Finally Deported After Fifteen Years (and how much money?).

Parminder Singh Saini has finally been deported back to his native India after a fifteen year stay in Hotel Canada during which time was able to obtain an undergraduate degree as well as a law degree from Canadian universities.

It shouldn't have taken this long. The man should have been kicked out of Canada a long time ago but thanks to an appeals process that has more to do with giving lawyers work than it does with due process Mr. Saini was able to delay his removal for fifteen years! Did I mention it took fifteen years to deport the man? No? Well it did. It took fifteen freakin' years to remove this man from our country.

This is another example that puts the spotlight on what is wrong with the immigration system. The appeals process is ridiculous, fashioned by lawyer for lawyers and put into legislation by ethic block vote seeking politicians.

The real question is how much tax dollars was wasted on this man to deport him.

The National Post has the story here.

A convicted Indian hijacker who came to Canada 15 years ago under a false identity was deported this morning, according to federal officials.

The Canadian government had been trying to deport Parminder Singh Saini since shortly after he arrived in the country in 1995 using a fake Afghan passport.

He had been fighting his deportation in the Federal Court of Canada but after the case was dismissed on Monday, the Canada Border Services Agency acted swiftly.

Escorted by CBSA officers, Mr. Saini, who has been designated a danger to Canadians, boarded a plane in Toronto on Tuesday morning to begin a one-way journey back to India.

A former member of the militant All India Sikh Student Federation, Mr. Saini hijacked an Air India passenger flight from Srinigar, India to Lahore, Pakistan in 1984.

He was convicted and sentenced to death but was released after serving 10 years. He fled to Canada, claiming to be "Balbir Singh," and was granted refugee status.

The poster boy for the appeals process is Mahmoud Mohammad Issa Mohammad. He's been in the country since 1988 and the government has been trying to deport him ever since to the tune of more than $3 million. Knowing that you can't blame Mr. Saini for trying.

All Around The World It's The Same Song.

The views I express here on this blog about mass immigration and its effects on Canadian society are not unique to myself nor to the nation. Take this New York Times piece on South Korea.

For most South Koreans, globalization has largely meant increasing exports or going abroad to study. But now that it is also bringing an influx of foreigners into a society where 42 percent of respondents in a 2008 survey said they had never once spoken with a foreigner, South Koreans are learning to adjust — often uncomfortably.

South Korea enjoys considerable regional economic prosperity and it is an advanced industrial state. This makes it a magnet for those seeking "a better life". So South Korea has become an immigrant receiving nation in the past several years much to the chagrin of a segment of the host society.

But a recent forum to discuss proposed legislation against racial discrimination turned into a shouting match when several critics who had networked through the Internet showed up. They charged that such a law would only encourage even more migrant workers to come to South Korea, pushing native workers out of jobs and creating crime-infested slums. They also said it was too difficult to define what was racially or culturally offensive.

“Our ethnic homogeneity is a blessing,” said one of the critics, Lee Sung-bok, a bricklayer who said his job was threatened by migrant workers. “If they keep flooding in, who can guarantee our country won’t be torn apart by ethnic war as in Sri Lanka?”

It is an open secret that there is no desire amongst Asian nations to "diversify" their populations culturally or racially or otherwise. They justify this by looking at other nations like Sri Lanka, the United States, or the U.K., as examples of the disharmony "diversity" creates and the problems (what we refer to as challenges) foreigners bring to a host society. It should also be noted that "diversity" has not been integral to building the advanced industrial economies of Japan or South Korea and now China as well.

A disproportionate number of South Asian immigrants to Canada come from the Indian state of Punjab. The is the home territory of the Sikh religion. In Canada Sikhs are prone to lecture Canadians on the benefits of immigration and cultural diversity which is what makes this next story interesting. It seems what is good for Canada is not necessarily good for Punjab, at least according to the Sikh separatist group Dal Khalsa.

Describing migrants as 'population bomb', hundreds of Dal Khalsa activists displaying placards and banners marched in the interior of the city of Hoshairpur and Jalandhar to convey that the (population) bomb was ticking and that their uncontrolled influx and permanent settlement is 'unwelcome' and unacceptable' in the state.

Calling unfettered migration a "menace", the hypocritical mouthpieces of Dal Khalsa claim migrants "pollute" Sikh culture (so Sikhs in Canada "enrich" Canadian society, not pollute it?). One can only imagine the reaction of Dal Khalsa if the same terminology was used to describe an influx of Sikh migrants into a host society.

Lastly, South Africa has seen its share of race riots and if you think black vs. white then think again. Try black vs. black only in this case it's against other African immigrants who have moved to South Africa in search of a "better life". The problem is that for many black South Africans the "better life" still eludes them and a constant influx of immigrants from other parts of Africa does not make their life any easier.

There are couple of issues that unite these stories. The first is the self preservation of a host society/culture in the age of globalization. Mass immigration has the potential to alter the demographic make up of a society in all sorts of ways. That being the case does a host society have the right to protect itself and enact laws that will preserve the character of the host culture even if these laws may be construed as "racist" or xenophobic? I believe it does.

Each country has the potential to offer its uniqueness to the world. Multiculturalism is the inevitable consequence of mass immigration. Multiculturalism is also a non-identity, a fake identity if you will. The more multicultural a nation becomes the less unique it is and ironically the less multicultural the world becomes. I believe each country should control is immigration intake and be as discriminate as it needs to be to make sure immigrants complement the host society and help preserve it, not replace it.

The second issue is that immigration is a plaything of the elites no matter what country it is. They are typically sheltered from its negative economic effects, taking from it what they can to accentuate their banal existence; to go ethnic and show how cosmopolitan they are; to show how morally superior they are to the rabble. That is if they are not profiting from mass immigration outright. In short, they get all the benefits, everyone else pays the costs. Were their jobs and their lifestyles threatened I can guarantee they will be singing a different tune.

Reconstruction Not Resettlement: Giving Permanent Residency To Those Fleeing Temporary Natural Disasters Is Not A Good Idea.

I have to give credit to Jason Kenney for standing his ground (though I am disappointed he stubbornly refuses to reduce Canada's immigration targets). He is being pressured by the usual interest groups to relax Canada's immigration standards to provided permanent residency to Haitians as a means to escape their nation's natural disaster.

My problem with this is thus: Why should we give permanent residency, Canadian citizenship, to help people flee what is a temporary circumstance.

Canada has already agreed to expedite the adoption process for Haitian orphans and it has fast tracked those already in the family reunification queue. This is enough. Expanding the definitions of who qualifies for family reunification will effectively open the nation's doors to accept more people from Haiti and this is not a wise move.

Canada's immigration system is already in disarray due mostly to the unacceptable volume of immigrants Canada foolishly allows to settle in the country each year. Compounding this problem is that the majority of them come here with little to no pertinent job skills or language skills and those who do have a hard time finding employment if their fields of expertise. This tells us a lot about Canada's real need for these people and its ability to effectively absorb them. Haitians will not fair much better.

The disaster that struck Haiti is temporary. Reconstruction efforts are underway. Aid and funds are being collected to alleviate the suffering and many a celebrity, quasi-celebrity, and their parasite hanger-ons in entertainment "journalism" are already exploiting the situation to bring positive attention to themselves and their careers. Haiti is getting help but depopulating Haiti is no solution to its long lasting problems.

Haiti is the poorest nation in the western hemisphere. It most likely will continue to be so once this crisis passes. Bringing Haiti's poor to Canada's shores will not make Haiti a wealthier nation. It just brings the poverty here with the attendant negative consequences.

Haiti's needs are great. It needs political stability and a healthy economy. Haitians need education and skills training and giving Canadian citizenship to select Haitians does not benefit Haiti as a whole.

What I am bothered by are certain groups within Canada who are exploiting the disaster in Haiti to satisfy their own agendas. This extends even to Canada's Haitian community who see this as an opportunity to swell their ranks within the country with an influx of Haitian immigrants. The most disgusting are the self serving newspaper editorials extolling Jason Kenney to import potential Haitian newspaper readers into to the country. Hiding behind the language of compassion they are not fooling the savvy.

The one I have in mind is this Toronto Star editorial. Since the Toronto Star is a profit maximizing entity, part of TorStar corporation, I will put my objection in terms it can understand.

Torstar is a publicly traded company listed on the TSX. It has shareholders seeking to make gains on their investment in the company. This means that officers in the corporation are under pressure to raise the value of the stock and increase dividends. Will Torstar shareholders approve a move by the company, through its mouthpiece the Toronto Star, to import and support Haitian immigrants even though projections say that they will be a drain on company coffers and any financial benefits the program will have is eaten up by the program itself? I think we can accurately see how they will react and which direction Torstar stock value will move. Why should they hypocritically expect Canada to behave differently?

The costs to immigration are socialized meaning it is the public who pays for it, not corporate entities like Torstar who enjoy a myriad of tax loopholes and breaks to make sure they don't. They also benefit from the abundance of cheap labour and in the case of the media an increase of audience numbers to sell to advertisers. With that said I find the compassion expressed by the Toronto Star editorial board to be insincere and self serving with more of an eye on their jobs and profits than with the real needs of Haitians.

Punishing Others For One's Own Problems: Hungarians May Face Visa Restrictions As Roma Flood The Asylum System.

I was going to hold off commenting on this story until Ottawa decided to slap Hungarians with visa restrictions to curb the surge of asylum claims from Hungary but it doesn't matter whether Ottawa does or not. The fact that Ottawa is considering this course of action is enough fodder to write about.

Hungary has jumped to the top of the list of source countries producing refugees to Canada and this has Ottawa concerned, as it should. Hungary is an EU member country and anyone claiming asylum from Hungary should immediately raise red flags.

We've seen this recently before with Mexico and Czech Republic. However in the case of Czech Republic the people of that nation didn't deserve it and neither do the people of Hungary. The cause for visa restrictions for both countries is the same: Roma are targeting Canada's refugee system for immigration purposes and they are the reason for the surge in asylum claims for both countries.

So, instead of facing the fact that Canada's refugee system invites and rewards abuse we choose instead to redirect blame by insulting our fellow NATO members with visa restrictions. Politically it's the better option. I'm sure you can imagine that any move to reform Canada's immigration and refugee systems for the better will be met with accusations of racism by the parties in opposition and lost votes from ethnic voting blocks. It's apparent Canada is willing to sacrifice good diplomatic relations with allied nations to protect a highly politicized, costly, and socially dangerous immigration and refugee system for the sake of ethnic swing votes in urban ridings.

The solution is simple. Stop considering any asylum claim from anyone who arrived in Canada via a safe country. This would necessitate a challenge to the nefarious Singh decision of 1985 but this should have happened at the get go. Because of it Canada is required by law to entertain an asylum claim from anyone arriving from anywhere, even countries like the U.K., the U.S., Australia or the EU. It's irrational and it consumes a lot of tax dollars to maintain, public money that should have been spent on more important projects like infrastructure, health care, education and retraining, etc. We simply cannot afford the system as is.

We can also avoid the embarrassing and diplomatically insulting option of visa restrictions. Ottawa should listen to Budapest. We are the cause of our own problem not them.

'Ah, Plenty More Where That Came From': Immigrant Labourers Dead After Scaffolding Mishap.

I held off on this until more details about the tragedy were known.

We learned that four men died and one remains in critical condition after a scaffolding mishap occurred on Christmas eve at a public housing development in Toronto's north west end. Initial reports said that the men were migrant workers but one of them did have a valid Ontario drivers license so details were not certain about the men's legal status in Canada.

We now know that two of them were "refugee" claimants, one from the ever oppressive, tyrannical, and anti-democratic state of Israel, a literal hell on earth, and another from Ukraine. I don't know exactly what alleged persecution these men were facing in Israel or Ukraine but my nonsense detector immediately tells me these men lied to get into the country, likely coached along the way by unscrupulous immigration lawyers and consultants.

The only survivor was from Uzbekistan and he has no family in Canada. According to the reports we can assume that one of the four dead was also an immigrant from Uzbekistan. Undoubtedly both were refugee claimants as well.

Now they are dead with one fighting for his life. Ironically, if Canada had a tough and sensible refugee determination system none of these men would have been allowed into the country as refugees and would probably be alive today. But other men would have been in their place.

Canada is not short of labour despite the whining that comes out of the business community. Canada is short of labourers who will work for low pay and/or in unsafe working conditions. Instead of sweetening the pot by raising wages, salaries, and offering benefits to attract workers the business community has successfully lobbied to keep immigration numbers high to flood the labour market with cheap and disposable labour. The result is predictable: downward pressure on wages and salaries and the weakening of labour standards. That being the case what Canadian would be attracted to jobs like that? By over supplying the labour market you create situations were people are desperate enough to take anything irrespective of pay and safety.

The media are just a culpable in my opinion. Instead of focusing on how immigration is disrupting the labour market and discouraging Canadians from taking certain jobs we hear heroic tails of immigrants toiling in jobs "Canadians won't do" to create a better life for their children.

Canada's unions are of no help either. Effectively non-existent in the private sector the only unions Canada really has are public sector unions and they too are silent on the negative forces of mass immigration even though it threatens to undermine union strength in the nation.

Who is really standing up for Canada's working class?

From the Toronto Star report linked above we learn that the company in question was ordered to halt work by the province over safety concerns. Work orders were also issued to ensure work place safety. But the men died anyway and it begs one to wonder how serious these work orders were taken.

Temporary workers and migrant workers, indeed mass immigration including the refugee stream which is more about immigration than asylum, are not only undermining Canadian living standards by forcing downward pressure on incomes but also undermine work place safety standards. The immigration system is not a weapon to attack Canada's working population nor are immigrant workers cheap and disposable cogs in a machine. We are talking about people's lives and livelihoods.

As for the title of this post, back in the day I used to watch The Simpsons when it was funny enough to make time for. But since it jumped the shark a long time ago I don't watch it all. However, there was one episode where an aunt of Marge's and her sisters' died and extolled Marge's two celibate twin sisters in a video will to have children. Feeling the mothering impulse one of them decides to take two of Marge's children, Bart and Lisa, to the beer themed amusement park Duff Gardens. On the way into the park Lisa reads from a pamphlet some points of interests about the Duff Gardens "Beeramid". She reads aloud that fourteen migrant workers died in its construction to which the aunt responded "Ah, plenty more where that came from." It's not so funny when it actually happens in real life.

If The Children's Aid Society Gets Its Way Expect Canada To Be A Dumping Ground For The World's 'Abandoned' Children.

As if Canada doesn't have enough holes in its border it appears the CAS (Children's Aid Society) is working to create another one.

Here is a story about a child called Kasim (not his real name). He was sent to Canada on a one way ticket from St. Lucia. His parents claim that he will have better education and employment opportunities in Canada than in St. Lucia. And since he has no parents or guardians in Canada the child will become a ward of the state. In other words they want Canadian taxpayers to raise their child for them.

Kasim isn't the only child they sent here. An older brother was residing in Canada illegally and to whom Kasim was sent to live with. However that older sibling has been detected and has been sent back to St. Lucia.

Though ordered deported Kasim still remains in Canada thanks to the meddling of the CAS. Claiming to be acting in the best interests of the child the CAS has delayed his deportation and want the government to grant Kasim immigration status even though he is in no danger if returned to St. Lucia to live with his mother and aunt.

If the CAS is successful then this will be a precedent setting case, paving a legal argument for others to send their children to Canada to be raised by the state. Undoubtedly these "unwanted" children will then be used for immigration purposes if not as a remittance paying ex-patriot. Ironically, the CAS will only encourage others to "abandon" their children by sending them to Canada. Is this what is meant by acting in the best interests of the child?

Canada's immigration system is already a money losing investment. We cannot afford to be the caregivers of the world's "unwanted" children. It is the responsibility of the child's parents to provide for his or her welfare not Canadian tax payers. Nor is it the place of arrogant, meddling, social workers at the CAS to tell others how to raise their kids, assuming they even know what is best for them.

The CAS is doing more harm than good by delaying Kasim's deportation. They will make things worse for Canada if they get their way. They are wrong and should let the child go which reminds me of a joke I once heard about the CAS. What is the difference between the CAS and a pit bull? The pit bull eventually lets go of the child. Ain't that the truth.

So Long Green Belt, We Hardly Knew Ya.

Here is another article out of the allegedly environmentally conscious Toronto Star. You can read it if you wish but the story is a familiar one. It is one of a key figure in developing strategies to protect southern Ontario's prime farm land warning of the pending environmental disaster if certain profit maximizing entities' proposed business ventures (euphemistically referred to as "employment zones") come to fruition on prime agricultural land.

A damning memo from Ontario's senior planner paints a stark picture of unsustainable sprawl, congestion and skyrocketing infrastructure costs if the province proceeds with a controversial strategy to urbanize large swaths of Simcoe County north of the Greenbelt.

The warning by Victor Doyle, a key architect of the groundbreaking Greenbelt plan, focuses on the combined impact of lightning-speed growth in Barrie and proposals to create two massive employment zones along pastoral Highway 400 in Bradford West Gwillimbury and Innisfil.

"The cumulative effect will be to open up a new linear pattern of urban sprawl along Highway 400 running virtually from the Holland Marsh to north of Barrie," Doyle wrote in the September letter directed at Ontario's Growth Secretariat and obtained by the Star.

What happens in Simcoe may determine whether a bold attempt to curb sprawl in the GTA ultimately succeeds or fails.

It is wishful thinking on the part of anyone if they believe the Ontario government (it doesn't matter who is in power) is serious about containing the seemingly unstoppable urban sprawl spreading out from Toronto into the surrounding region and beyond. It is wishful thinking on the part of anyone if they think the rapid population growth infecting southern Ontario, thanks almost in whole to mass immigration, can be accommodated by "smart growth" planning. It is also naive for anyone to believe that the Toronto Star is actually serious about the environment.

Think about it. More immigrants means more citizens which, fingers crossed, translates into votes for the party in power. More immigrants means more surplus labour to work for low wages and benefits in "employment zones". More immigrants means more demand for the "better life" which means a large two door garage house, an SUV for each port, which means more urban sprawl and frequent shopping trips to outlet malls and shopping centres (that's what Canada means to immigrants anyways), and a carbon footprint that helps make Canada one of the worst offenders in the world. And, more immigrants means more Toronto Star readers that can be sold to advertisers.

More immigrants means more cars on the road, which means more congestion, which means more idling cars, which means more pollution which is the cause of an estimated 10,000 deaths in Ontario. More cars so that they can get to their urban sprawl homes, which was developed on prime farm land, which means leas arable land, which will be needed if and when peak oil hits.

I think you get the picture.

Mass immigration is what is fueling urban sprawl and its associated consequences. Perhaps if Canada's environmentalists spent most of their energy pressuring the government at the provincial and national levels to cut immigration numbers then they might actually accomplish something for once and help preserve Canada's environment. They do have the facts on their side this time and Canada is, after all, bringing in too many immigrants this country needs or the citizens care for. Instead, like chickens with their heads cut off, they run around screaming "they sky is falling" over what is turning out to be a global warming hoax.

Priorities people. Get them straight.

If American Culture Impovrishes Us Then Why Does Multiculturalism Enrich Us?

I came across this commentary in the Toronto Star. It's about the current state of Canadian broadcasting and its reliance on "cheap" imported U.S. programming and how this reliance "impoverishes" Canadian culture. It's an interesting read but the article can be summed up by this single paragraph:

Can Canadian culture survive when the primary instrument of communication of the age concentrates most of its effort on the importation of the culture of another country?

It is a question worth pondering and one that should be applied to multiculturalism and its fuel, mass immigration. If American culture "impoverishes" Canadian culture then why does South Asian culture or Chinese culture, etc., enrich us?

I happen to agree that American cultural influence in Canada is a concern but it is one shared by many countries. And it shouldn't stop with the U.S.

Indian films are becoming commonplace in select theaters in major Canadian cities. Indeed, the Indian film industry, in its attempt to market its brand of mediocre film fare internationally, will hold its nomadic film awards in Toronto in 2011, the first city in North America to do so. The fact is there is no market in Canada for Indian films outside of Canada's South Asian colonies. Chinese films have tried to find a market in North America and has found little mainstream success even though Chinese films have more appeal then the characteristically silly Bollywood tripe.

American films already dominate Canadian screens and competing with American films is hard enough. Now Canadian filmmakers, thanks in whole to Canada's burgeoning Indian and Chinese colonies, have to compete with imported Indian and Chinese films for Canadian screens as well.

It doesn't stop there. Companies like Rogers and Bell, in an effort to attract subscription dollars from Canada's growing immigrant communities, offer packages that will deliver television content from non North American sources.

The CBC is of little use. If it isn't making shows about the cultural hobbies and sensibilities of its Toronto-centric producers (Little Mosque On The Prairie), its making shows about themselves or their friends (Sophie, Being Erica). In other words shows no one wants to watch.

The truth is given the choice Canadians will choose American culture over multiculturalism any day. It's because American culture is so a part of Canada. It's a part of Canadians' daily lives. We see it when we turn on the T.V., when we listen to the radio, when we wear their clothes. That's just how it is because we are so much like them (or if you wish we are so like each other). There are differences but there are many similarities and there's nothing terribly wrong with that. We should be cautious (and suspicious at times) when dealing with the U.S. (NAFTA was a mistake for one thing and we should get out of it) but the United States is a great country and the American people are wonderful. There is a lot we can learn from them but likewise there is much they can learn from us.

We may feel slighted that we know more about the United States and its people than they do about us. And that we, as the people who know the Americans best are given little thought by them we too have to consider that we, as Canadians, give little thought of anyone, anywhere outside of North America north of the Rio Grande. Quick, who is the current president of Mexico (yes Mexico does have a president)?

Multiculturalism on the other hand is completely irrelevant for the majority Canadians. It means nothing to them. They simply don't care about it because it is not present in their daily lives. They may eat at an ethnic themed restaurant every now and then but those are simply cultural indulgences where the cultural habit is the generic act of going out to eat. They may see a sari here or there, a turban or a hijab, but the most they will do is acknowledge that a people and a culture not of North American origin (and thus not North American) resides within the borders of their nation. If anything multiculturalism is viewed as a rejection of Canadian culture and thus an insult.

So, if the survival of a Canadian culture, a unique Canadian voice, is desperate against American cultural influences then how is it to be heard in a multicultural society? To me it's the same thing. If American culture is impoverishing then so is multiculturalism. Both doom Canada to a state of cultural mediocrity.

Immigration Watch Canada.org Has A Forum.

Check it out here.

Of Points And Credentials: Canada Is Awash With Some Skilled Labour So Why Do We Still Let Them In?

I read this commentary in the Toronto Star and it seems it was lifted, some of it anyways, from my last blog post. As much as I'd like to think so I doubt that is the case. It's good to see that some sobering thoughts are printed in the Toronto Star on occasion instead of the usual irresponsible cheer leading that graces its pages.

There is no doubt that the initiative by federal Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and Human Resources Minister Diane Finley to speed up the recognition of foreign credentials for new immigrants is a step in the right direction. But this initiative addresses the effect of the problem, not the cause. It addresses the issue of what to do when they are in Canada, not the question of why we have let them immigrate to Canada if their credentials are not recognized by the provinces and whether the provinces really need new immigrants with those credentials.

Our immigration system is allowing people with high academic credentials into Canada and helping them find jobs that don't exist while, simultaneously, disregarding the requests of industries that need different manpower and survive only thanks to the work done by illegal workers who can't be in this country legally because of an unfair point system.

Those requests for manpower are requests for cheap and plentiful labour.

The commentary points out that Ontario is flooded with imported skilled labour it never needed and doesn't need.

When we talk about foreign credentials, we automatically think about doctors who come from abroad and drive taxis in Toronto. But the reality is different. Only 200 doctors arrive every year. Rather, according to numbers from Ontario's immigration ministry that are only 2 years old, our province is flooded by engineers, accountants, lab technicians, IT experts and teachers we don't necessarily need.

As former Ontario immigration minister Mike Colle pointed out, we have 10,000 to 15,000 engineers arriving in Canada from abroad every year. At the same time, every year we have 4,000 to 5,000 new engineers graduating from our universities and the workforce can barely accommodate them.

One of the problems, according to the commentary, is the points system. As I have stated on this blog the system is outdated and arbitrary. It is also subject to meddling from non citizens as was the case when Canada tried to increase the score necessary for immigration as a means to control to the inflow of unnecessary skilled immigration. When the government made public its intentions to do this Ottawa was threatened with lawsuits from potential immigrants who passed on the lower score but failed at the higher score. Ottawa back down and the score remains at its low of 67.

Immigration policy for skilled workers should start before we let them into Canada, not when they are already here because of the point system – and when we don't know what to do with them.

Sound familiar? This was the sentiment I expressed in my previous post. We shouldn't be importing skilled immigrants if their credentials are not going to be recognized. And it may very well be that their skills do not meet Canadian standards. These complications facing immigrants should be settled before coming to Canada. If they fail the skills assessment then they should not allowed to land regardless of their application score.

The commentary focuses its criticisms for Ontario but it is a problem for all of the country. Too many is too many and Canada needs to cut back on the inflow of immigrants and rethink its selection criteria.