Tories Invite, Then Boot, Racist Group

CBC has the general story, but more can be gleaned from the cireport website:

Earlier today, the webmasters of cireport.ca were scheduled to appear before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration. Due to apparent interference by Liberal and NDP members of the Committee, our scheduled presentation did not happen. 

It didn't happen because NDP research staff took a look at the website and didn't like what they saw:

The Conservatives invited two witnesses to the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration today from  the Canadian Immigration Report, an organisation associating itself with racists and hate groups.

 On the Canadian Immigration Report website, we can find among other things, an interview with well-known Canadian white supremacist Paul Fromm.

In the CBC story,  Conservative MP Chungsen Leung, who apparently invited the group, pled ignorance--something, as a Tory MP, I'm sure he can do with aplomb:

...[he] told reporters he had requested the witnesses on the recommendation from people in his Toronto-area riding of Willowdale, but admitted he didn't do due diligence in checking their backgrounds.

"I was told these witnesses were lawyers, I was not told anything else, and I was not aware of the views or the website they are associated with," he read from a statement.

"The views stated in their website are disgusting, and anti-Canadian, and I'm outraged by them. So as a result, I have asked the clerk that they be pulled [from the committee list]."

However, what is interesting is how the Lussier's (Julien and Madi, who run Immigration Report) blame not  Leung, who invited and then dis-invited them, but the opposition parties:

... it seems that the Liberals and NDP did not believe in their immigration policies enough to defend them before us. Along with all the other Canadians we speak for, we were silenced, censored, discarded.

Bad vetting or worse?  A quick google of Cheung and Julien Lussier doesn't bring up anything besides this story.  Still, five seconds playing around the cireport website by Mr. Leung's staff would have saved their boss a whole day of embarrassment.

Gruending On Kymlicka On Canadian Immigration Policy

In which Dennis Gruending channels Queens University professor Will Kymlicka's full-throated defense of Canadian multiculturalism:

There is a high degree of political integration among immigrants and an elevated percentage of immigrants to Canada who become citizens. They are more likely than immigrants in other countries to vote, to seek political office and to get elected. Canadians are just as likely to vote for a foreign born or visible minority candidate, as they are to vote for any other candidates.

[...]

Rather than focusing upon social science research, many commentators rely on anecdote. They say it creates ethnic ghettos but Kymlicka says that is no truer now than it was previously for other groups such as Italians and Hungarians. Some commentators say that among visible minority immigrants the second generation express lower levels of “belonging” to Canadian society than do their parents. Kymlicka said that, in realty, studies show no dramatic differences and second generation immigrants still express a “high level of belonging to Canada. Too many Canadian commentators, Kymlicka says, are importing a European analysis that holds we are sleepwalking into segregation. “There is little evidence to support this, he says. “My view is that this ominous public debate is off target and unhelpful."

[...]

Kymlicka then outlined what he sees as the major problems confronting Canada’s multicultural model. One is economics. The current cohort of immigrants is not keeping up with native-born Canadians. Policies of multiculturalism, Kymlicka said, cannot deal with broadly based economic problems. There are also problems that relate to multiculturalism and religion. Policies developed in the 1970s did not take account of religious sensibilities. “We still do not have a good framework to decide which religious demands are legitimate.” He gave as examples the debates that have swirled around public funding for religious schools and around the use of shariah law in solving certain disputes.

Makes me wish the whole presentation was on-line somewhere. UBC Professor David Ley's “Multiculturalism: A Canadian Defense”, which I admit to not having read, can be found here.

Conservative Writer Would Ban Halloween, Hoodys, Goalie Masks!

I had never heard of Dick Field of the Canada Free Press, but today he joined the wingy-dingy elite with a rant entitled "Hijabs, Veils, Burkas, Masks, Balaclavas, Hoodies Kirpans, Turbans, and Quebec’s Ethnic Cleansing":

In view of all this multicultural distortion of Canadian society by our constant accommodation of minority demands; should we accept the wearing of Burkas, Hijabs, Veils, Masks, and Balaclavas etc?

The answer has to be NO! Any covering of the face must be outlawed to preserve the peace and good order of Canada. We must not accept any further destruction of our Canadian rights and freedoms. The answer must be clear. No and no again!

Two words, Dick: Frost bite. It's Canada, after all. Or would only whites be entitled to wear ski-masks?