Can anyone tell me if the Canadian results are good or bad for us?

[PlanetBev]

I don't quite understand how the systems work, I just want to know if I can make a run for the border if things turn any worse over here.

[cprise]

1. Let me put it this way:

Ralph Nader is having an orgasm right about now.

[TrogL]

2. Better check out your immigration status before you get your hopes up

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/immigrate/index.html

Got enough points?

[MallRat]

5. Good to know. I'm an 81.

Need 67 points to immigrate.

Hope I don't need to use this information. :eyes:

-MR

[PlanetBev]

6. Looking pretty good

30+ years skilled worker experience, Bachelor's Degree, English speaking. Maybe I'll become an RCMP groupie. I always did like a man in uniform.

[TN al]

8. Hot Damn...

...scored an 83 out of 100 as a skilled worker. Lost points on not having an arranged job and not speaking French, although I can read it a little. Of course I may even be a citizen. Where do I check on that?

On edit: anybody know what a good city to locate in is? My family is in Thunder Bay and I like it just fine there but what if there is a better place. any ideas?

[SeveneightyWhoa]

3. The results are good.

Read this: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/CanadaVotes/2004/06/29/519546-cp.html

Even if this isn't the case, the Liberals defeated the Conservatives (ie. Republicans North), defying all expectations.

[camero]

12. It is sort of good news

Martin will have to seek out left-leaning BQs or else the kingmaker could actually be the one conservative in BC who ran as an Independent and won his seat.

Before I came back here temporarily from Victoria I was watching TV there and the prediction was for the NDP winning 21 seats so I was kinda disappointed reading the link but I'm also hoping that there are more left-leaning BQs to tilt the balance of power left.

[Bill McBlueState]

4. my take

The way I read it, not much will change. Paul Martin is still the PM and the Liberals still hold onto their cabinet positions. They're going to have a hard time getting legislation passed because it's a minority government, but that will lead to gridlock more than any major policy reversals.

I don't think the current government is expected to last more than twelve to eighteen months.

[cprise]

9. Considering the Rightward moves by the Liberals

...the results are excellent news. This intervention by the NDP is something the US system isn't capable of.

[TrogL]

7. Immigation could theoretically get tighter

The Bloc Quebecois is anti-immigration (not sure why) and would oppose any loosening of immigration standards and might press for them being increased.

[Minstrel Boy]

10. The BQ suffers the contraditions of Quebec nationalism:

Socially progressive, yet demographically reactionary. The "pure" Quebecois is the BQ's constituency. And most new Quebeckers are fierce Canadian federalists, and so opponents of the BQ and of Quebec sovereignty.

All nationalism is, to some degree, reactionary.

[iverglas]

11. the straight goods

http://www.straightgoods.ca/ViewLetter.cfm?REF=1373

Social Democratic Parties Social democratic parties since 1914 are left-wing capitalist parties. They generally more represent the working class rather than the big-business and professional classes of the Liberals and Conservatives. Such parties normally adhere to capitalist concepts - but want a greater share of the pie for the working class. This is achieved by increased worker rights and benefits, fairer taxation; social programs which reduces inequality and poverty and through collective bargaining by unionism. (The Bloc Quebecois originally a Conservative separatist party is now a social democratic party led by Gilles Duceppe for Quebec interests.)

New Democratic Party (NDP) The social democratic NDP, has been the party of the working class. Under Jack Layton, the party is shifting from its passive role since the 1970s to more aggressiveness policies to reverse the losses of workers' wages, benefits and conditions under neoliberalism. Today its major policies are to improve public health and education and to stop the privatization of government assets and social programs.. It advocates bank reform - to reduce and eliminate the $40 billion in unnecessary interest rates by borrowing from the Bank of Canada instead of through the private banks. It advocates gradually eliminating the GST <federal value-added tax>; and renegotiating NAFTA particularly Chapter 11 which allows foreign corporations to sue the government if it intervenes even to stop toxic pollution.

Always worth poking around at www.straightgoods.ca - current stories are about the election.

In answer to TrogL's comment, is the Bloc anti-immigration? Not to my knowledge. Quebec sovereignists are constantly seeking more provincial control over immigration (which is a shared federal-provincial jurisdiction). Quebec has always been concerned, with good reason, about non-francophone immigration jeopardizing the ability of the québécois culture/people to survive and develop.

http://canada.metropolis.net/Renewal/academic%20reports/Adelman%20Paper%202.htm

I FRAMING THE ISSUE - CONTEXT

Usually discussion in this area begins with the question of whether two neighbouring countries that are both traditional countries of immigration can work at establishing common security policies without, at the same time, working on common immigration, refugee and migration policies, in the latter area particularly with respect to temporary work permits, student visas, and visitor visas. However, cooperation, coordination and integration in asylum and humanitarian migration policy and practices must be understood within the context of other trends.

<footnote 24> The only real criticism of the report Hands Across the Border, focused on the safe third country provision. Though both the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP supported the report in general, the few recommendations on which they aimed their critical guns dealt with one or two recommendations that those parties thought were too harsh on those trying to enter the Canadian refugee claims system.

The Bloc Quebecois dissented from Hands on the safe third country discussions because, "A safe third country agreement could pull the rug out from under the feet of a number of refugees seeking asylum in Canada or Quebec who had had the misfortune than to pass through the 'wrong' countries on their way here."

Similarly, the New Democratic Party also qualified the 'direct-back' policy (requiring those trying to enter the claims process in Canada to wait in the USA while awaiting clearance) as well as the Report's recommendation for a 'safe third country' agreement with the US. The NDP noted that, "Canada does not take in large numbers of refugees compared to many other countries. We are also an "end-of-the-line" country in the sense that with our geography more refugees come here as a final destination than pass through in search of a safe home. Roughly 60 per cent of refugee claimants come here from the US. There is no clear purpose to the Report's recommendations except to cut back on the number of refugees coming to Canada … by closing the legitimate avenue for refugees to enter, a third safe country agreement with the US would likely raise the number of refugees who will resort to illegal means of entry."

[ibegurpard]

13. Canada's not far enough

think Austria in the 1930's.

[Lisa]

14. well, if there's a draft next year ...

During the Vietnam War, the NDP were able to help put pressure on the Liberal government to allow Americans to stay here. Immigration restrictions are tighter now, but one newspaper columnist in Victoria suggests that concerted lobbying of Parliament, plus the help of the NDP, Greens, left-leaning Liberals, and even the Bloc could get Martin to cave in and allow draft-dodgers sanctuary on "humanitarian and compassionate" grounds. If the NDP had been wiped out, or the Conservatives had locked down a majority, this wouldn't be nearly as likely.

[iverglas]

15. don't forget refugee claims

http://www.hrea.org/learn/tutorials/refugees/Handbook/hbtoc.htm

The United Nations High Commissioner For Refugees' Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Statusunder the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees:

Chapter Five

B. Deserters and persons avoiding military service

167. In countries where military service is compulsory, failure to perform this duty is frequently punishable by law. Moreover, whether military service is compulsory or not, desertion is invariably considered a criminal offence. The Penalties may vary from country to country, and are not normally regarded as persecution. Fear of prosecution and punishment for desertion or draft-evasion does not in itself constitute well-founded fear of persecution under the definition. Desertion or draft-evasion does not, on the other hand, exclude a person from being a refugee, and a person may be a refugee in addition to being a deserter or draft-evader.

168. A person is clearly not a refugee if his only reason for desertion or draft-evasion is his dislike of military service or fear of combat. He may, however, be a refugee if his desertion or evasion of military service is concomitant with other relevant motives for leaving or remaining outside his country, or if he otherwise has reasons, within the meaning of the definition, to fear persecution.

169. A deserter or draft-evader may also be considered a refugee if it can be shown that he would suffer disproportionately severe punishment for the military offence on account of his race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. The same would apply if it can be shown that he has well-founded fear of persecution on these grounds above and beyond the punishment for desertion.

170. There are, however, also cases where the necessity to perform military service may be the sole ground for a claim to refugee status, i.e. when a person can show that the performance of military service would have required his participation in military action contrary to his genuine political, religious or moral convictions, or to valid reasons of conscience.

171. Not every conviction, genuine though it may be, will constitute a sufficient reason for claiming refugee status after desertion or draft-evasion. It is not enough for a person to be in disagreement with his government regarding the political justification for a particular military action. Where, however, the type of military action, with which an individual does not wish to be associated, is condemned by the international community as contrary to basic rules of human conduct, punishment for desertion or draft-evasion could, in the light of all other requirements of the definition, in itself be regarded as persecution.

172. Refusal to perform military service may also be based on religious convictions. If an applicant is able to show that his religious convictions are genuine, and that such convictions are not taken into account by the authorities of his country in requiring him to perform military service, he may be able to establish a claim to refugee status. Such a claim would, of course, be supported by any additional indications that the applicant or his family may have encountered difficulties due to their religious convictions.

173. The question as to whether objection to performing military service for reasons of conscience can give rise to a valid claim to refugee status should also be considered in the light of more recent developments in this field. An increasing number of States have introduced legislation or administrative regulations whereby persons who can invoke genuine reasons of conscience are exempted from military service, either entirely or subject to their performing alternative (i.e. civilian) service. The introduction of such legislation or administrative regulations has also been the subject of recommendations by international agencies. 24 In the light of these developments, it would be open to Contracting States, to grant refugee status to persons who object to performing military service for genuine reasons of conscience.

174. The genuineness of a person's political, religious or moral convictions, or of his reasons of conscience for objecting to performing military service, will of course need to be established by a thorough investigation of his personality and background. The fact that he may have manifested his views prior to being called to arms, or that he may already have encountered difficulties with the authorities because of his convictions, are relevant considerations. Whether he has been drafted into compulsory service or joined the army as a volunteer may also be indicative of the genuineness of his convictions.

The definition of a Convention refugee (which is applied in Canadian legislation) is:

http://www.canlii.org/ca/sta/i-2.5/sec96.html

Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
PART 2 REFUGEE PROTECTION
DIVISION 1 REFUGEE PROTECTION, CONVENTION REFUGEES AND PERSONS IN NEED OF PROTECTION
Convention refugee

96. A Convention refugee is a person who, by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion,

(a) is outside each of their countries of nationality and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of each of those countries; or

(b) not having a country of nationality, is outside the country of their former habitual residence and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to return to that country.

Anyone seriously considering this option should, if and when the time comes, contact the Law Union of Ontario, http://www.lawunion.ca/ ... stupid site isn't responding right now, but try it later. It's similar to the National Lawyers' Guild (there is a BC Law Union as well, which I'm not familiar with, having been out of the biz for years, but which seems to be a little more doctrinaire), and both the organization and its immigration lawyer members have long been leading progressive voices in Canadian immigration policy debates.