07.17.2012 12:00 AM

In today’s Sun: Jason Kenney is a thug

You can judge a nation sometimes on how it treats its weakest citizens.

Canada, historically, has always known itself to be a nation of immigrants and refugees. All of us — with the exception of our First Nations, whose leadership are gathered this week in Toronto to select a national grand chief — have come here from somewhere else. If we’re being honest with ourselves, we must acknowledge that much.

It’s a strength, too. Our diversity, and our willingness to welcome others seeking a new and better life, is one of the things that makes us great. We’ve collectively made Canada the best country on earth by welcoming newcomers. Not by turning them away. As such, the United Nations has consistently ranked Canada as one of the world’s best nations.

Jason Kenney doesn’t agree with any of that, or he doesn’t understand any of that. In the Harper government, Kenney is the minister charged with making Canada less hospitable to those from afar. He’s good at it.

Whenever the Conservative government gets in trouble or seems adrift, Kenney can be counted on to offer up some mean and miserly new policy, a bit of dog-whistling to quiet the conservative core vote. Thus, his recent plan to deny basic health benefits to refugees.

Kenney’s anti-refugee bill, C-31, will kill basic medical coverage provided to refugees and asylum-seekers. As such, it persecutes those who have mostly come here to escape persecution. It is a distinctly un-Canadian bit of viciousness, one that will see diabetics denied insulin, heart patients denied life-saving medications and high-risk pregnant women unable to get the treatment they need. The Canadian Medical Association says it will see children held in detention centres with their mothers.


  1. Tim says:

    Has anyone noticed these guys are starting to wear red ties? They are kicking sand in the Liberals’ faces. I recall the Charles Atlas ads in the comics and I remember how this story turns out.

    • Kaplan says:

      Dumb. Color of one’s tie means nothing. I’ve seen Obama wear red ties. That means he’s a red-stater? I’m sure we could find pictures of Paul Martin and Jean Chretien wearing blue ties as well.

  2. LD says:

    Bravo, Mr, Kinsella .. Bravo!

  3. tf says:

    I don’t know what to think…!
    I read your article and agreed with every word. It’s reasonable, responsible and compassionate. I clicked to read the end, and didn’t change my mind. Well done.
    Then I started reading some of the comments.
    I can’t believe there are actually people who live in Canada who would write that kind of hate onto the internet for all the world to see. Who are those people? I am lucky to live in my world and feel sorry for those who allow hatred to rot their minds.
    Thanks for braving the foul air over there Warren!

    • Peckster says:

      The people who write this stuff usually aren’t using their own names, and rightly so. They’d be an embarrassment to their friends, families and possibly employers.

  4. smelter rat says:

    Kenny is doing his best to convince Canadians that brown people only come to Canada to mooch off the rest of us. He is a despicable little man.

  5. Anne Peterson says:

    And from a purely fiscal point of view, medical conditions can get much much worse when untreated and cost so much more. No to mention the horrendous conditions some of these people have escaped. Most of us come from families who came to Canada running away from horrendous condition of one kind or another. When can we get rid of this horrible psychopathic bunch who are busy sabotaging the small arms trade agreements also, so they can’t just make life horrible for the refugees who get here, but can succed in making life more horrible for them before they leave their war torn countries.

  6. JamesHalifax says:

    Warren, I think you forgot to mention a few pertinent points. This change will not deny medical help to refugee’s to the degree your article indicates. They will still receive “free” medical services when they require it, however, they will not receive BETTER health coverage than Canadians who have been paying for it. Many of the people in question who may not receive the enhanced medical care are those refugees who are found to be bogus, or otherwise dishonest. Genuine refugees are still going to be well taken care of. There is no reason someone who has never paid a cent in taxes, should receive better care than those who have.

    • Torgo says:

      What exactly constitutes ‘better’ health care? When I hear something like that, I think of people who called gay marriage ‘special’ rights…

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Better health care is exactly what it is. Refugees, or failed refugees have access to care, that is only provided to Canadians if they can pay. Eye care, dental, prescriptions, etc.

        As for gay marriage…..I support it. That is EQUAL.

        The health care Warren discusses is not. I understand Warren’s side has to make it sound evil and petty, but I don’t think many taxpayers hold it against Kenney.

    • Jenny says:

      What drivel is this, JamesHalifax ? The “better” healthcare coverage than elderly Canadians? That is a line from the conservative p.r. machine.

      Elderly canadians don’t have access to pre-natal care or childbirth care. So that means Canada should deny this to refugees? This is retarded.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        No, Jenny…

        retarded would be someone who thinks an elderly woman would need pre-natal care or help with childbirth.

        Tell you what Jenny…..why don’t you actually read the proposal, and then come up with an idea.

        As for elderly Canadians….I think most would agree with Kenney; considering the elderly have paid far more into health care (which many still can’t access) than any refugee.

        • smelter rat says:

          Here’s one. Why don’t we ditch those multi-billion dollar jets that don’t exist yet, and even if they did wouldn’t meet our needs, and give that money to Grandma and Grandpa for their health care.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Sure…lets just ditch the jets.

            But then, what will the Air Force use when the current CF-18’s are set to expire?

            Or are you one of those folks who think any money spent on defence is wasted?

    • Ted H says:

      Even if they are “bogus” they are here, they are sick and they could make others sick. At some point this has to be just about helping people, without worrying about who pays, or who has paid.
      That is the kind of country Canada has been for quite a while, one with a heart, with compassion and one that treats the weakest with kindness. Obviously Conservatives are uncomfortable with that attitude and are trying to change the way Canada operates and we are all lesser people for it.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Ted, H….

        Your first comment shows you clearly misunderstand the issue. It was made quite clear, that folks with diseases that are contagious or life-threatening are still covered. Personally, I think it’s a bad idea to let anyone in that condition into the country in any event.
        While I do agree that Canadians are known for their compassion and kindness, I also know that that compassion comes at a steep price. If we’re too compassionate to people coming here from the third world….we won’t be able to afford the compassion for those who have lived, worked, and paid taxes here for their entire lives. That’s the point.

        Identifying yourself as compassionate and kind may provide you a certain measure of self-righteous comfort, but it does little for Canadians who are waiting in line for surgery.

        • Ted H says:

          James, I am more concerned with Canada being compassionate and kind. As to myself, I do not use or need those attributes for self identification. To be honest friend, you exhibit more self righteousness than I think I do and you are more than a little smug in your comments to anyone who disagrees with you. You share the same belief as the Conservatives that there isn’t enough to go around and that taxpayers better get their portion.
          Canada is a big country, we don’t need to ration generosity, we can help people coming here from the third world and at the same time we can help lifelong citizen taxpayers, that’s my point.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Ted, H….it would be great if we could help everyone who sets foot in this Country, however, you have to be realistic.

            do you think that Canadian doctors are going to take a huge pay cut in order to help pay for the added burden of folks using health care they have never paid to provide? Do you think the nurses will?

            If there was a way we could pay doctors a decent salary, cut the costs of drugs, and frankly have more doctors…it wouldn’t be an issue. HOwever, with Canada’s current centralized health care system, we have to ration services. That’s why we have ridiculours wait time compared to other civilized Western countries. I don’t see why we can’t have services like they do in France or Germany. They get far better results for the dollar…and their health care is pretty good too.

            Until we can manage that…we’ll still be rationing, there will still be line ups, and there will still be a requirement to make sure we look after Canadians first. After all…we’ve paid for it.

        • Pomojen says:

          I have actually never heard of “too compassionate” before. I don’t believe there is such a thing. In fact, I find the suggestion that it’s possible to be too compassionate quite repugnant. It is not a zero sum construct.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            You may have not heard of being too compassionate….but I’m sure you’ve seen the effects. You probably just didn’t realize it.

            Here’s a hint…..if you try to do everything, for everyone, soon people will think that it is not their job to look after themselves. Someone who is “compassionate” will take care of them. Think welfare. It is a societies duty to look after those who cannot look after themselves, but when you start looking after people who could look after themselves, but choose not to, then you get what we see today. Inter-generational welfare with folks who assume that their goal in life is to have babies and collect the cheque. That’s what too much compassion will do.

            Sometimes…it’s tough love that is required.

          • Pomojen says:

            You don’t seem to understand and I do not need hints.

            Compassion is a feeling. An emotion. It motivates action. And it motivates different actions depending on the circumstances and the person experiencing it. One can feel deep compassion and also choose to act rationally, purposefully and with intention, in an evidence-based fashion. These are not contradictory concepts. Experiencing compassion does not mean you must give everything away to your own detriment. It means you have connected with and recognized the suffering of another human being. You see your own fragility, your own vulnerability, and your shared humanity. The other person is no longer rendered “the other.”

            James, you continually make statements here about how things really are, how beneath your intellect and understanding others are on this board and proclaim yourself an expert on a vast array of things you very transparently know little about. You argue about the use of words you don’t understand and concepts that have been discredited and debunked, like “tough love” for people who live in grinding poverty, suffer tyrannical governments and seek safety for themselves and their children in our relatively abundant and free society.

            We should never, ever tell ourselves to feel less compassion. Without compassion, we lose a driving motivation to make change. We lose our moral compass.. We lose sight of out connectedness and same-ness as people. It becomes easier to hector and lecture others who are powerless and in pain rather than engage with them courageously to find solutions. Without compassion and the willingness to experience it, we come closer to actions, policies and laws that dehumanize all of us and deeply harm the most vulnerable among us.

          • Philip says:

            Well said. We could all use a little more compassion in our lives. I don’t always get there myself but I do what I can and keep trying.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Pomojen, you seem to think that I lack compassion, but that is not really the case. I just have a different view of compassion than do you. You wrote:

            “Compassion is a feeling. An emotion. It motivates action. And it motivates different actions depending on the circumstances and the person experiencing it”

            I have to agree with that. In fact, I would say my compassion directs me to different actions than your compassion does you. I don’t want to waste my time trying to “feel” my compassion, or making sure someone else is aware of it. I want results. If your compassion means you think we should provide more money to help solve problems, then that is your choice of action, and I’m sure you feel very “progressive” or noble in stating such. I on the other hand, consider getting people off welfare so they can rely on themselves. Now this doesn’t mean cutting funding for people who legitimately need social assistance, but it does mean cutting off people who have become comfortable on welfare because they would rather not work, or work hard.
            If your idea of compassion is letting anyone who shows up on our shores with a sob story (many of which are completely bogus) access public funding so they can live here for free..then again, we disagree. My compassion means letting in legitimate refugees who really have come from a life of hardship and risk of personal safety, and kicking out those who simply wanted to come to Canada because it is a better country than they were leaving.

            So, you and I actually do agree that compassion is a noble trait, we just have different way of reaching our goals. Your compassion is “feeling” oriented, whereas I am a little more impatient and simply want results.

          • Warren says:

            James, I’ve asked you to cool it on continual posting. I meant it. Last warning.

        • smelter rat says:

          James you are wrong again. Kenny’s last minute adjustment to the rules on June 30th does allow for gov’t sponsored refugees to receive the same care as they did before the bill was passed, but there are many others sponsored by churches etc, that have been thrown under the bus.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            smelter, it’s not the job of Government to support churches in their charitable endeavors….its the job of the people who attend that church.

            If Government supplies the money….why do we even need the church?

            As for Kenney’s bill….there was tweaking required, I agree. But overall, I think the bill is heading in the right direction. We need to stop the abuse of the system, given it is a finite resource.

    • Emily says:

      Actually, there is a reason – they’ve fled their countries with nothing but their lives and deserve help. Plus, they’re likely to become tax paying residents/citizens eventually. In addition, claimants are here for months or even years before they’re deemed either “bogus” or legitimate and often in need of immediate care, so your claim that genuine refugees will still be taken care of doesn’t make sense. I think you might be thinking of government sponsored refugees?

      • JamesHalifax says:

        True Emily, I was referring to Government Sponsored refugees. These are the ones we let in from UN controlled refugee camps. However, the bill isn’t directed their way, but more towards folks like those who came to Canada by the hundreds aboard leaking boats organized by human traffickers. Or the folks who fly to Canada, ditch their papers, or otherwise enter under fraudulent means. Why should we pay for their glasses, their prescriptions, or their dentures? Canadians have to buy their own….so should would be refugees.

        As for those who fled their countries due to legitimate circumstances, I do support looking after them until they acquire a means to support themselves. My beef is with the folks who come to Canada and demand freebies.

    • Tom says:

      Refugees are not allowed to work in Canada until their claim is processed. There is a reason refugees are a different class of immigrant because they come here seeking asylum. You cannot pay taxes if you cannot legally work yet.

      What really burns my biscuit is these selfish, self righteous Conservatives who were born on third base, yet believe in the delusion they hit a triple. We are Canadians, our country is a beacon on hope for most of the world. Sadly people like James and Jason Kenney are doing everything in their power to extinguish that beacon. To hoard their wealth in a smug game of social darwinism.

      • Nic Coivert says:

        What the Feds are doing is downloading responsibility onto the provinces, when the diabetic refugee shows up at emergency it’ll be the provinces that pay. This is a just the beginning of eroding health care; create a crisis then privatize your way out, ostensibly.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        Tom…are you referring to legitimate refugees…..or the ones this bill is directed towards?

        • Tom says:

          You cannot tell if they are legitimate until they are processed and their claim is vetted. They cannot work and pay taxes until the claim is investigated. So the bill affects them all. Not just ones Kenney feels are bogus, like his comment on Mexicans. As if all those headless corpses piling up are a figments of our imaginations.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            So, Tom……once these folks have been found to be FRAUDULENT or illigitimate refugess, do you propose we take back the glasses, the dentures, and make them pay their health care bill?

            As for the headless mexican corpses…..guess they should stop hanging around drug cartels.

          • Tom says:


            You don’t burn down the orchard because of a few bad apples. There is no way to tell if a claim is legitimate until it is vetted. You cannot tell by looking at someone that they are making a false claim.
            Therefore it’s impossbile to decide who gets aid and who doesn’t until their claim is processed. While they are in the process we take care of them like a civilized nation should.

            This is just more Con legislation to make the rabid base get some blood and change the subject from all their scandals.

          • Tom says:

            I happen to be friends with a woman from Mexico who testified against a cartel and is a refugee here with her children.

            Under what justification would you and Jason Kenney deny this woman and her a kids health care?

            Jason Kenney wants to deny all refugee claims from Mexico.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Tom, if you had an orchard and were looking over your harvest of apples……you DO throw out the bad ones. You don’t leave em in the pile and treat them like the rest.

            While it’s true you can’t look at someone and tell if their claim is illigitimate, you can make some common observations. Certain countries are rife with immigration fraud (China, Punjab, etc.) and we’ve known about it for ages. Kenney is starting to address that reality. As for being a civilized society, you do realize that by your definition, Canada is uncivilized. After all, if we make Canadians who have paid for the health care system pay for glasses, dentures, or medication….how is it uncivilized to ask the same of folks claiming refugee status?

            As for the mexican woman you refer to….I don’t think it is incumbent upon Canadians to pay for the victims of bad Governments around the world. Do you think perhaps, that it should be the Mexican Government to look after citizens of Mexico. Again, by your definition, we should take everyone in regardless of the costs. That’s just naive.

          • Philip says:

            Should the Policia Ferderales Preventiva stop “hanging around” the drug cartels as well? Members of the city and state police forces? Their families? Or do they all deserve to be shot, stabbed, mutilated and kidnapped because they were “hanging around” drug cartels?

            Not your finest moment, James.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Philip, if Mexico was a stable, democratic society, the United states wouldn’t be home to over 20 Million of them.

            The point is, we are a relatively small country in terms of population. We can not afford to let everyone from a third world crap-hole come here simply because it is better than the land of their birth. The mexican woman is just one of many who would prefer Canada to anyplace else. If the people of Mexico want to have a decent country to live in…..it’s up to the people of Mexico to provide it, not Canada.

          • Tom says:

            The myopic simplistic view that nations should just simply stop being corrupt, war torn places is exactly why I believe Conservatives lack the compassion gene. We are a wealthy nation with high standard of living. We can certainly afford to take in those who need refuge. We can also provide dental, eyecare and prescriptions for every citizen if we stop the insane military spending. If corporations cannot survive at the same tax rate I am paying then they are not viable. Let them fail. If Cons were true capitalist they would follow the logic, but they aren’t. They LOVE Corporate welfare even more than demonizing refugees.

            .59 cents per year per canadian is not too much to ask for refugee healthcare.

            The military industial complex is far more the fault of Canada’s woes than the miniscule refugees. Kenney knows he cannot tell who has a bogus claim or not until it is vetted. He is just scoring political points with selfish constituents. Getting us off Dean Del Mastro, Bev Oda, Peter Mackay, Tony Clement and the many scandal ridden Cons.

          • Philip says:

            Mexico is a democratic nation, James. They have elections and everything. I’m not certain why you seem to think the war with the drug cartels are the fault of the ordinary Mexican citizen. Drug cartels financed by an insatiable North American appetite for their product. I think the American demand for cheap, unskilled and semi-skilled labour has quite a bit to do with there being 20 million Mexican citizens living and working in America. U.S. Construction, service and agri-business industries would crater without cheap undocumented labour for Mexico and Central America. Strange you didn’t mention that.

  7. Pat says:

    I love the comments – “they come here with nothing, so they are a drain on society”. I wonder whether they understand that the majority of the people who settled the west came to Canada with absolutely nothing, the Irish were trying to escape a famine and persecution and also had nothing, and even many UELs came to Canada without much after being chased from the USA after their war of independence. Canada is built on people who came here with nothing. We celebrate it. The only difference is that these new refugees have vastly different cultures and customs (as well as a different skin colour).

    It is important to note, though, that former immigrant groups ALWAYS deride the next immigrant group. The English and Scots hated the Irish influx in the mid- to late-1800s, the Irish hated the Italians, the Italians hated the eastern Europeans who settled much of the west, etc.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Pat…you make a valid point, but you leave out the only pertinent one.

      In the time period of which you refer…….people paid for their own health care. They didn’t demand freebies.

      Kenney is on the right track. If the Liberals had come up with this, the Liberals posting here would be making the same arguments, along with the refreshing, “It’s about time”…blah..blah..blah…

      As for the English, Scots, and Irish…..I”ve got a little of all of them mixed in the bloodline somewhere. Oh…and a tad of First Nations if the rumours are true.

      • Pat says:

        So, James, who was paying for the free land the government was giving the new immigrants? Didn’t that land have value?

        We have always given things to people who come here. It is why they come here. It is why they think Canada is a good and generous country.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Pat, land was given as an incentive to populate the big empty country, and to have people come and fill in the blanks. Given most of these folks had skills, and could farm the land and grow food…was also a benefit.

          As for the land being free…..it was. The Government never bought it from anyone (sorry to our aboriginal friends) but they held title for the most part. Besides, after the land was under private ownership, Governments had a tax base, so the land that was previously worthless….now became a source of revenue. both in taxes, and in goods produced from that land.

      • Tim Sullivan says:

        If the Queen had balls she’d be King.

        When you don’t have facts, make them up!. Providing imaginary evidence of a reaction to a policy the Liberals did not adopt is, unfortunately, not a new low for you.

        Have your own opinions, my dear pathetic ignoramus, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

  8. CQ says:

    Tell little Liam Reid’s family that! Or how about the Toronto area family of the discharged young man who returned to hospital 24 hrs later, only to fall into a coma – reported this past weekend. That’s right, you don’t talk about any of the provincally overseen issues affecting health care in Ontario.

    Nor have you addressed the recent 180, 190… million dollar gas plant cancellation (and the other one in Oakville), now widely blamed as an Ontario Liberal Party safe-guarding manoeuver during the last election. Yet, here you’ve boasted aplenty about your Ont. Liberal election room involvement before.

  9. Ronald O'Dowd says:


    Please pass them the nearest dictionary so they can look up secular humanism…

    They called me Vichy. I would return the compliment and call them screwy.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Vichy vashy?

      (Shades of John McCallum who didn’t know the difference either)

      • Ronald O'Dowd says:


        Please. This isn’t a guy who slept through history class. I know the difference between Vimy and Vichy. However, I will admit that some on the battlefield have reason to know it much better than I could ever hope to. Too bad no one ever sent Pétain a shipment of Ross rifles…war profiteers, IMHO, always the ideal candidates for any convenient firing squad.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Ronald…I wasn’t poking fun at you.

          I was poking it at McCallum. It was either the Vichy comment he made, or the fact he’s been booted off a few planes for being three sheets to the wind after waiting in the airport bar on a few occassions.

          I do however, think he’s smartened up since then.

  10. Jim Hayes says:

    Thanks to Warren and the others who continue to remind us that despite attempts by Harper and company to change, Canada remains a compassionate nation. There has been much written on Bill C31 we owe a debt of thanks to the Docters who have continued to speak out and interrupt Tory gatherings to voice their opinions.

  11. Philip says:

    This is all about feeding the Conservative Party base, the same base which comments so colorfully on Warren’s columns. Whenever the Conservatives get into trouble, Kenney gets trotted out to announce yet another crackdown on immigration. Or to announce that a boat load of scary brown people many be headed towards Canada. Either one works and it happens just like clockwork. Wait until Dean del Mastro’s troubles start getting serious, the very next week there will either be a suspected ship full of refugees or another cut to an immigration program.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Philip, you seem fixated on brown people; even moreso than the Conservatives you despise. I don’t care what a person looks like, and frankly, never have.

      If a boatload of Danes were to wash up on the shores of Victoria looking for a free ride…..I’d want them sent back too, especially if there was a chance that many of them were terrorists or perpetrators of organized crime or human trafficking.

      As for Dean Del Maestro…..I am not sure what went on, but I have to admit, the evidence is piling up. Not good. If guilty, he should be fined and demoted to the back benches. If he wanted to act like the Liberals…he should have joined their party.

      • Philip says:


        I’m getting some real pleasure watching you frantically spin and spin, James. I’ll leave the whole skin color bun fight to you and Nurie, our resident experts.

        Oh James, Dean del Mastro is all yours, part of your party’s inner circle. When he starts to sink beneath the weight, I will PVR his perp walk, open a good bottle and have a nice long laugh. Shortly thereafter, Jason Kenney will pivot directly to either a cut to an immigration program or breaking news about a ship full of illegal immigrants headed to Canada’s shores. Who knows, James, maybe it will be that ship full of Danes so you can trot back here and show just how much you believe in the principles of equality. Anything is possible.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          There’s no spin here Philip……that’s just your head causing you dizziness because you lack the critical thinking skills to follow me.

          As for Nurie…..she makes you look reasonable in comparison.

          I miss her.

          As for the Danes……..if they don’t follow the rules…ship em all back. I don’t care who they are, I just don’t want to be forced to pay for them.

          • Philip says:

            Because nothing makes you look calm and reasoned like frantically commenting on every single post, right James? All I see you doing is desperately running from post to post, trying to bury every voice which dares to question under a barrage of talking points, misinformation and smug insults. Not exactly the tactic of someone convinced of the righteousness of their cause. So keep on spamming , James. It just means that all of us who care about a Canada which reflects our values of fiscal responsibility, social justice and decency are doing something right.

            I see you have taken to threatening to join the Liberal Party. That’s OK James, you are not the first rat to leave the listing Conservative Party and you won’t be the last.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Philip, if you post something directed my way, for the most part you will get a response. If you don’t like it, then stop doing it.

            As for my talking points, misinformation, and smug insults….a little research would pretty much back up both my talking points and my information. The smug insults…they’re free.

            As for being a rat leaving a sinking ship….I left the Good ship Liberal first…..but don’t worry, I’m sure I’ll find my way back after the Liberals do.

          • Philip says:

            Keep on shoveling, James, it’s honestly quite funny to watch. Bill C-31 is dog whistle politics at it’s most cynical and disturbing. Kenney and other Conservatives use it because it works for their base. All the false equivalency, strawman arguments, smug insults and misleading statements in the world won’t cover that up, James.

            You can join whatever political party seems most expedient for you, James. It’s still a free country.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Philip,…please note I posted the link to bill C-31 in a link above. Please take the time to read it before you comment on it.

            that’s what I did.

            (tedious and long….but it will clear up your misunderstanding)

          • Philip says:

            Thanks for the link, James. I did read all the way through the document you linked to. Are you OK with the new wording of Section 25.2, as it applies to the personal authority vested in the Minister? Bear in mind that Minister won’t always be a Conservative. Are you OK with the changes laid out in Sections 55-57 about mandatory detention and the qualifications for release from detention? Because I did read the document you keep hiding behind, I’m just not sure you have.

      • Tim Sullivan says:

        Del Mastro was acting like a Liberal? In what way? Has a Liberal ever defended illegal overspending on elections? No, wait, that Polievre.

        Has a Liberal ever misled parliament by lying about the insertion of a “not” in a perfectly acceptable grant? No, wait, that was the still an MP, Bev Oda.

        Has a Liberral said that Elections Canada doesn’t know how to investigate election irregularities, it should just ask Dean Del Mastro? No. Dean did that. No Liberal did.

        What “acting like the Liberals” are you referring to?

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Granted, Del Maestro may not have stolen $40 million and stashed it so far away even the Auditor general couldn’t find it…..but he’s still got to answer for what he did/may have done, if the allegations are true.

          I don’t brook corruption from anyone.

          years from now, I may be defending the Liberals and castigating the Tories, but not just yet. I think it’s a vicious cycle. a New Party gets elected because the electorate is tired of the old government waste, corruption and arrogance..etc..etc…..and they choose to kick them out and give the new guys a chance.

          After several majorities, or years in power, the new party becomes like the old party….and once again, the electorate kicks out the current government, and votes in the New (old) party for another shot.

          That’s the problem with our system. Successful Parties attract some people who are a little unscrupulous, because some people want to be on the winner’s side, with all the accompanying opportunities. After a few elections, the bad folks increase in number, and the party starts to rot.

          I suspect, that in another two elections, I will once again be a Liberal supporter….and will be on this site writing about the crooked tories.

          it happens.

  12. Cromwell says:

    If people don’t have access to health care and their conditions get worse, it will just end up costing us more money in the end – or does Kenney also expect physicians to refuse emergency medical care to refugee claimants ?

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Cromwell, again…..that’s not what this policy will do. Do some digging for yourself and see what it is all about….you’ll see it is not some mean spirited draconian measure. it’s just common sense.

      People will not be allowed to waste away because they can’t access free services (free to them). They will simpy be expected to pay for the same things Canadian citizens already pay for. For Government sponsored (read: real) refugees….the free service will remain.

      • Cromwell says:

        So, JamesHalifax, you think that making refugee claimant pay for their insulin or blood pressure medication is a good thing ? And when they can’t pay because they can’t afford it, what then ?

        • Tim Sullivan says:

          JamesHalifax does not understand the system. He’s taken whatever Kool-Aid Kenny was serving.

          Somehow “refugee” means “bogus refugee”. Refugees are not allowed to work in Canada (imagine the conservative shitstorm if they came to Canada and took our jobs!?!) since they are not landed (or whatever term is used now). Bona fide refugees do not have a lot of possessions and likely did not have time to gather their things (immigrants can do this, but refugees, seeking refuge from something like war, poverty or famine … do not typically have a lot of resources) or have money to acquire the finer refugee accoutrements upon arriving.

          You can thank Jason Kenny and the Kool-Aid drinking conservatives for saving you $.59. I expect Norman Bethune would be proud but would like his $25m monument instead.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Cromwell, instead of focusing on the diabetic refugee who can’t afford his or her insulin….why not ask what Canadians in the same situation do?

          what happens with a Canadian who can’t pay?

          Well…we don’t let them die, if that’s your question. And neither will we let the refugee’s.

          • Cromwell says:

            Canadians generally have relatives, friends or even sympathetic acquaintances who can help. Those on social assistance can apply for programs that cover their medications. And who do refugees have in Canada to help ? Nobody. The Harper Conservatives are once again attacking the weakest and most vulnerable in our society, and you, JamesHalifax, seem to be proud of that when you should be ashamed instead.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Cromwell, you don’t get off that easy.

            what about Canadians who were born here, but have no contact with friends, relatives, or church groups to support them?

            As for social assistance, what do you think refugees have? Both real and bogus refugees get social assistance very quickly once they arrive. They receive the same benefits as Canadians using it.

            Try again.

            As for shame…sorry….I don’t feel it unless it is warranted.

      • David Bronaugh says:

        I suppose us regular Canadians should have to pay for health care, too, because then we won’t waste it.

        Oh, wait. Despite our system being free for all to use, it’s still far cheaper than the US system…

        • JamesHalifax says:

          Keep telling yourself that David.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          David…..you do know that health care isn’t really free right?

          Maybe it’s free to you…..but for folks like me who pay taxes……it doesn’t feel free.

          • David Bronaugh says:

            Actually, if you look at the overall economic cost of the Canadian health care system vs the US one, the Canadian system costs far less to run (ie: fewer of your hard-earned tax are spent dollars on health care in Canada, than you would pay out yourself in a private system in the US).

            If you did your own research, you’d already know this… it’s been proven, time and time again.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            David, the question was not about costs, it was about whether it was “free” or not. Granted, many people don’t pay a cent for it, but for those of us who pay taxes, it is not free.

            With regards to the USA, you will note that when figures are trotted out that 50 Million Americans don’t have health insurance…..most of it is voluntary. Young healthy Americans see no reason to pay for health insurance until they are older, and more prone to failing health. The folly of youth.

            I do note, however, that you did not mention the quality of Health care. Probably due to the fact that in the USA you can get surgery when you require it, not when your time in the line up comes. And they do a better job of it as well. Just look at how many Canadians go to the USA for surgery or health care, and compare it to the number of Americans who come to Canada.

          • Tom says:

            American youth do not have health care for many reasons, the least of which is the folly of youth.

            1) Large employers like Walmart make them work 38 hrs as part timers and thus do not offer medical coverage.
            2) Private health care insurance is very costly and way above the minimum wage budget.
            3) Until Obamacare came into effect, Americans up to 26 years old were not allowed on their parent’s policies. That has now changed.
            4) Smaller business are not required to have health care plans for their employees
            5) Having your healthcare tied to your employement is insane. The high unemployment rates of American youth means they fall through the healthcare availability cracks.

          • JamesHalifax says:

            Tom, don’t misunderstand, I too think that Americans need to fix their health care system, but I’m not sure the Canadian model is the way to do it.

            I’d be more prone to look to France of Germany where they use a combination of both public and private health coverage. They get far better results.

  13. JamesHalifax says:

    Ron, that’s true. Too many “immigrants” or “New Canadians” only come to Canada when they need free healthcare. Just look at Lebanese Canadians, many who have never set foot here until grandma needs a new hip, or bypass.

    That being said, some of he nicest and most competent nurses I have ever dealt with were immigrants from the phillipines in Toronto’s St. Michaels hospital. They were far superior to the “Canadian” born nurses I had to deal with.

  14. JamesHalifax says:

    Hmm…I wonder if this guy has used Canada’s (not really) free health care? What about the cab drivers?


  15. JamesHalifax says:

    Special post for NDP fans….and Lefty Liberals. Here’s what happens when you piss off the rich folks….and try and take even more of their wealth.


    • Mulletaur says:

      More hilarious bullshit from the Daily Torygraph, propaganda sheet for the British landed gentry, and from you, Jimmy-boy. The story doesn’t even say what the number of sales were last year from Sotheby’s Realty (!), it just says that it represents a “marked increase” (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more) and it of course didn’t say where those who were selling their 1.7 Euro piles were moving to. Obviously, inquiries are up for the rich French looking into homes worth more than £5 million – they are looking for places to hide their money from the French fisc.

      In any case, I’m glad to see the Harper Conservatives standing up for what they believe to be the God given right of the filthy rich to avoid taxes.

      • JamesHalifax says:

        It’s not the right to be filthy rich that is in question…..

        It’s the right of the Government to take from the rich…what the Government has no right to take.

        That’s what happens when you punish success……it leaves and goes elsewhere.

        Just watch what happens in France over the socialists mandate.

  16. Slice says:


    While I do not agree with the Conservatives on many things, I do on this issue. Let me explain why. I do not think that people that come here to take advantage of the welfare and healthcare system of Canada by claiming (falsely) refugee status should not be given better coverage than Canadians. Why do they get glasses and perfect teeth? What about the people who’s refugee claims are rejected and refuse to leave? They should continue to get these benefits? As I am sure you are not so naive as to think that the more than 65% (amount of failed claimants/year) of people who come here seeking safe refuge are not actually here to collect benefits, work and jump the queue?

    • David Bronaugh says:

      Actually, if you’re on welfare in Canada, you receive similar coverage to what refugees receive, if I’m correct (it varies by province, but most if not all provide it). So do veterans, currently serving members of the military, native people, penitentiary inmates, and members of the RCMP.

      The Conservative byline on this, which I initially bought, and you have also unfortunately bought, conveniently neglects to mention this.

      Why shouldn’t we support refugees, as vulnerable members of society, when it comes to prescription drugs? Seems to make sense to me. And it’s cheap, unlike F-35 fighter jets.

      • MCBellecourt says:

        In BC, when Gordon Campbell first came into power, the first thing his miserable government did was take away basic and emergency dental care for those on welfare or under a certain wage level. Before that, if you were only making minimum wage in some shit job, you could apply with the ministry if you wind up with an infected tooth that needed taking care of. If you didn’t have someone to help you out within a circle of family or friends, you were, basically, fucked.

        Campbell took all that away with absolutely no regard or compassion for the suffering he has caused, and his negligence has created more burdens on health care that come with lack of preventitive measures for people.

        It is his government that also de-listed eye exams, and everyone has to pay, welfare recipients included.

        It depends which province you come from where the welfare coverage is concerned.

        • MCBellecourt says:

          oh, i must be tired…it should read, “**NOW**, if you don’t have someone to help you out within a circle of family or friends, you ARE, basically…..”

          mea maxima culpa….

    • Tim Sullivan says:

      Well, if the National Post defended Kenny, it must be true. Just wait for the Sun to have a go at him.

  17. Anne Peterson says:

    I think everyone should have the best health care. We send aid dollar overseas to assist people. Why is it so wrong to assist them here. Everybody get the best kind of health care. I wonder if this Halifax dude spent his school years measuring to make sure no one got a bigger peice of candy than he did. There should be no rationing and if this government wasn’t so fiscally wasteful there wouldn’t need to be.

    If we can sepnd billions and billions and billions on arms we can afford to give EVERYONE the best of health care, no?

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Actually, Anne…you answered your own question.


      You think everyone should get the best health care. Great…that means we have to go to France or Germany. If you meant the best Health care in Canada..then that’s a different story. Every time, and in every place, centralized planning has been enacted, you get problems. You have to ration, your results aren’t the best…..and people are waiting in lines.

      You think everyone should get the best health care….Great. I think everyone should have a unicorn and pixie dust.

      Bet my wish is more likely than yours.

  18. Keith says:

    “All of us — with the exception of our First Nations, whose leadership are gathered this week in Toronto to select a national grand chief — have come here from somewhere else. If we’re being honest with ourselves, we must acknowledge that much.”

    Actually, this is false.

    The “First Nations” came from somewhere else just like everyone else.

    I also love the “OUR” ‘first nations’ locution…very Stuff White People Like.

  19. Tom says:

    My husband and I were both not originally from here and chose Canada because neither of our birth nations would allow us to remain together. We are now proud citizens.

    We were lucky we applied under skilled worker before Harper won control. I work for a multi-national and was very fortunate to bring my job to Canada. We sent my husband to school here for a career change, he graduated top of his class and is now very happy and successful.

    We did not come in as refugees, but I need to point out that had we applied during the Harper/Kenney regime we would have been denied because my job is not listed under the new approved skilled worker rules. Which I think now is only 27 professions. Canada would have lost two well paid, tax abiding, land owning citizens.

    My point is every action taken by Kenney whether skilled worker or refugee has been thug behaviour that does not benefit Canada. It breaks me heart to tell gay couples, who would have qualified previously, that they are wasting their time because of the policies implemented by this government. It’s time all progressives unite and throw the bums out.

    • JamesHalifax says:

      Tom….real question.

      In a same-sex marriage, do you both refer to each other as husband?

      • Tom says:


        Yes we do. We used the term for each other way before Ontario made it legal for us. In our hearts we have been married 11 years.

        Plus I find the more I use in every day life the more people get comfortable with it as a reality.

        • JamesHalifax says:

          I agree, Tom.

          My mother was very uncomfortable about same-sex marriage until her best friends son (whom she babysat for years) came out. She started to lighten up then, and when this young fella married his beau (of six years) a year later, she was the first one to kiss him in congratulations.

  20. Philip says:

    If the latest Conservative spin is all about not wasting valuable health care dollars on scheming foreigners so we can treat Canadian citizens instead, then why not cut off access to all Canadians who smoke? Those who drink too much and eat fatty foods? Those who won’t exercise on a regular basis? They are all a drain on scarce health care dollars, due to their lifestyle choices.

    But saving money isn’t what C-31 is about. It’s about the creation of a new underclass of foreign temp workers, here at the whim of employers, who will take their 15% less in wages and STFU because they can always be deported in a heartbeat. Or banged up Immigration Division facility while their process keeps getting suspended and re-suspended every 12 months. Exploitation and kicking the vulnerable newcomer in the teeth are exactly what this bill is all about.

    Sadly, this plays very well to the Conservative base which is why Kenney will always pivot to immigration issues whenever the party is deemed to be in trouble.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *