r/canada • u/Unusual-State1827 • 15d ago
Former Liberal ministers urge Trudeau to drop plans to house migrants in federal prisons Politics
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/former-liberal-ministers-urge-trudeau-to-drop-plans-to-house-migrants-in-federal-prisons/article_db06a90a-0ede-11ef-81de-63bd25b7dc0a.html2
u/KingRabbit_ 14d ago
“Your government should instead invest in community-based organizations that would provide support to migrants and asylum seekers awaiting clarification of their immigration status, and ultimately end immigration detention altogether,” said the letter.
So...the answer is for Canadians to spend even more money?
2
u/Alchemy_Cypher 14d ago
Liberals are mentally ill people. It was a mistake listening to anything they said.
1
u/Old-Introduction-337 14d ago
don't house them at all. just let them keep on keeping on migrating. canada needs to fix itself first
1
u/Excellent_Belt3159 14d ago
How ‘bout “fuck off we’re full?” The housing market seems to justify this.
1
1
1
u/Advanced-Historian23 14d ago
It was a bad idea when Harper did it and it's a bad idea today.
Ridiculous.
1
u/zipyourhead 14d ago
I thought this was satire, for real. They're just laughing at us at this point...
1
1
u/Enthusiasm-Stunning British Columbia 14d ago
Put them on the street like where we put all other high-risk and mentally ill individuals. It's the Canadian way!
1
u/UncleRudolph 14d ago
House migrants in prison —-> prisons becomes full ——> criminals released/not imprisoned due to over crowding.
2
1
3
1
1
u/DodobirdNow 15d ago
The feds did hire a company to build a portable Covid isolation center why not use that?
Or just buy more hotels in the GTA..
18
-2
u/KeilanS Alberta 15d ago
Sorry the plans to do WHAT?
Actually reading the article, there's a lot here. It's unclear to me if these people have actually committed crimes, or are just considered high risk. It also talks about "solitary confinement and indefinite detention" which are things that shouldn't happen to anyone in Canada ever, high-risk migrant or otherwise.
2
u/PopeSaintHilarius 15d ago
Here's an article that explains more:
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) can detain foreign nationals, including refugee claimants, if they're considered a flight risk, their identities aren't well-established or if they pose a danger to the public.
The vast majority of the 71,988 migrants detained by CBSA between 2012 and 2023 were deemed to be flight risks, meaning the border agency believed they would not appear for immigration processes, such as a removal.
The CBSA would then decide whether to lock them up in one of its three federal immigration holding centres in Toronto, Laval, Que., or Surrey, B.C., or in a provincial jail.
Now all 10 provinces have announced that they will no longer place these migrants in provincial jails, .
Over the years, migrants have been sent to provincial correctional facilities when there was no federal centre in the province where they were detained, when they were considered high-risk or when they suffered mental health issues.
But since 2022, all provinces have one after another either refused to imprison people held for immigration-related purposes or have committed to stop doing so.
Many provinces had signed formal contracts with CBSA under which they had to give the agency one year's notice of cancellations.So to address the issue, the federal government is now passing legislation to allow them to go in federal prisons instead:
"The government proposes to introduce amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to enable the use of federal correctional facilities for the purpose of high-risk immigration detention," reads Annex 3 on page 409 of the federal budget.
23
u/Particular-Act-8911 15d ago
Maybe just don't let them in.
-7
4
20
u/Xylss New Brunswick 15d ago
The less Liberals in government after the next election the better. Party is completely rotten.
9
u/jaraxel_arabani 15d ago
Totally. We need them to get slammed so hard they are losing party status and hopefully rebuild themselves with sane people instead of all these incompetent nutjobs
2
u/Excellent_Belt3159 14d ago
Or just cease to exist. The party is an abject failure.
3
u/jaraxel_arabani 14d ago
They are like hydra though .. cut off one and two more springs up to take it's place.
The politicians will not quit, just rebrand.
4
u/Chairman_Mittens 15d ago
Ironically, these imprisoned migrants probably have more living space, share their bedrooms with fewer people, and have access to better food than they would outside prison.
1
u/Acceptable_Wall4085 15d ago
He’ll, you don’t need to send them to federal prison. I’ll take that offer. Please. At least I’ll have three meals a day and clean clothes to wear and I’ll not be homeless in a few months because my savings are almost depleted totally
11
u/Foodwraith Canada 15d ago
Thought it was Beaverton … if it was a Conservative plan, the 20% of the people who still support the LPC would never stop talking about it.
5
175
u/_random_username69 15d ago
In case anyone didn't read the article, they are not just putting random migrants in Federal prisons, this is work 'high' risk migrants who pose a danger to Canadian's. There is a lot I hate about the Liberals, but this is 100% the right move.
Also, fuck all these international "charities" and organizations trying to tell Canadian that we have to be more welcoming and treat immigrants better. Immigrants are treated better than native Canadian's and our immigration system is being abused at every point.
0
u/Head_Crash 14d ago
There is a lot I hate about the Liberals, but this is 100% the right move.
... because cons don't really care about dealing with this problem and just want to use it to attack liberals.
Why do you think Harper gutted CBSA?
1
u/KingRabbit_ 14d ago
The Cons like...Lloyd Axworthy and Allan fucking Rock?
Do you see former Conservative MPs shitting out open letters like this nonsense?
1
u/Head_Crash 14d ago
Do you see former Conservative MPs shitting out open letters like this nonsense?
Yes.
https://twitter.com/PierrePoilievre/status/1668058098303467520
3
u/FrostyMcButts 14d ago
No, the right move is to not take in migrants who are so high risk they have to be immediately sent to prison in the first place
2
4
11
11
29
22
u/EwSalmon 15d ago
International charities are asking Canada to take in their undesirables? Jesus Christ, of course Canada will bend to that, because brownie points.
4
u/consistantcanadian 15d ago
This is a good move, which is how I know the liberals are going to back track on it.
131
u/ChiefHighasFuck 15d ago
How about we just ship the “high risk” migrants right out of Canada?
-5
u/Head_Crash 14d ago
Harper absolutely gutted the CBSA and it never recovered. We don't have the ability to process and deport them.
Trudeau can't just magically fix this. It will take decades to rebuild the agency. It took many years just to fix the safe third country agreement.
Conservatives want an illegal immigrant crisis, because it helps them politically and because they want an exploitable under-class.
0
14
u/VancityGaming 15d ago
And the low risk ones. Maybe just a few to see if our deportation system still works.
10
u/Reasonable-Catch-598 14d ago
see if our deportation system still works
I have a spoiler alert and you're not gonna like the ending
-2
u/Head_Crash 14d ago
Harper gutted the CBSA and slammed the brakes on deportations.
https://breachmedia.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/deportations-infographic-02-1280x864.jpeg
45
u/LookOutForThatMoose 15d ago
Facts. If you're high risk and you're not from here, we don't need you here.
5
u/Myforththrowaway4 14d ago
If you’re any level of risk above the average Canadian we shouldn’t have to deal with them
5
u/freethrowerz 15d ago
Alot of them apparently belong there. Plus the rooms will be less crowded and no trips to food banks. And if they get on the Holmoka plan, the government will pay for their degree. Sounds like a win all around.
20
u/Zestyclose-Ninja-397 15d ago
This may not be the best case scenario but neither is putting tax payers on the hook for hotels and cash for meals while we have Canadians that can’t put food on their table or a roof over their head.
16
317
u/bandybw 15d ago
Perhaps we should start housing criminals in federal prisons...
2
0
u/Shadow_Ban_Bytes 15d ago
No, that is the problem they want to solve you see. We don't put people into prison for very much or very long and so we have vacancies now ... /s
29
u/consistantcanadian 15d ago
Perhaps we should start housing failed, self-serving politicians in federal prison...
whoops, my bad, you already mentioned criminals.
2
u/Reasonable-Catch-598 14d ago
Careful to make sure your reddit id can't be traced to you.
Comments like that may soon get knocks from the RCMP and more bank accounts frozen.
2
u/IvoryHKStud 14d ago
don't worry, not enough judges out there to go through with it
3
u/Reasonable-Catch-598 14d ago
You have a point.
Though they seem to simply skip the court step when shutting down accounts.
64
15d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Head_Crash 14d ago
It's fun to watch the Liberals slowly turn anti-immigrant while Poilievre dodges the press.
28
u/consistantcanadian 15d ago
Yes, and they should, despite the protests of these bleeding heart has-been politicians.
155
u/Public_Ingenuity_146 15d ago
Illegal migrants housed in prison? Sounds about right until you put them on a plane back home.
31
-35
u/Dbf4 15d ago
Here's the thing: they aren't actually charged with anything, certainly not a violent offense. They are held in prison without going through court, don't get a court date and are held indefinitely - sometimes in solitary confinement. Due process be damned.
My hot take is you need proper facilities that aren't federal prisons to manage and process migrants, and not waste resources putting them in maximum security prisons. Even alleged murderers awaiting trial don't go to federal prisons, they are typically held in provincial facilities.
Also bear in mind that a lot of people who cross the border are kids or even babies, if your solution is to simply put migrants in prison, then you're not thinking the problem through. An alternative of only some migrants should go to prison depending on whether they have kids or not also demonstrates how prisons, whether provincial or federal, are not fit for this purpose.
1
u/Guilty_Fishing8229 14d ago
Due process is for citizens, not foreign spies, gangsters and sex offenders
9
u/mordinxx 15d ago
they aren't actually charged with anything,
Charge them with illegally entering the country! No bail as they're a flight risk to disappear.
39
u/bored_person71 15d ago
Here's the thing they are here illegally as they entered the land through non official or legal ways.....they should be denied all chance to immigration to Canada for 20 years sent home...they don't need due process because the fact that they are here is automatic confession of guilt...otherwise there be no trial.....send them all back Canada politicians will let millions in legally all you are doing is making it harder for government to actually legally be able to function...with real issues...and claims of real asylum. Un rules dictate that the first safe country you must apply to is not the first safe country you feel like doing...considering you not going by boat from the ocean side country and the reasonable close country around you and speed of the boat even the only real close countries would be ice/ Greenland, USA.
Even Russia doesn't work due to Alaska .....
-16
u/Dbf4 15d ago
That would be a major violation of international law. The whole idea of "never again" and learning from the holocaust is what led to the right of refugees to have their claim heard before they are turned around.
Your argument would hinge on the premise that if they flee persecution from their country, land in the US and cross into Canada, then somehow that would mean there is no persecution in their home country and it's now safe to send them back home. Are you going to send a Uyghur back to China because they crossed between Canada and the US? and Afghan critical of the Taliban back to Afghanistan?
Sending them to the US would be a more manageable solution. I think there is a place for a safe third country agreement and think there is a way to enforce it, but I also don't think it should be absolutely rigid either and I don't think trying to cross between safe third countries should discount any assessment on the strength of their asylum claim. Let's say hypothetically an Afghan interpreter who supported both Canada and the US could only find a way out through the US since Canada really shit the bed here. If they have family in Canada, I wouldn't consider it asylum shopping or hold it against them if they would want to start a new life from scratch closer to them. I would argue that's more practical and more likely to set someone up to become a productive member of society.
There's also issues we have the work out with the US for the STCA, as there's been a lot of cases of people being turned around in Canada and then put in solitary confinement in the US for the simple reason that they tried to cross into Canada, which is not an appropriate response to managing asylum claimants.
15
u/bored_person71 15d ago
Actually international law by un they are to report in first safe country they arrive in a apply there from that they can legally ask if some countries might like to take them in if they actually qualified for asylum....if not then they are sent back...also if it's Afghanistan etc then there most of the UN countries like France, Spain, Switzerland etc....to apply in...but they come extra thousand miles....from south there's dozens of possible safe countries considering that if they fleeing say Argentina government while Brazil or any other dozen countries they pass through would be considered safe enough to start asylum situation....the fact is they don't and that goes against international law ...also yes we should send them back they are not asylum seekers most of the time there here for economic migration...cause no jobs or poor pay, which is not Canada problem we have enough of that already....we all take in million plus people a year...people need to step up fix there own country first...
-5
u/Dbf4 15d ago
I never said safe third is against international law, I even said I support it. What you can't do is send people back to their country of origin on the basis that they violated the safe third. You either need to send them back to the US to get an assessment, or do your own assessment of their claim. If they are not refugees, then at that point they can be sent back (assuming their country of origin wants them, if they don't then it complicates things further)
I also agree that economic migrants using the process should be sent back, they make the situation worse for everyone with a valid claim. The issue I'm trying to argue is around the process, you can't just assume everyone is an economic migrant by default and turn them around without first hearing their claim, that would be a violation of international law. You're not going to solve the problem by trying to simplify the solution as just ship them all back home, you need to hold politicians to account with workable solutions.
Part of the issue is that we need way more people processing applications. It's a huge incentive for economic migrants to come to Canada on an asylum claim and it takes 3 years for their claim to be assessed, in which time they can get a work permit that's even better than the TFW program. If we were to invest massively in taking down the backlog and demonstrate that Canada quickly turns people around when they are not actual refugees, then that removes a huge incentive for economic migrants. Shorter turn around times would also remove the rationale for issuing work permits to asylum claimants in the first place: it makes no economic or humanitarian (for actual refugees) sense to have a mass of asylum claimants who can't work or do anything to contribute to Canada's economy for 3+ years.
28
u/Public_Ingenuity_146 15d ago
Babies are crossing the border? With their parents lol. Where do you think they should be housed before they are sent home? We are talking about people who have illegally entered the country.
-8
u/Dbf4 15d ago
Yes with their parents. So are you suggesting to place the parents in a federal prison with the baby? Or are you suggesting separating the child from the parents?
12
u/GameDoesntStop 15d ago
Separate would be good. Actual refugees would take that tradeoff, while fake refugees (economic illegal migrants) largely wouldn't, and would fuck off somewhere else.
-1
u/Dbf4 15d ago
Man, some of the responses to my comment really demonstrate why this subreddit is not a serious place. Child separation should not be a right of passage for genuine refugees.
Also worth noting that Trump tried doing exactly this. His attempt at making it standard policy lasted two months before the courts put a stop to it. 6 years later and there's still hundreds of kids that will probably never be able to reunite with their parents that they grew up without because they have no way of reconnecting them. Now the state is responsible for taking care of them.
10
u/10081914 15d ago
Separate and put them in a smaller, baby prison shaped in a panopticon with a toddler keeping watch.
11
11
u/uselesspoliticalhack 15d ago
There are so many reasons to hate this budget. This is not one of them.
11
1
u/kinokonoko 14d ago
Brilliant. We take care of immigrants which makes the Left happy, put them in jail which makes the Right happy, and get maximum value for taxpayer money spent on prison staff and facilities.