Yet another “refugee” outrage!

In the Toronto Star of May 27th, 2010, appeared an article by Tracey Tyler headed “Refugee door pried open for Haitian women fearing rape”. 

See story here.

In it, we are told that a Federal judge took into account Amnesty International and Doctors without Borders having “identified rape as a systemic problem in Haiti, one that has worsened since January’s earthquake.”  

An Adjudicator last year rejected the refugee claim of a woman with four daughters, “because violence is such a widespread problem in Haiti”. 

However, the new ruling takes into account a previous Supreme Court of Canada determination that “sexual assault is not like any other crime and targets women in the vast majority of cases.” 

Justice Yvon Pinard refers to “…a historical social context which describes Haitian women as specific targets by the military, and civilian armed gangs……  This clearly contradicts the board’s assertion that rape is an act of violence faced generally by all Haitians.”

However, when Federal lawyers argued that a ruling based on this assumption could mean that “all female refugee claimants from Haiti would automatically be granted refugee protection simply because they are women”, Justice Pinard responded that “female refugee claimants from Haiti will still have to prove their risk of being raped is more than a mere possibility.”

In my opinion, this requirement will be ridiculously easy to meet, considering the Justice’s earlier observations Indeed, one may feel tempted to question the Justice’s motives in making such a seemingly contradictory statement. 

But, there is a lot more to this than the deplorable situation in Haiti.  For the last several decades, we have been flooded with refugees claiming status for a variety of reasons, some flimsy to say the least.  Some come here – or are actually sent here – expressly to obtain funding for foreign wars, by making multiple welfare claims.  Some have been documented flying from province to province to collect, and the money thus extracted from Canadian pockets is then used to finance civil wars and acts of terrorism in their distant homelands.

Since when has Canada been responsible for the many culturally and religiously-generated conflicts and injustices throughout the world?  Why should we have to assume the burden of providing food, housing, education, and medical care to those affected? Who says we have an obligation to carry the world on our shoulders?

If anything can be done for these people, it should be done in their own countries.  Not just to prevent overloading and abuse of our welfare and other social services, but more importantly because, in my opinion, the more Third World immigrants and refugees we allow into Canada, the more Canada itself begins the display the warning markers of a Third World country.  Skyrocketing crime rates, dozens of murders every year, gang wars, drug trafficking and the accompanying petty crime, the failure by many immigrants and refugees to make any effort whatsoever to assimilate, all combine to seriously impair our quality of life.

As long as welfare in Canada pays better than working in the Third World, people will continue to lie and cheat in order to get onto our gravy train.

Consciously or unconsciously enabling this, as in the ruling above, makes an already bad situation considerably worse.

The sooner we have a political party in power willing to use the “not-withstanding” clause to prevent abuses of our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the sooner we have a system in place whereby judges are elected, the better. 

Jeff Goodall