UN Global Migration Pact is a high risk, low reward document unworthy of Canada’s signature
Barring a drastic change of plans from the Trudeau government, Canada will sign on to the UN’s “Global Compact for Safe, Orderly and Regular Migration” next week in Marrakech, Morocco.
Hyped as a “historic” event, this pact aims to promote a “common understanding, shared responsibilities and unity of purpose regarding migration, making it work for all.”
This lengthy 34 page document contains 23 objectives and corresponding broad policy suggestions for countries to use in the efforts to meet said objectives.
Included in these objectives are calls to increase data driven policy decisions, improve legal documentation of migrants and “prevent, combat and eradicate” international human trafficking.
Clamping down on press freedom
However, the agreement also includes provisions which encourage member countries to crack down on media reporting that is not favourable to migration by adjusting journalistic and advertising standards and removing funding from outlets that “systematically promote intolerance, xenophobia, racism and other forms of discrimination towards migrants.”
In light of the government’s recent announcement of a $600 million bailout package to Canadian media companies, the signing of this pact only increases the amount of pressure on media companies to conform to the governments positions and soften their reporting on them.
To be clear, media companies should not be racist or xenophobic in their reporting, that much is obvious. However, the concerning portion of this policy recommendation is that the definition of these terms, particularly “intolerance” and “discrimination,” is rather ambiguous and ripe for abuse.
Differing views on the pact
Many proponents of this pact see it as an opportunity for countries around the world to come together and solve the problems of migration on a global scale. Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen, International Development Minister Claude-Marie Bibeau and Canadian UN representative Jean-Nicolas Beuze said just as much in their Macleans article praising it as a “plan that holds the promise of improving the lives of millions of people.”
Critics of the agreement, including Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer, have voiced concerns about the effect it might have on domestic policy, particularly as a resource for legal decisions concerning Canadian immigration cases.
Despite it officially be listed as a non-binding agreement, many countries have rejected the pact on national sovereignty grounds, including notable Canadian allies like the U.S., Israel, and Australia.
While some nations like Hungary pulled out because of a fundamental disagreement of the pact’s stated benefit of migration, most countries who declined to sign did so out of concern that a global pact on migration would lead to less control over sovereign borders.
All told, the vast majority of countries seem to agree on the need to address the problems caused by mass migration but disagree on whether this requires a global solution or not.
The pact is intolerant of criticism
That’s why the agreement’s language surrounding media coverage of immigration is so important. Many of the supporters of this pact find any disagreement with it to be nonsensical—after all, who would oppose helping needy migrants?
EU Migration Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos was quoted in the German paper Die Welt expressing exactly this sentiment, saying he didn’t understand why countries would oppose this pact.
If there’s no good reason to oppose the pact, why not ban any media coverage that doesn’t tow the line of the U.N. view of migration then? If they aren’t in favour of helping out migrants in need, they must be racist and xenophobic right?
This is the kind of thinking that is so pervasive among the upper echelon U.N. types and leads to these dangerous suggestions of curtailment of press freedom.
While the agreement does contain positive aspects including commitments to reduce “structural factors” leading to mass migration and strengthening the “transnational response to smuggling of migrants,” it fails to properly address some of downsides migration and only sees it as a “source of prosperity, innovation and sustainable development in our globalized world.”
Recognizing that migration can affect countries in “different and sometimes unpredictable ways,” instead of expanding on these ways, the pact actually seeks to dispel any “misleading narratives that generate negative perceptions of migrants.”
What these “misleading narratives” are is unclear. However, were one to point out some of the adverse effects of migration including economic costs and cultural effects, there is a strong chance such critiques would fall under the “misleading narratives” category.
The same approach of minimizing the negative effects and attacking the critics of immigration policy as hustlers looking to promote misleading narratives or stoke intolerance can be seen right here in Canada as well.
The governing Liberals have frequently attacked their immigration critics as “intolerant” with Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen going so far as to call Ontario’s Minister of Children, Community and Social Services Lisa MacLeod “Not Canadian.”
The pact is not the right solution
Despite the approach of the current Canadian government, as a nation with a long and proud history of safe, orderly and merit based immigration, Canada should not take an unnecessary risk of signing on to this flawed agreement.
While its intentions may be good, the pact’s lack of respect for alternative immigration viewpoints, failure to address the negative effects of migration, and encouragement of governmental interference with the free press make it unworthy of Canada’s signature.
This clumsy, ill worded, and narrow minded U.N. document is not the tool Canada should use to help address the problems caused by mass migration.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has cancelled his trip to the Caribbean after receiving backlash online on Sunday after it was reported he was still planning to go on the trip, despite Canadian cargo and passenger trains being shut down for the greater part of two weeks.
The Canadian Press reported Sunday afternoon Trudeau was still intending to go on the trip to the Caribbean, so it appears Trudeau backed out last minute.
The Prime Minister’s Office released a press release Sunday evening, less than 24 hours before his flight was supposed to take off to Barbados.
The PMO stated that Foreign Affairs Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne will go to represent Canada instead.
Trudeau was planning to continue his world tour to try and secure Canada a seat at the United Nations Security Council.
Last week Trudeau was in Africa and Europe trying to drum up support from foreign countries for the UN vote on who will get the seat. The prime minister was criticized throughout the week, including when he indicated Canada would be willing to help develop an African country’s oil and gas sector at the same time Canadian protesters are trying to shut down parts of Alberta’s oil and gas industry. Trudeau was also criticized roundly for shaking and bowing to Iran’s foreign minister a month after the country shot down a plane killing 57 Canadians and for not returning home sooner as the #ShutDownCanada protests continued to go on unabated.
Grocery, agriculture, retail sectors have all been affected by the protests. Some major cities also receive their chlorine for water treatment from CN Rail trains, which could mean drinking water in major cities may run out. Other cities rely on getting their propane to heat homes from trains.
Via Rail predicts over 83,000 passengers were affected and over 400 trains trips were cancelled due to the protest blockades over the past two weeks.
The Trudeau government has said that they will not revoke $372.5 million that they gave to Bombardier, even after the corporation said it is leaving commercial aviation, according to Blacklock’s Reporter.
The Liberal Minister for Industry Navdeep Bains said in a statement that “Our government has been steadfast in its support for the Canadian aerospace industry and its workers … we will continue to engage with all relevant parties to ensure that previous commitments are honoured.”
The Trudeau government gave an intrest-free loan of $372.5 million to Bombardier in 2017 to help with their production of the C-series aircraft. Soon after this, Bombardier cut 14,500 jobs, sold a majority of the C-series aircraft shares, and moved the production of the aircraft to Alabama.
Despite the huge redundancies, Bombardier executives saw it fit to grant themselves a 48 percent pay raise for six senior managers. These raises, however, were soon revoked after protests and condemnation.
Despite government support, Bombardier managed to lose $1.6 billion last year.
Speaking in the Senate, Conservative Senator Leo Housakos said that “The terms of the agreement were not fully disclosed to Parliament or the public … we still don’t know today if that $400 million was a grant or a loan, or when it will be repaid.”
Liberal Minister Navdeep Bains’ Department of Industry managed to create “zero” jobs for a $1 billion subsidy according to an internal document obtained by Blacklock’s Reporter.
Much of this comes down to a lack of order in the Department of Industry. They did not fill in what they considered to be unnecessary data brackets: these being, “estimated jobs created,” “estimated jobs maintained,” and “actual jobs created.”
Justin Trudeau’s cabinet created this program in 2017, where they spent $950 million with a promise that they would create some 50,000 new Canadian jobs. Another $918 million was spent in 2018 under the same program.
As a result of the Department of Industry not recording data, it is impossible to know how many of these 50,000 jobs were actually created.
Minister Navdeep Bains said that this program would “equip Canadians with the skills they need for the jobs of today and tomorrow … this investment in innovation will create those jobs.”
The Liberal’s promise of 50,000 new jobs has come under much scrutiny by the Conservative Party and the NDP.
Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner, for instance, criticized the government, saying that “little government analysis has been made available to parliamentarians regarding the measurable outcomes of these dollars.”
In a separate case, Minister Navdeep Bains faced similar scrutiny after he said 56,000 jobs would be created with a $1 billion loan in 2019. In reality, the Liberal government only managed to create 6,613 jobs.
A month after 57 Canadians were killed by the Iranian regime, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been pictured greeting Iran’s foreign minister Javad Zarif with a smile—and bowing.
Trudeau met with Zarif in Munich, Germany, at a security conference. Trudeau is currently on a world tour, attempting to drum up support for a seat on the UN Security Council.
The footage of Trudeau bowing was captured on Iranian state TV, and was shared to Twitter by Brian Lilley.
Social media users were outraged to see what they see as “subservience.” Simon Jefferies tweeted: “A bow. A happy grin. A 15-second handshake. I can’t even begin to imagine how the families of the 57 Canadians on that plane would feel seeing this.”
The pictures of Trudeau and the Iranian delegation were taken by an Iranian state photographer as Canadian journalists were prevented by the Prime Minister’s Office from witnessing the event. Iran insisted that no Canadian journalists could take photographs.
In January of this year, the Iranian regime shot down a Ukrainian passenger plane, killing all 176 civilians who were on board. 57 Canadians died from the plane being shot down.
Over the past few weeks, Trudeau has been meeting with leaders of foreign countries in order to win support for his Security Council bid. Earlier this week, Trudeau met with Senegalese President Macky Sall, where he discussed an “oil and gas partnership,” despite killing oil and gas projects in Canada.
Trudeau also promised the African Union $10 million in funding that would go to the empowerment of African women.