Contact us now: Phone: +111111111



A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian . . . Really?

Tue, February 20, 2018   |   Author: Rod Taylor   |   Volume 25    Issue 8 | Share: Gab | Facebook | Twitter   

During the long and rocky federal election of 2015, Justin Trudeau, at the Munk Leaders Debate, objected loudly to the provisions of Bill C-24 which allowed for the stripping of Canadian citizenship from dual-citizenship convicted terrorists, famously stating that “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”.

In February of 2016, as Prime Minister, his government acted on his simplistic slogan by introducing legislation reversing parts of C-24 and effectively ensuring that people like Zakaria Amara, (a Jordanian-Canadian member of the Toronto 18 terrorist group who pleaded guilty to plotting to set off a bomb in downtown Toronto) could not lose his Canadian citizenship. The Liberals’ Bill 6 became law in June of 2017. Immigration Minister John McCallum, told reporters, “We believe very strongly that there should be only one class of Canadians, that all Canadians are equal, that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian from coast to coast to coast”.

Ensuring that foreign-born terrorists are treated equally with law-abiding Canadians was deeply offensive to many concerned citizens. Was it a “matter of principle” as the PM claimed or was it just another ploy to garner support from an angry class of disenchanted ideologues?

If the PM really wanted all Canadian citizens treated equally, why has he given such prominence to promoters of Islamic causes? People like MP Omar Alghabra, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, a man who has repeatedly sought to introduce Sharia Law into Canada. People like MP Iqra Khalid with her ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and the sponsor of M-103.

If the PM really wanted all Canadian citizens treated equally, why has he arrogantly and openly denied pro-life and pro-family organizations access to the Canada Summer Jobs Program?

If the PM really wanted all Canadians treated equally, why has he waived fiscal transparency for First Nations chiefs and band councils while (rightly) expecting it of other levels of government?

Why is the PM denying free speech to Christian organizations in regard to abortion, homosexuality and the dangers of Sharia Law while allowing thousands to violate every measure of human decency in the Gay Pride Parades in which he participates enthusiastically?

There’s a simple reason for all of the above discrepancies: The PM and his strategist-handlers are identifying and isolating voter-blocs which they assume can be counted on to give Mr. Trudeau another majority in 2019—by giving them special rights:

  • By opening the border to unvetted refugees and illegal migrants, he hopes to secure the immigrant vote and build that base for the future.
  • By legalizing recreational pot, he hopes to get the votes of an increasingly confused bloc of first-time voters who may see him as “cool”.
  • By parading shamelessly with lewd and shameless sex-activists, he hopes he can secure the votes of the gender-confused.
  • By allowing First Nations band offices to operate under their own rules, he hopes to be seen as a reliable arbiter of indigenous rights.

On Valentines Day of this year, the Prime Minister announced that his government will recognize and ensure—in a new way—special rights for indigenous peoples in Canada. With flowery speech, he promised that his government will enact legislation and follow through with action designed to enshrine and enforce a new understanding between indigenous and non-indigenous Canadians. Again, this sounded hopeful to those who have seen or lived through the tragic days of the residential schools and the dysfunctional poverty of life on many of Canada’s reserves.

On one level, the PM was right: the inequities of the past do need to be addressed; a new partnership must be forged if all Canadians are to achieve the quality of life and dignity to which we all aspire.

But is the PM’s promise of special treatment, special status and special privilege truly the way forward? And if “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”, how can we accept a completely different reality, a completely different set of circumstances, a completely different set of rules for this demographic subset of the Canadian population?

The PM claims—of course—that his promised new approach is based on existing Constitutional rights and existing agreements. It’s true that special provisions in the British North America Act (1867), in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) and in the Indian Act (1876) all contain special provisions for aboriginal people, today represented by 614 First Nation bands. Past acts of the Canadian Government towards indigenous peoples (such as land confiscation, Residential Schools and denial of voting rights) are rightly regarded as unjust. But much has changed.

Today, Canada wants to be known as a nation of inclusivity, of equality of opportunity and of justice. How can we achieve this when special privileges, unequal access to resources and unequal standing before the law are proposed as inviolable “rights”?

Canada has changed dramatically since 1867. Indigenous people, since 1960, are recognized as full citizens, able to vote for their federal, provincial and municipal representatives. Much remains to be done but Canadians must face these challenges together. We cannot undo the past but we must take responsibility for the future.

For the good of future generations of Canadians, we must end the era of special rights. If “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian” then the government should act like it.

The Christian Heritage Party of Canada endorses the Charter Preamble, not only for its support of the “supremacy of God” but also because of the “rule of law”. One law for all Canadians under God’s direction: that is the recipe for national prosperity, security and social peace.

If you believe in the equality of all Canadians, join CHP Canada today.

Download PDF Version

Share to Gab

Other Commentary by Rod Taylor: