================================================================= Note: The electronic version of the following Hansard is for informational purposes only. The printed version remains the official version. ================================================================= HANSARD Published By Authority Volume 18, No. 11 Victoria, March 31, 1995 --------- FRIDAY, MARCH 31, 1995 The House met at 10:05 a.m. Prayers. Orders of the Day Private Members' Statements THE IMMIGRANT HEAD TAX U. Dosanjh: I recall that on May 22, 1992, this House passed a unanimous motion to the effect that the federal government, in consultation with the Chinese-Canadian community, ought to redress the wrongs of the Chinese head tax. In May 1993 I again spoke on that issue, and I was supported in that by the members of the Liberal opposition at that time. That part of our history is a saga of shame: 62 years of legislated racism. Added to that are the redress issues concerning the Ukrainian community, the Italian community and other communities. Some time in December of last year Sheila Finestone, the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, basically denied the request for redress on behalf of the Chinese community. She said: "We wish we could rewrite history; we wish we could relive the past." Those who do not learn from history and are now repeating it would like nothing better than to forget about that history. The $975 tax on immigrants -- the landing tax, as it's called -- is a replica of the head tax of 1885, 110 years after that year. Some among us have attempted to distinguish the two. This is how I see it. The head tax of 1885 was definitely inhuman; it was definitely wrong; it was definitely racist in its application, its consequences and its impacts. The landing tax of 1995 is definitely inhuman; it is definitely wrong; it is definitely racist in its consequences and impacts. These are shades and shadows of 1885 falling on this Liberal government in Ottawa in 1995. It seems to me that the government in Ottawa wants to run with the hare and hunt with the hound. They are running with the Reform. In fact, they are outrunning the Reform -- out-reforming the Reform Party. They want to say that they are really very justice-loving, compassionate people who welcome refugees and immigrants from all parts of the world, and that definitely is not true. This $975 head tax is anti-British Columbia, because it interferes with the flow of investment and talent into British Columbia, particularly from the Pacific Rim. This is a policy tailored to meet the needs of eastern Canada and doesn't jibe with the requirements and the aspirations of the people of British Columbia. This head tax is anti-refugee. A refugee running for his or her life doesn't have the time or maybe the resources to pack $975 in his or her pocket before he or she decides, or is forced, to flee the circumstances from which he or she may be fleeing. This particular landing tax is anti-family reunification. It hinders the right of sponsors to reunify with their families, because it imposes excessive financial burdens on prospective sponsors and immigrants. It is a further burden on poor immigrants, who have come here from all over the world over the past hundreds of years and have made this country into the great country that it is. This federal government is now trying to undo the work that immigrants have historically done in Canada in making this country great. This fits in; it's part of a consistent pattern of behaviour on the part of this federal government. It has reduced the number of immigrants coming into the country, contrary to their promises in the red book. It has made immigration into the country more difficult; it has made it more expensive. It has hurt the family reunification process; it obviously has hurt the poorer immigrants. This federal government, consistent with its anti-immigrant attitude, is privatizing ESL and reducing funding for English as a second language. In particular, the Link program at King Edward campus in Vancouver is threatened and endangered. This is the second year in a row that the federal government is refusing tofund that program. Just recently I read that Canadian human rights offices are being closed in the regions. You're now going to have a 1-800 number to make your complaints directly to Ottawa. [10:15] What are their cousins, the provincial Liberals, doing? They opposed the anti-hate amendments to the human rights legislation in 1992. They have not once publicly supported our policy on the extension of language learning -- Chinese, Japanese and Punjabi -- in this province, after its announcement in June of 1994. Now, their candidate in Vancouver-Fraserview supports the landing tax of $975 per immigrant coming into the country. Dr. Gulzar Singh Cheema, the Fraserview candidate, supports that criminal landing tax on the entry of immigrants or refugees into this country. What have we heard from those benches? Nothing. The Speaker: Sorry, hon. member, your time has expired. The member for Vancouver-Langara responds. V. Anderson: We need rational and concerned discussion on these very critical and important issues. There is no doubt, as I have stood with the member for Vancouver-Kensington on previous occasions and commented about the injustice of the Chinese head tax, that an injustice was perpetrated wrongly and falsely against a particular group of people. I personally have had the opportunity to experience that kind of racist decision-making when my own youngest daughter, who happens to be of Canadian-Japanese origin, was not able to enter the United States with us in normal fashion because of the policy of both Canada and the United States at that particular time. That, fortunately, has been changed since then so that this kind of discrimination on the basis of race, ethnic background or country of origin no longer exists within Canada. We have been amiss in not responding and not being willing to apologize to those whom we have so unjustly wronged in past times. But to take that injustice and call the present circumstances a head tax is to use it in a false and misleading way, because they are entirely different situations. The major difference is that the fee they're talking about, which they're referring to as a head tax, is a fee which everyone except refugees has to pay as they come into the country. It is not discriminatory in the sense that it applies to one racial group coming from one part of the world or one particular country; it applies equally to anyone who comes from anywhere. Every country of the world has poor people; they're not limited to one section of the universe in which we live. It has always been difficult and unfortunate that people who have not had the financial wherewithal to buy train tickets, plane tickets or bus tickets have not been able to travel in the same way that other people travel. That is an injustice that needs to be worked on totally for all people, wherever they may come from, in any country of the world. To try to make these other decisions into a comparison with the head tax against the Chinese people is simply misleading, dishonest and improper. If they wish to argue that everyone should be subsidized, and not only granted the freedom of no expenses when they come into the country, then if we go beyond the logical argument, everybody who is unable to provide themselves a plane ticket should be given the opportunity to apply and have the plane ticket provided for them. It's a different argument. It's not a racist argument; it's an economic argument. It's an argument of whether, in managing our country, we need to keep a balance in what we do. But the principle is that everyone is treated the same. This is not a question of refugees having been charged extra. They come under a special consideration, as they should, out of desperate circumstances, which must be taken into account. We, like the members of this House and all the members in Canada, want to welcome them and make it as easy as possible for people to come into our country in a planned and considerate way. I object to the manner in which they take one issue and reflect it on another. The Speaker: The member for Vancouver-Kensington concludes. U. Dosanjh: Hon. Speaker, I am extremely saddened at the total blindness that exists on the benches of the Liberal opposition. This Liberal opposition said to the federal government that they should have gone further and cut more from the federal transfers. Do they now say that the landing tax should have been $9,750 per immigrant instead of $975? I am really troubled that the opposition does not have the courage to stand for justice and fairness. As I said before, the previous head tax was definitely inhuman, definitely wrong and definitely racist both in its application and its impact. This landing tax is also definitely inhuman, definitely wrong and definitely racist in its impact, because what the Liberal opposition is rejecting is the talent that comes into this country. They are now saying that being poor is a disqualification for immigration into the country or a disqualification for a sponsor to bring his or her dependents into this country. I think that's a matter of shame. I think the Liberal opposition should hang their heads in shame collectively. The Speaker: Before proceeding to the next private member's statement, I would remind all hon. members to review from time to time the criteria on which private members' statements are constructed. One of the key points would be that they are not intended to be argumentative. I'm sure we can get along much better if members will just review those criteria. I believe His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor is about to enter the chamber. Would members please keep their places. His Honour the Lieutenant-Governor entered the chamber and took his place in the chair. -------------------------- Queen's Printer for British Columbia(c) Victoria, 1995