Liberals always know best

I have read some interesting news about what our Liberal government is planning to do in the near to medium term. An infrastructure bank is to be set up, for example, to coordinate and fund vital infrastructure projects across Canada.

This, by itself, is probably not a bad idea – Canada’s infrastructure is crumbling from coast to coast to coast, and with so many jurisdictions (municipal, provincial, federal) tending to work against, rather than with, each other, it might be helpful to have a more centralized approach.

At any rate, where infrastructure is concerned, nothing much or major has been done for decades, with the city of Toronto being one of the most glaring examples of inaction.

But there is another thing the Liberals want to do: increase immigration levels from currently around 300,000 to close to 500,000 a year. Despite several polls that show that at least two-thirds of Canadians are dead set against higher immigration numbers, the Liberal government, so it has announced, will disregard (majority) public opinion and simply go ahead with its plans – because Liberals always know what’s best, right?

Canadians are not against immigration per se, but what they don’t like is receiving hundreds of thousands of people who are not compatible with Canada – for linguistic, cultural or religious reasons. Two-thirds of Canadians firmly believe that it’s high time we stopped bending over backwards for newcomers and accommodating their various requests for this or that religious or cultural oddity. No, they say, it’s time we demanded that our “guests” do the bending-over from now on. In other words, they must learn our language(s) and adopt our ways.

And they are 100 percent right. After all, Canada spends close to $30 billion a year on immigrants who, by all rights, should have never been admitted to the country. Instead of rejuvenating our society and fixing our demographic collapse, we have brought in middle-aged or old folks, with tons of medical ailments and problems. Even worse, instead of creating future taxpayers, as per the original objective of immigration, we have been building an ever-growing army of welfare cases (not to mention criminals and terrorists). This is also why wait times keep increasing in our public healthcare sector, because doctors’ offices and emergency rooms are clogged with all those foreign (and elderly) patients.

The government and its experts tell us that Canada needs more people, and this is true. Even though we are the second largest country in the world by land mass, we are a tiny nation, especially when compared to the American juggernaut south of the border.

Our relatively small population is the reason, so it has been said repeatedly, why certain products we see on American TV aren’t available here, or why mobile phone rates are not as cheap as elsewhere. It is also why the Canadian market has been shunned by global giants like Apple, Amazon or Google, as they all withhold certain services from puny Canada that they have readily made available to Germany, Britain or even Japan.

Our perpetually low rate of productivity has also been blamed on the fact that we don’t have enough (smart) people in Canada.

There is a simple solution to this problem, one that even the two-thirds of Canadians who have soured on immigration will agree with: implement free movement of people between Canada and the US – and ideally, also between Canada and the UK, Australia and New Zealand.

This way, people in all those countries would be able to go where the work is, and without any red tape and hassle. Only too often, massive numbers of Americans have been out of work, but due to immigration restrictions and general problems, they have been unable to move north, especially at times when Canada had more vacancies than it could fill on its own.

Through such free movement between and among like-minded countries (all sharing the same language, as well as more or less the same culture and mindset), Canada could easily satisfy its needs, as could every other country on that list, and it would be done in a way that would be socially benign, largely free of the risk of importing troublemakers, criminals and terrorists.

Leave a Reply