WHY Immigration debate avoided in election?

[aliz]

I just read this, interesting

Full marks to Trevor Lautens for pointing out the disastrous consequences of Canada's immigration policy and the fact that candidates of all parties shy away from discussing the issue (5 Vital Issues Not on the Election Agenda, April 1). The days have long gone when immigration was used to strengthen and build this country. Now it's no more than a means for vote-grubbing federal politicians to buy what they perceive to be the immigrant vote at the expense of the rest of us.

Michael Ignatieff demonstrated this last week when he promised to increase the number of immigrants in the family reunification class. Our health-care system is already severely stressed because of an aging population, yet Ignatieff proposes to make things far worse by bringing in ever more elderly people who have never paid a dime into the system. Those of us who have contributed to health care for decades can be treated on the floor of a hospital cafeteria for all Ignatieff cares: just as long as he and his party are elected.

If anything, Stephen Harper's Conservatives are even worse. During their term in office, they've increased the annual intake of immigrants from a level that was already ruinously high. They've also brought in hundreds of thousands of "temporary" workers, most of whom will never go home. All this has happened during a time when unemployment levels have been among the highest since the Great Depression.

We needn't expect any of our present crop of candidates -- including our two sitting MPs, Andrew Saxton and John Weston -- to show their concern for the welfare of North Shore voters by addressing this crucial issue either before or after the election. They just don't have the guts.


Read more: http://www.nsnews.com/news/decision-canada/Immigration+debate+avoided+election/4607712/story.html#ixzz1JXHI9Rxp

 

[steaky]

How about Jack Layton?

 

[Pippin]

This was a letter to the editor stating someone's opinion of another person's opinion and as such does not reflect anything more than that. To have a better understanding, one needs to know that Trevor Lautens' is a columnist whose writing style is frequently sensational and rarely reflects the views of the majority. There is a long history here. I have long since stopped reading anything he writes.

 

[saki]

WHY Immigration debate avoided in election?

Simple because citizens have right to vote and immigrants won't get them any votes so they debate only on those issues which are related to the citizens of Canada because they are the ones who will be voting for them and citizens have many other concerns than immigration.

Its my opinion.

Cheers
Saki

 

[fariza]

I agree with Saki. In addition to that usually debate held on issues where the two parties have a major difference in opinion and promise and I am afraid on Immigration issues it is not that remarkable to ignite the debate as an agenda......as saki said immigration has not been a major concern for the citizen but for the government and whoever comes in or regain in power will have limited options to bring radical changes (other than employing new policy!!!) in current immigration set up... so they are currently taking this as a off topic.....

 

[jnathan]

Canada has already injected millions of new migrants in the year 2008-2010, huge amount has been pushed into their economy. they are doing good now. They'd now concentrate on their unemployment rate and creating more jobs.