from the floor to bar MP spouses from sitting on the national council
Motion from the floor to enshrine riding equality in the party's constitution
Resolutions passed:
C-101 — to deny party membership to anyone who holds a membership in another party
C-108 — to replace departing National Council members with a representative from the same province or territory
C-125 — a housekeeping vote that moves the article on the leader nominating the party's executive director
To cut taxes for families providing homecare
To eliminate taxation on taxes
To end support for a cap-and-trade system to lessen greenhouse gas emissions
To eliminate the inclusion of parental income in calculating a student's need for a loan
To allow eight extra months of interest relief on student loans
To encourage immigrants to adapt to Canadian values and traditions
Under the current rules, every association is allocated 100 points, no matter how many members it has, which get divided depending on how the association's members vote. Reid's proposal, framed as the compromise motion, called for a 100-point base plus one point assigned for each member over 100, but with a 400-point cap.
MacKay said Friday the latest motion is technically the fourth time the party's had the discussion. Each time, he said, members have soundly defeated the idea.
"We had the discussion in the original discussion to bring the Conservative Party together, so it was rigourously debated at that time," he said, adding the party also debated it at the last two conventions in Montreal and Winnipeg.
"Now the membership have again pronounced themselves against changes to a formula that promotes equality, a formula that wins and a formula that is inclusive and doesn't marginalize any region of the country, like Quebec, Atlantic Canada, the territories or rural ridings that sometimes have difficulty between elections keeping their membership high."
In an interview airing Saturday on CBC Radio's The House, Kenney argued it's only fair for electoral district associations with more card-carrying members to have more weight than smaller associations.
"A riding member with five or 10 members gets the same weight as a riding with 5,000 members," Kenney told host Chris Hall. "There is a real lack of equity there and there is no incentive for the riding with five or 10 members to grow, to recruit, to sell new membership.
"I think there's a reasonable argument to be made for the single-member vote, a reasonable argument for equality of ridings.… Why don't we try to blend the best of both systems with a compromise? For me that's kind of self-evident."
The resolutions being considered by 2,300 delegates are to guide the creation of to party's platform, but are not binding on the government.
Delegates also passed a resolution to simplify the tax code, as well as to make anyone convicted of two offences causing death or serious harm a dangerous offender. A controversial resolution to take away citizenship from anyone who takes up arms against the Canadian Forces or their allies was defeated.
Also on justice issues, the party passed a resolution pledging it "does not support a parallel justice system which would contravene our existing rights and freedoms," and another that rejects "the normalization of prostitution." The resolution says the party will work to prevent legalizing bawdy houses, living off the avails of prostitution and communication for the purpose of prostitution.
In other votes Saturday, delegates also passed resolutions in support of ensuring veterans have the benefits and services they deserve and changing the Divorce Act to give grandparents a shot at shared parenting.
In keeping with the government's tough-on-crime talk, the party adopted a resolution to take a proactive approach to reducing human smuggling through sanctions, and to promote democracy in countries where refugees originate.
Supporters of the current points system mounted a successful challenge to hearing the resolution at the party's Ottawa convention, despite the "balanced leadership" proposal's author MP Scott Reid collecting the required 100 signatures from 100 ridings.
The proposal pitted Reid and other high-profile Conservatives such as Jason Kenney against Defence Minister Peter MacKay, who negotiated the current rule of equality of ridings when he helped create the Conservative Party.
The delegates also voted down a motion to enshrine riding equality into the party's constitution, meaning it's possible the "one member, one vote" battle will be back at the next convention two years from now.
In a separate vote Saturday, the final day of the three-day convention, delegates passed a resolution saying the party supports the freedom of religious organizations to refuse to perform same-sex marriages or allow the use of their facilities for events incompatible with their faith and beliefs.
The resolution changed the wording of an existing party policy on gay marriage, which said the Conservative "government" supported legislation saying marriage is between one man and one woman, with delegates voting to change it to say the Conservative Party supports the move.
The resolutions set party policy but are not binding on the government.
Gay marriage has long been a thorn in the side of the party and an issue opposition parties have used to paint the Tories as behind the times. Canadian courts started the process of allowing gay marriage in 2003 and the Liberal government in 2005 passed a law making it legal.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper allowed a free vote on a motion whether to re-open the same-sex marriage debate in the House of Commons soon after the Conservatives took power in 2006. After the motion was defeated, Harper said he didn't want to revisit the issue.
But the ability of religious organizations to be able to say no to performing the ceremonies has been an irritant to the party's grassroots supporters.
Divisive battle over ridings
On the ridings debate, Reid said the delegates reserved the right to keep looking at the issue by defeating the motion.
"The fact that this particular version wasn't accepted by delegates today doesn't necessarily mean that there can't be a better design," he said. "And one should always leave that option open."
Resolutions defeated:
C-111 — to allow Conservative Fund board members to vote at conventions
C-104 — to keep riding associations "well-informed" of National Council decisions
C-128 and C-132 — to put one representative from each territory on the party's national constitution and policy commissions
Motion from the floor to bar MP spouses from sitting on the national council
Motion from the floor to enshrine riding equality in the party's constitution
Resolutions passed:
C-101 — to deny party membership to anyone who holds a membership in another party
C-108 — to replace departing National Council members with a representative from the same province or territory
C-125 — a housekeeping vote that moves the article on the leader nominating the party's executive director
To cut taxes for families providing homecare
To eliminate taxation on taxes
To end support for a cap-and-trade system to lessen greenhouse gas emissions
To eliminate the inclusion of parental income in calculating a student's need for a loan
To allow eight extra months of interest relief on student loans
To encourage immigrants to adapt to Canadian values and traditions
Under the current rules, every association is allocated 100 points, no matter how many members it has, which get divided depending on how the association's members vote. Reid's proposal, framed as the compromise motion, called for a 100-point base plus one point assigned for each member over 100, but with a 400-point cap.
MacKay said Friday the latest motion is technically the fourth time the party's had the discussion. Each time, he said, members have soundly defeated the idea.
"We had the discussion in the original discussion to bring the Conservative Party together, so it was rigourously debated at that time," he said, adding the party also debated it at the last two conventions in Montreal and Winnipeg.
"Now the membership have again pronounced themselves against changes to a formula that promotes equality, a formula that wins and a formula that is inclusive and doesn't marginalize any region of the country, like Quebec, Atlantic Canada, the territories or rural ridings that sometimes have difficulty between elections keeping their membership high."
In an interview airing Saturday on CBC Radio's The House, Kenney argued it's only fair for electoral district associations with more card-carrying members to have more weight than smaller associations.
"A riding member with five or 10 members gets the same weight as a riding with 5,000 members," Kenney told host Chris Hall. "There is a real lack of equity there and there is no incentive for the riding with five or 10 members to grow, to recruit, to sell new membership.
"I think there's a reasonable argument to be made for the single-member vote, a reasonable argument for equality of ridings.… Why don't we try to blend the best of both systems with a compromise? For me that's kind of self-evident."
The resolutions being considered by 2,300 delegates are to guide the creation of to party's platform, but are not binding on the government.
Delegates also passed a resolution to simplify the tax code, as well as to make anyone convicted of two offences causing death or serious harm a dangerous offender. A controversial resolution to take away citizenship from anyone who takes up arms against the Canadian Forces or their allies was defeated.
Also on justice issues, the party passed a resolution pledging it "does not support a parallel justice system which would contravene our existing rights and freedoms," and another that rejects "the normalization of prostitution." The resolution says the party will work to prevent legalizing bawdy houses, living off the avails of prostitution and communication for the purpose of prostitution.
In other votes Saturday, delegates also passed resolutions in support of ensuring veterans have the benefits and services they deserve and changing the Divorce Act to give grandparents a shot at shared parenting.
In keeping with the government's tough-on-crime talk, the party adopted a resolution to take a proactive approach to reducing human smuggling through sanctions, and to promote democracy in countries where refugees originate.
Sunday, June 12, 2011
Sponsors must cover welfare costs: SCOC .... The Supreme Court of Canada Governments must not forgive debts in hardship cases, ruling confirms.
The Supreme Court of Canada has upheld the right of federal and provincial governments to collect social-service payments from the sponsors of immigrants, even in cases involving abuse or abandonment.
The landmark ruling involves the cases of eight Ontario immigrant families that sponsored relatives from abroad who later went on social assistance.
Under federal immigration law, the sponsors agreed to repay any welfare payments that the new arrivals may have incurred after they got to Canada.
—Justice Ian BinnieThe high court, in a unanimous 9-0 ruling, overturned an earlier Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the sponsors, all of whom had claimed various hardships. The individual cases involved repayments of $10,000 to $94,000 in social assistance to the Ontario government.
"The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer," Justice Ian Binnie wrote Friday on behalf of the court.
The court said governments have limited discretion to delay collection of defaulted payments, but not to totally forgive the debts.
"The discretion enables the governments to delay enforcement action having regard to the sponsor's circumstances and to enter into agreements respecting terms of payment, but not simply to forgive the statutory debt," wrote Binnie.
The government is obliged to notify a sponsor that they are in default, he wrote, and allow them an opportunity to explain their financial circumstances.
From job loss to abandonment
In the eight individual cases before the court, the reasons the sponsors gave for not paying included leaving an abusive relationship and losing their own job. In a couple of cases, the fiancee or spouse of the sponsor simply took off after arriving in Canada and began collecting social services.
The sponsors filed motions in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2008 to defer or avoid entirely making payments back to the provincial government.
The court rejected their argument, saying that sponsorship undertakings are in fact contracts, and that the sponsors understood they were assuming financial liability for their family members.
In 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal reversed that ruling and said governments may exercise a case-by-case discretion not to collect. It noted that the law states money "may" be recovered.
The provincial appeal court ruled the government owes sponsors a duty of procedural fairness, entitling them to a process in which they can explain their circumstances.
The Supreme Court ruled that standard of procedural fairness was met in each of the eight cases.
"We are dealing here with ordinary debt, not a government benefits or licensing program," said Binnie.
Weighing the burden
He noted that Parliament has become "increasingly concerned" about the financial burden that is being shifted to the public treasury to financially support sponsored relatives in immigrant families.
"Family reunification is based on the essential condition that in exchange for admission to this country the needs of the immigrant will be looked after by the sponsor, not by the public purse," Binnie wrote.
"Sponsors undertake these obligations in writing. They understand or ought to understand from the outset that default may have serious financial consequences for them."
Binnie said the government does have some discretion when it comes to considering the specific hardships of sponsors.
"It would hardly promote 'successful integration' to require individuals to remain in abusive relationships. Nor would the attempted enforcement of a debt against individuals without means to pay further the interest of 'Canadian society'," he wrote.
Binnie said the government should notify sponsors as soon as their relatives begin receiving welfare payments so debts don't build up without them knowing. But ultimately the sponsors are responsible for keeping their relatives from becoming dependent on social programs.
Friday's ruling does not affect refugee claimants, which are treated separately from family reunification applicants.
Of the two million permanent residents that were admitted to Canada between 1997 and 2007, about 615,000, or 27 per cent, were under the family class.
The landmark ruling involves the cases of eight Ontario immigrant families that sponsored relatives from abroad who later went on social assistance.
Under federal immigration law, the sponsors agreed to repay any welfare payments that the new arrivals may have incurred after they got to Canada.
—Justice Ian BinnieThe high court, in a unanimous 9-0 ruling, overturned an earlier Ontario Court of Appeal ruling in favour of the sponsors, all of whom had claimed various hardships. The individual cases involved repayments of $10,000 to $94,000 in social assistance to the Ontario government.
"The risk of a rogue relative properly lies on the sponsor, not the taxpayer," Justice Ian Binnie wrote Friday on behalf of the court.
The court said governments have limited discretion to delay collection of defaulted payments, but not to totally forgive the debts.
"The discretion enables the governments to delay enforcement action having regard to the sponsor's circumstances and to enter into agreements respecting terms of payment, but not simply to forgive the statutory debt," wrote Binnie.
The government is obliged to notify a sponsor that they are in default, he wrote, and allow them an opportunity to explain their financial circumstances.
From job loss to abandonment
In the eight individual cases before the court, the reasons the sponsors gave for not paying included leaving an abusive relationship and losing their own job. In a couple of cases, the fiancee or spouse of the sponsor simply took off after arriving in Canada and began collecting social services.
The sponsors filed motions in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in 2008 to defer or avoid entirely making payments back to the provincial government.
The court rejected their argument, saying that sponsorship undertakings are in fact contracts, and that the sponsors understood they were assuming financial liability for their family members.
In 2009, the Ontario Court of Appeal reversed that ruling and said governments may exercise a case-by-case discretion not to collect. It noted that the law states money "may" be recovered.
The provincial appeal court ruled the government owes sponsors a duty of procedural fairness, entitling them to a process in which they can explain their circumstances.
The Supreme Court ruled that standard of procedural fairness was met in each of the eight cases.
"We are dealing here with ordinary debt, not a government benefits or licensing program," said Binnie.
Weighing the burden
He noted that Parliament has become "increasingly concerned" about the financial burden that is being shifted to the public treasury to financially support sponsored relatives in immigrant families.
"Family reunification is based on the essential condition that in exchange for admission to this country the needs of the immigrant will be looked after by the sponsor, not by the public purse," Binnie wrote.
"Sponsors undertake these obligations in writing. They understand or ought to understand from the outset that default may have serious financial consequences for them."
Binnie said the government does have some discretion when it comes to considering the specific hardships of sponsors.
"It would hardly promote 'successful integration' to require individuals to remain in abusive relationships. Nor would the attempted enforcement of a debt against individuals without means to pay further the interest of 'Canadian society'," he wrote.
Binnie said the government should notify sponsors as soon as their relatives begin receiving welfare payments so debts don't build up without them knowing. But ultimately the sponsors are responsible for keeping their relatives from becoming dependent on social programs.
Friday's ruling does not affect refugee claimants, which are treated separately from family reunification applicants.
Of the two million permanent residents that were admitted to Canada between 1997 and 2007, about 615,000, or 27 per cent, were under the family class.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)