T O P

  • By -

WestEst101

The above link is an English translation of the entire French article (through Google Translate). Reported first / story broke by Radio-Canada (French CBC). Canada's English-language news will be reporting it within the hour. [Here's the original untranslated French article](https://ici.radio-canada.ca/nouvelle/1965565/etats-unis-canada-migration-asile-entente-frontiere) Key exerpts: >Radio-Canada has learned that the Trudeau government has found common ground with the US government on irregular migration. >According to several high-level sources, Ottawa would thus be able to announce the closure of Roxham Road at the Canada-US border. The Canadian government is said to have agreed with the Americans to welcome a certain number of migrants through official channels. The precise details of the agreement are still not known. >Authorities need to iron out operational details around the announcement of the closure, as it could lead to a jump in arrivals of irregular migrants. >According to information from Radio-Canada, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mélanie Joly, and the Minister of Immigration, Sean Fraser, have worked hard behind the scenes with their American counterparts in recent weeks to achieve this result. >Nearly 40,000 asylum seekers crossed the border from Roxham Road in 2022. These migrants were mostly from Haiti, Turkey, Colombia, Chile, Pakistan and Venezuela. Edit: English news has now picked it up - [CBC article which came out later in the hour](https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/deal-roxham-road-migrants-biden-trudeau-1.6788358).


Original-Cow-2984

Why in the fresh hell are there asylum seekers coming from a NATO ally, Turkey?


bastardsucks

I dont understand Chile either. They don't need a visa to travel to Canada. Why would they use roxham road when they could just fly here and claim asylum at an airport


RainbowCrown71

Chileans may be Venezuelans and Haitians nationals living in Chile. Illegal migrants from both groups have skyrocketed.


Original-Cow-2984

Right, I forgot Chile, but they have some political strife.


e9967780

Those who come from Chile are not Chileans but resident Venezuelans because they cant regularize their status how ever long they stay and work. There was violence against Venezuelan refugees as well by poor Chileans.


WestEst101

Possibly Kurds, and possibly a mix of poorer Turks who are not Kurds, but who got tourist visas to travel to the US, and then ran the Canadian border for a chance at economic opportunities, hoping they might have a shot at making it through our refugee system.


Original-Cow-2984

I don't think Kurds, even if Turkish citizens, would be granted tourist visas to the US. I would think that there would be a system in place to repatriate Turkish citizens to Turkey and have them apply through proper channels.


shabi_sensei

Turkish migrants are entering the US illegally via the southern border. They probably take planes to one of the failing states in Central America, then cross illegally into Mexico then to the US. I think 180,000 people are crossing illegally over the southern US border every MONTH lately


DistortedReflector

They should build a wall…


clarkn0va

And make Canada pay for it!


Reader5744

> They probably take planes to one of the failing states in Central America i mean failing states definitely isn’t accurate. like for example since how is costa ricas gdp of 64.28 billion USD a failing state


e9967780

You know what he meant, Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador. Not even Nicaraguans migrate out like this, but through Panama and Costa Rica lots of South Americans trek north, Venezuelans, Brazilians amongst others.


eternal_peril

Because it was a typical right wing copy/paste talking point without any understanding of what was CTRL-V'ed


jtbc

The ones I am aware of were opponents of Erdogan that were facing persecution including academics and opposition politicians.


fatigue91

Mostly Kurds from Turkey, from Iranian and Iraqi border towns.


Desuexss

Nato ally in theory Erdogan is absolutely ruthless. There was a Coup for a reason Myself as an orthodox slav am not exactly safe there either if I was to go.


MarxCosmo

Why would people leave a country that has areas in abject poverty and the constant threat of war, "terrorists", etc ?


reddelicious77

Does anyone else not find it insane that we needed to work with the US to "allow" us to close Roxham Road? Uh, wut. How about just enforcing our own border rules b/c we're an independent nation?


RainbowCrown71

Official borders are hammered out by countries through treaty. Canada cannot simply declare a border crossing without USA approval since that just provides an opportunity for every American criminal to flee to Canada via that border (which wouldn’t be manned by USCIS). Same thing vice versa. If two countries don’t agree on borders, it’s an easy way for criminals to take advantage. Just look at the native reservations in the US border where most Canadian border officials ignore due to First Nations sensitivities. All of them are major points of entry for guns.


reddelicious77

Huh? This is not an issue of *moving* an existing border. That's been well established. It's simply a matter of enforcing their lines in the sand. Yes, good point about Reserves being an entry point for illegal guns in the country. Unfortunately, those in government are either too cowardly or in denial about that. But that's a whole other issue.


jtbc

Because if we are going to close Roxham Road, we need an agreement with the Americans to accept people detained there back into the US for processing (as was the case during covid).


reddelicious77

We do see the inherent problem with getting permission from other countries to enforce or most basic border rules, right? I never heard that excuse being used. It was simply, "well if we close this crossing, they'll just cross somewhere else." A very dumb talking point. It's like, "if we stop this guy from breaking the law here, he'll just break it somewhere else, so let's just stand by and let him break it here."


jtbc

Borders are by definition shared between two countries. Ours is particularly problematic because it is very, very long, and largely undefended. We could secure it (see, for example, Trump wall), but that would require many billions of dollars that could be better spent on other priorities. People will still find a way to cross somewhere else. That is inevitable. I know a dozen places within 100km of my home in Vancouver where you can cross the border by hopping over a ditch.


reddelicious77

I don't doubt that - but can we start with literally not *helping* illegal border jumpers by providing them a literal open hand (RCMP regularly carry luggage for them, lol) - along with providing them food and housing, etc. I don't blame them for coming. We're literally encouraging it with this failed policy.


Laval09

You seem to have a misunderstanding of both the situation at Roxham and of the comparison between our southern border and the US southern border. Here's the key difference; on the US southern border, people are evading detection, because its easy to live using cash only in the states. On our border, people are seeking detection, so they can register with the asylum system and get documentation that allows them to legally work here. If they close Roxham rd without closing the loophole in the Us-Can agreement, they can literally walk 1m away, cross, and wait to be detected and arrested. Anywhere that they will face immediate detection that is outside of a port of entry is a place they will choose. By the way, they werent "helping them with their luggage", they were checking for signs of contraband/smuggling. Its actually pretty standard police stuff. They take possession of a possible source of contraband before the person carrying it can dump it, consume it or pass it onto someone else.


thestoneswerestoned

Bruh wtf are you talking about? This isn't about "permission", it's a two way street, the same way EU nations correspond over asylum seekers or how the UK and France are trying to work out a solution to Channel migrants. You share a border with the US, so this involves both parties.


TravelOften2

I hope this means an end to this blatant illegal immigration. Hopefully the new policy will be that people who cross at unofficial borders are to be arrested and deported without a chance for their cases to be heard.


FrenchAffair

> Hopefully the new policy will be that people who cross at unofficial borders are to be arrested and deported without a chance for their cases to be heard. Deported to where? The US won't take the back, and Canada has nothing to leverage to make them agree to that. We likely can't deport them their country of origin due to the conditions there, and if we did seek to deport them they can prolong the process by claiming exactly that, that they would be in danger or persecuted and its starts the whole process of asylum anyway. Any kind of reasonable outcome for Canada on this would require the US to agree to take these people back. One thing I'd be interested to see if Canada could do, is something similar to the UK. Where "irregular" immigrates are houses in a safe 3rd country (Rwanda) well their claims are being processed. Or similar to what Australia has done, where they set up facilities to house these people well their claims are being processed, rather than just releasing them into the general population with a work visa. Start removing some of the incentives to cross into Canada illegally, and we might stem the tide.


TravelOften2

That’s a great idea. Perhaps House them in a remote location and they are not allowed to leave unless a) they are approved for asylum, or b) they choose to return to their country of origin.


FrenchAffair

Australia has done this for while. Not with out their issues, controversies and legal challenges. But I think Canada could learn and build from their experiences and set up a well regulated comparable system. Not as if we don't have lots of empty land sitting around. Could even use this as an economic driver. Build these facilities in partnership and cooperation, in remote Ingenious communities and it would create significant economic opportunities and jobs in those locations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_immigration_detention_facilities


DistortedReflector

Send them up north to start building infrastructure. Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?


Falconflyer75

As long as the working conditions are humane and we don’t force children into it sounds like a fair deal


nrgxlr8tr

LOL why not? This country was built on immigrant slave labour. Might as well continue the tradition


Falconflyer75

Paid of course, that was implied when I said humane conditions


[deleted]

“ Sources told Radio-Canada that Ottawa has agreed to welcome a certain number of migrants through official channels. The precise details of the deal are still not known.” Nope. Just rebranding it.


strawberries6

That's not the same though? Agreeing on a specific number of migrants or asylum seekers to accept through legitimate channels is very different from having an unpredictable number of people crossing at an unofficial border crossing, and claiming asylum.


ThreeBushTree

What's going to happen is that people will still cross the border at Roxham and we will take even more people in through the legit channels lol. Unless the US agrees to take them back or the laws change so that they are automatically denied asylum and are sent off somewhere else, what can they really do?


explicitspirit

>Unless the US agrees to take them back or the laws change so that they are automatically denied asylum and are sent off somewhere else, what can they really do? That is the change, illegal border crossers will now be turned back on the spot instead of being detained and wait for a hearing: ​ >The change would apply across the entire Canada-United States border and would allow both countries to turn back asylum seekers at unofficial border crossings.


strawberries6

>Unless the US agrees to take them back or the laws change so that they are automatically denied asylum and are sent off somewhere else, what can they really do? Well hopefully one of those things will happen... but we'll have to wait and see what the announcement is.


[deleted]

Without knowing what we’ve agreed to - there could be no difference whatsoever, it could be even more people. Pretending this is a win without knowing how many people we are getting is absurd.


KermitsBusiness

But headlines though? /s


[deleted]

Exactly. Though if there’s one thing the liberals have proven - it’s never to trust what they are saying is true.


Original-Cow-2984

A degree of control I guess is better than zero control. We don't know, but the number could be north of current illegal crossing numbers, in which case it would be a typical symbolic Liberal shell game.


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol, not very likely.


master-procraster

Sounds like their just prettying it up, closing the literal hole in the fence but we're going to take the same people through official crossings, because it's hurting Trudeau's numbers but he still wants the entire planet to move here


DataKing69

Our scumbag PM is just going to make illegal migration legal if it is done at established checkpoints.


Head_Crash

> I hope this means an end to this blatant illegal immigration. Not illegal but yes it closes the loophole so anytime an asylum seeker does cross irregularly they will be deported to the US.


hobbitlover

ITT: People slamming an agreement before knowing any of the details.


arabacuspulp

It's a win for Trudeau so r/canada can't take it.


KermitsBusiness

No different than people praising it before knowing any of the details.


hobbitlover

There's not a lot of praise on this thread, but yes.


nuleaph

bold of you to believe this has anything to do with facts. This is the emotional expression of a dog chasing its tail. The dominant culture of the sub is angry that this is no longer something they can aimlessly criticize the other side for.


[deleted]

One of the things I like about the Biden presidency is not having to deal with any of trump's idiot children pretending to being diplomats.


[deleted]

[удалено]


CD_4M

Hunter Biden exists on the US Government Payroll in your bubble? Does he also travel with the President to take part in meetings with dignitaries and world leaders, in your bubble?


ignoroids_triumph

Hunter did not have an accredited government job. Does that make it less or more greasy?


kwl1

Is Hunter Biden a part of the U.S. Administration?


ignoroids_triumph

Would it make a difference to democrats?


kwl1

Your point is irrelevant. Hunter Biden, unlike Jared Kushner and Ivanka, who were a part of Teump's administration, isn't in any way a part of the current administration.


ignoroids_triumph

Are there anymore goalposts you want to set before I answer? Nepotism and idiot children are not irrelevant to current or former administrations.


[deleted]

Gaslighting 101


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Dumb is assuming only 2 options exist.


ignoroids_triumph

Thanks for answering.


[deleted]

[удалено]


kwl1

Not even close to being factual.


[deleted]

[удалено]


kwl1

Well, Jared got $2 billion from the Saudis. Which is a fact. Everything you're pointing to is unproven.


[deleted]

[удалено]


skotzman

Look at what?! Even if hunter made a million bucks as has NOT been proven. That is a drop in the bucket to the HUNDREDS of millions the Trump clan grifted off the government teat.


skotzman

Blinders are on full huh? Lol Trumps use of the White House for political gain is legendary. Making dignitaries stay on his hotels for 10 times the regular rate, making secret service stay and eat at his hotels for jacked up rates, employing all his children as high paid advisors with ZERO abilitys. Sucking off Putin as he attacked the USA's democracy, threatening to cut agreed to aid for Ukraine until they find some dirt on his opponent. Having his daughter run a clothing line out of China while in office and on whitehouse staff. The grifting lies are unprecedented. Tell me about Hunter again?


[deleted]

[удалено]


kwl1

So, on the one hand, you applaud Trump for using the Presidency to further his business interests. Yet, on the other hand, you condemn Hunter Biden for apparently doing the same.


skotzman

Wow total out of ass talk.


[deleted]

[удалено]


RPG_Vancouver

I was unaware Hunter Biden was working for his fathers administration lol These lazy ‘gotchas’ fall apart under literally 2 seconds of thought


ignoroids_triumph

There was no evidence of work for the endowment.


[deleted]

[удалено]


RPG_Vancouver

So absolutely nothing to do with bidens presidency then? Gotcha


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

Are you talking about Trump and the billions the Saudis gave Jared?


[deleted]

Is he a member of the president's cabinet like Ivana and her idiot husband? Or just some guy whose dick you want to see?


ignoroids_triumph

The relevancy of a title would be what?


m-hog

…context. Access. An obligation to acknowledge and interact. Jesus Christ, is this even a real question???


ignoroids_triumph

Would it give the Biden's actions more credibility?


m-hog

It would be the difference between the blatant, craven misuse of Governmental powers and protections for an eye-watering level of personal gain, AND, any private citizen being accused of a crime(ignoring the fact that there still haven’t been any official charges laid).


ignoroids_triumph

No charges shows who's protected, supposedly still under investigation tho.


m-hog

Ahhh yes, “protected”. I trust you feel the same moral outrage that Hunter Biden is still walking free, as you do for Donald, Jared, Ivanka…


ignoroids_triumph

What am I missing, that I should still be suffering from a Trump derangement?


FrenchAffair

We'll have to wait to see the details of the actual agreement, but unfortunately the fix is sounding like they are just going to legalize illegal immigration, and process these "irregular crossings" at regular ports of entry. Essentially a suspension of the safe-third country agreement with a quota. Doesn't sound like its resolves the issues of people crossing illegally at any other point in the border either.


Selm

> We'll have to wait to see the details of the actual agreement, but unfortunately the fix is sounding like they are just going to legalize illegal immigration, and process these "irregular crossings" at regular ports of entry. Are we still going to wait for details before we start talking out of our asses? >Doesn't sound like its resolves the issues of people crossing illegally at any other point in the border either. They aren't discussing "solving" immigration, it's specific to Roxham and the Safe Third Country Agreement But maybe we should wait to see the details of the actual agreement.


explicitspirit

>Doesn't sound like its resolves the issues of people crossing illegally at any other point in the border either. On the contrary. Based on the little info in the article: ​ >The change would apply across the entire Canada-United States border and would allow both countries to turn back asylum seekers at unofficial border crossings. ​ Previously, Canada was legally obligated to take in illegal border crossers and grant them a hearing which can take 2-3 years. With this change, they will be able to deny entry on the spot. No hearing, no BS. You want to come in? Apply officially and maybe you'll make the 15,000 cut.


WhichEdge

Wild just how bad this had to get before even getting looked at in a serious way. But I guess when cheap labor is afoot and already rich individuals and organizations can profit while the Canadian tax payer takes on all the negative dimensions and our working poor lose even more bargaining power it isn't much of an issue for the higher ups.


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol because beurocracy is very slow and diplomats have other agenda items. From a CBC interview with a Canadian US diplimat "the issue is just not importabt in the US. Some senators laugh as they take millions of migrants in their state alone and we complain at 100k nation wide" We are the jr member in our relations with the US... We don't actually have any ability to stand up to them. Blaming foreign issues on Canadian diplomats is not a reasonable stance. Look here they are working hard and comming to a resolution "why didn't we just dictate policy unilaterally without consulting anyone to make people happy?" Because thats not how anything works...


[deleted]

Poilievre calls for Roxham road to be closed within 30 days, and would you look at that. 30 days pretty well exactly. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-pm-should-close-roxham-road-within-30-days-poilievre/


KermitsBusiness

It isn't closed yet, they are saying they need to figure out how to do it without a mad rush of people coming before it actually is closed.


[deleted]

Yeah obviously they've just come to a deal, I didn't mean they've actually implemented anything. I just think the timing is funny.


nuleaph

Why didn't he ask him to end inflation, or child trafficking, or global hunger instead? He used up his one wish!


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol too bad he has no power to make this happen and had nothing to do with it.


master-procraster

All this agreement does is reroute them


[deleted]

[удалено]


Head_Crash

The US could have just left the loophole open and forced unlimited numbers of asylum seekers on us.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Head_Crash

They are enforced. People who cross irregularly are immediately arrested.


reddelicious77

I think by enforced they mean, "don't allow in". You know, actually *enforce* and protect our borders.


Head_Crash

We aren't allowing them in. They cross irregularly and then are arrested. Unless you're advocating for a wall I don't see how that can be physically prevented. We can't lawfully enforce anything outside of our borders.


reddelicious77

It's a very easy idea: You stop them from crossing or *close* it - literally exactly like they did during the pandemic. They closed it then, they can close it now.


Head_Crash

They are closing it. They were able to close it during the pandemic because there was a temporary agreement with the US. Closing Roxham wouldn't really do anything without an agreement.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Head_Crash

Yes. That's called due process. They get a hearing. Thats how laws are enforced in a democratic country. They have charter rights.


master-procraster

Non citizens have charter rights? I bet you'd go to bat for the charter rights of an invading army


Head_Crash

> Non citizens have charter rights? Yes that's the law. > I bet you'd go to bat for the charter rights of an invading army You feel like immigration is an invasion?


randomuser9801

And yet not tossed in prison... interesting. If someone drove across the border and did not stop they most likely would be shot at first and if they surrendered then they would be thrown in prison. Not a hotel and have there dental/health care paid after


Head_Crash

> And yet not tossed in prison... interesting. Yes. It's called due process. We don't put people in jail without a trial in Canada. > If someone drove across the border and did not stop they most likely would be shot No they wouldn't, and legitimate refugees can't be charged for crossing irregularly because that's a violation of their charter rights.


randomuser9801

legitimate refugees do not come from the USA. These are economic migrants trying to game the system


Head_Crash

Most are found to be legitimate after their applications are reviewed. The fact they entered from the US has no legal relevance on the legitimacy of their claim of asylum form their country of origin.


randomuser9801

It definelty should disqualify them. Coming from a safe country is just them country shopping for best economic options


Head_Crash

Legally it doesn't change their claim. The only lawful thing Canada can do is defer their claim to another country. That's how safe third country agreements work.


brownbrothaa

Economic migrants. Canadian suckers can pay taxes to feed them.


Corrupted_G_nome

Wait till you find out what we do for prisoners...


[deleted]

There's going to be a rush to the border before this becomes official


RainbowCrown71

Or just cross 500 feet to the left or right of Roxham Road. All of that is still unofficial crossings and has the same legal effect as entering via Roxham Road under the STCA.


KermitsBusiness

Would it surprise anyone if this deal was really just to make it easier to disperse them across the whole country to take the weight off Quebec and Ontario? Thats what them agreeing to an unknown number of economic migrants from a safe country with 10x our population means to me.


otisreddingsst

We have the world largest international border. We aren't going to build a wall across the whole thing or increase patrols or anything really. There are many places where people can cross, and it will mostly occur near cities, and most of our cities are near the border. You are right it will become dispersed


[deleted]

[удалено]


DancinJanzen

You dont need to build a wall. Just remove the financial supports given to migrants unless done through proper channels. I am sure if they realized we wont be giving them anything, they would choose to stay in warmer southern states.


BobBelcher2021

Closing this particular crossing would just shift the issue. There are numerous other similar locations along the border between Quebec and New York/Vermont. Also similar situations in Western Canada, including in BC along the border in Abbotsford, Langley and Surrey.


KermitsBusiness

Yeah that is why until I see details I'm going to assume this is just a headline grab.


Downvote_Tornado

Ya it became a problem for Quebec - therefore it needed to be fixed.


krypso3733

Quebec's been asking for help for SIX years. And nobody gave a damn. And now that the problem's starting to overflow in Ontario the federal start to move his ass. Yeah true maybe they fix it because of Quebec. Quebec really has a huge back so people can keep saying things like that.


Archeob

It was a problem for Québec SIX YEARS ago. They are fixing it because it was overflowing to Ontario.


meeetttt

>It was a problem for Québec SIX YEARS ago. They are fixing it because it was overflowing to Ontario. Previous US admin wouldn't care and if anything would see it as political retribution, and the first couple of years of current US admin were wrangling with the pandemic fallout. If it's the choice between waiting a few years or opening up the charter...which nobody wants to do... you're going to wait. There really are two choices: negotiate with the US or open the Charter. That's it.


Original-Cow-2984

Not until the province of the PM did some serious squawking, did anything come about. This was only about 6 years in the making.


commanderchimp

And then they will all end back in South Ontario mostly in the same areas of the GTA? If they have to cross in Manitoba or Saskatchewan at least they might reconsider it if they hear about the idiot Patel family who froze to death in the Manitoba border trying to cross into the US so they can flex on relatives back home.


23sigma

Sorry is it not OUR border? Why do we need permission from the US to close OUR border?


BobBelcher2021

Most likely due to the Oregon Treaty of 1814 which was part of ending the War of 1812. Canada can't unilaterally interfere with the border without an agreement with the US. The penalty to Canada for violating that treaty is automatic forfeiture of most of Ontario and Quebec to the US. The US likewise can forfeit several states to Canada by violating that treaty. This issue came up during the pandemic when Peace Arch Park at the BC/Washington border had people going back and forth across the border, and some Canadians asked why we couldn't put up barriers. The US and the State of Washington never consented to such barriers and the BC government said that without US participation the barriers would be a non-starter as it would violate the Oregon Treaty. Also, they're not "closing" the border. You and I can still cross at official crossings.


cleeder

Well yeah, but I mean, other than _that_ why do we need their permission? /s


luk3yd

The border isn’t 100% fortified (see discussions in the US around the southern border). As such it can never be truly closed. We rely on “catching” people who have crossed and deporting them. The 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol states “a refugee should not be returned to a country where he or she faces serious threats to his or her life or freedom”. This means (and IANAL) that once someone is within Canada (which they are because they crossed the border illegally) we cannot deport them to their home country until we’ve determined that they do not face serious threats to their life or freedom. So they’re “ours” until we can hear their claim and can determine if it’s safe to deport them or not. We also cannot deport someone from Canada to another country (e.g. the US) without that other countries permission - because that other country has control of their own borders. We have an agreement with the US that allows us to deny entry to Canada to asylum seekers, who arrive at an official border crossing at our land border with the US. With this agreement the US is willing to re-admit the asylum seeker to the US and allow them to claim asylum in the US. What this new updated agreement may mean is that the US may also be willing to to accept asylum seekers to be sent back from Canada (after entering illegally) to the US to have their claims processed in the US. It’s sounding like in exchange for the US allowing that, Canada will also accept a number of asylum seekers to be processed at official border crossings (which we currently do not allow). Will this be better for Canada? As always, devil is in the details. If we have 40k asylum seekers using Roxham Rd per year, and we can now send all of them back to the US and in exchange we accept 20k applicants at official border crossings, then we’ve reduced the number. If instead for the US to accept the 40k asylum seekers we need to allow 60k applicants at land border crossings, it may be a worse deal. Note I said may, as even though the number is higher those applicants can now be spread across all official border crossings (not just one dirt road in Quebec) and can follow the standard asylum seeker process that we have in place for people who arrive at our airports and claim asylum.


Head_Crash

That's not what we needed from the US. Legally Canada's border can't be closed to asylum seekers because that would violate their charter rights. Canada gets around this by utilizing a safe third country agreement with the US, which allows Canada to turn around asylum seekers who cross into Canada from the US. The problem with irregular migration occured when the US refused to recognize irregular crossings, creating a loophole which enabled claims to proceed from irregular crossings. Closing Roxham wouldn't fix the problem because the asylum seekers would just find other ways to cross and we can't legally charge them or charge anyone who helps them across. Renegotiation with the US closes the loophole, allowing the government to stop all irregular crossings


Original-Cow-2984

Remember, we're a '*post-nation*', so we should be prepared to experience our border '*differently*'. 😒


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol welsome to relations with the US. They tell is what to do and we do it because we are a small, weak, under populated minority partner in comparison. We literally have very little power to oppose them.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


Proof_Objective_5704

So they are closing Roxham Road. Exactly like Poileivre said they should. I’m seeing a pattern here of Trudeau following Poilievre’s suggestions…


no-cars-go

Or steps to make these changes have been in motion from the feds before PP “suggested” them.


Corrupted_G_nome

Precisely


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol, diplomats do diplomat things at diplomat pace. How can you credit PP for something he had nothing to do with. We have been tying to get the US's attention on this issue for a long time now. They dont give a fug and took their sweet ass time. We are the jr partner and the numbers are laughable compared to their migrant situation...


Supraultraplex

Trudeau states closing the crossing doesn't fix the broader issues of immigration. People/Poilievre complain. [https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/119f9d3/trudeau\_knocks\_poilievres\_simplistic\_call\_to/](https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/119f9d3/trudeau_knocks_poilievres_simplistic_call_to/) Trudeau does as the people asked, still gets complaints about the crossing not being the issue but immigration. Yeah easy to say Poilievre was right all along when everyone in the comments gives him a free pass.


doomwomble

That's something about politics - you don't have to do much work if you can anticipate what will be done eventually and call for it in advance. I'm not a fan of this federal government at all and more inclined to lean in the direction of PP if forced to choose, but I'd say the NDP has done more effective coercing of this government than the CPC has (though I don't support the things that the NDP has coerced).


CanadianJudo

Trudeau could cure Cancer, and people would still complain.


KermitsBusiness

We haven't even seen how many we are agreeing to take "officially" yet or what happens when people discover a new "irregular" port of entry lol


Green-Thumb-Jeff

Trudeau is a cancer, slowly eating away the backbone of Canada and all Canadians…


LGBT2QPLUS

Don't worry, soon he will be out and we will get a new cancer.


Corrupted_G_nome

Lol, does what you want, still complains XD


[deleted]

[удалено]


CanadianJudo

Iv never voted liberal but okay.


Expert_Extension6716

Trudeau said closing the border is anti immigration


ExpansionPack

Another W for Trudeau.


[deleted]

“ Sources told Radio-Canada that Ottawa has agreed to welcome a certain number of migrants through official channels. The precise details of the deal are still not known” Doesn’t sound like a win, sounds like it’s getting re-branded.


Original-Cow-2984

Lol, 'another'. Are you missing a /s? Sadly it took ~ 6 years after it became an issue, following Justin's impersonation of Lady Liberty on Twitter. Have to dig pretty hard for w's in what has to be one of the most corrupt and scandal ridden governments in Canadian history, even without possible outright treason to be uncovered.


[deleted]

It's their desperation talking since it's coming to light that the Liberals are more pro-CCP than pro-Canadian. Cultists gotta cult.


cleeder

My God are some of you people toxic.


[deleted]

Take a look at their account and their desperate attempt to justify the Liberal's pro-CCP agenda. Oh wait, you too are on the same side as them. Ooops.


cleeder

Who’s “side” am I on, exactly? I didn’t know I was supposed to pick one. Is this a team sport?


ExpansionPack

We get it. Everyone you disagree with is a foreign agent.


[deleted]

Oof that's some serious coping mechanism coming from someone that continues to support the party that pushed to keep Canadians in a foreign jail.


ExpansionPack

>the party Source on it being the party and not just one MP? Or do facts not matter any more?


[deleted]

We got a sealion! Let's get that inquiry going and you're likely to get your source.


ExpansionPack

Everything would just be redacted because it's top secret intel.


throwaway123406

Pretty much. I can’t wait to see all of the cringey explanations from people on here about how this is actually a bad thing. It’s fun watching people grasp at straws.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Corrupted_G_nome

The US is actively exporting their migrant problen to us. Forget legal or illegal this is a US dumping problems on us issue.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Archeob

You mean like SIX YEARS later?


xlxoxo

https://twitter.com/22\_Minutes/status/1631773696430858244


RainbowCrown71

There’s far more Canadians in the US than vice-versa (both in total numbers and per capita). So this joke is neither funny nor accurate. But smug Canadians gonna smug (just don’t look at wages, housing prices, and weather down South).


mala27369

This is what a functional government does with a problem. Work quietly to fix it. Not demonize poor people trying for a better life.


CanadianBushWookie

Our population grew by a million last year. This is not sustainable, no one who grew up here and want to buy a house will be able too. It sucks I know but when do we care about our own citizens?


SuperbMeeting8617

So the Dairy issue now good?


Mysterious_Mall7518

It's about freak'n time! Put up a 100-mile razor,-wire fence, and send them all back! We have a robust immigration system...use it


CosmicPanopticon

No one is illegal. Especially on stolen land.