Two articles appeared this week that go begging for the light of truth:
Note: an alert reader contacted me to advise that the sister of #1 spender Vivienne Poy is none other than our esteemed (?) former GG - Adrienne Clarkson. No wonder Senator Poy comes first in spending our tax dollars - it runs in her family.
First concerns a report released on the top 5 Senator Spenders for only the "first half of 2011"; all five (5) are Liberal Senators and all have spent more than $150,000.00 on Travel and Entertainment in just 6 months.
The top spender - Liberal Vivienne Poy spent a whopping $173,511.87. It is in respect to the number 2 guy on the list that causes me to include him in the need for a reality check although it can be said that all Senators are in need of same. Indeed, the best solution here is to see the Senate abolished - but I digress.
Number #2 Big Spending Liberal Senator is Terry Mercer who comes in for the last 6 months at $172,356.81. His home is far away in the remote Province of Nova Scotia - a cheap air flight from the Nation's Capital. He states that one of the main reasons for his high expenditure is the need for him "to go back to (his) constituency quite often, almost every weekend."
Senators Do Not Have Constituencies - Only Members Of Parliament Do !!!
The Second Reality Check is in relation to an article critical of the Government and praising the Federal Court in the handling of Refugee Cases. The case highlighted concerns a South American chap who came to Canada because he was forced to pay extortion money to criminal elements in order to operate his food stand.
The Government's arm - the Immigration and Refugee Board had turned this Refugee down but his case then went on to Federal Court - filled with Liberal Judges - where the IRB ruling was over-turned.
The problem with what the Federal Court did - and constantly does - and the angle taken by the media report is that they are wrong. Wrong in the sense that the South American Applicant may well be a Refugee but in order to gain entry into countries like Canada, an applicant must be Convention Refugee as Defined by the United Nations.
I say this with some authority given the fact that for 4- 5 years I worked in Legal Services with the Refugee Board.
By Convention Refugee - it means a person who has been profoundly discriminated for reasons of Race, Religion , or Politics. Nothing in the Definition refers to persons being 'shook down' in their business by criminal types.
So Second Reality Check - the Federal Court and the Newspapers may call this chap a Refugee - and he well may be - but He Is Not A UN Convention Refugee and as such he is not entitled to remain in Canada. Full Stop.
As a post-script this is all semantics though - since virtually all who enter Canada and claim Refugee Status - no matter how bogus their claim - seldom, if ever get deported.
As I see it...
'K.D. Galagher'
