Almost 1/3 of rich Canadians born abroad: BMO

While on a cruise a couple of years ago, I sat at the dinner table each night with a large group which included two sisters from New York who had immigrated to the USA from Hong Kong.  Over the course of one evening the conversation turned to immigration and new countries and one of the sisters asserted that one could 'buy their way into Canada' but they could not do so in the USA. I had no experience or education in the matter but I have to admit it troubled me. I wonder if the following article from CBC online actually supports that contention?

Almost 1/3 of rich Canadians born abroad: BMO


The face of Canada's wealthy is changing with almost a third of high net worth Canadians reporting they were born outside of Canada, according to a new survey by BMO Harris Private Banking.
The online survey, conducted for BMO by Harris Decima and released Tuesday, said 30 per cent of affluent Canadians, which it defined as those having more than $1 million of investable assets, were born elsewhere.

The study also found that almost all affluent new Canadians — or about 96 per cent — keep the bulk of their wealth in Canada."These findings speak to the Canadian spirit of multiculturalism and how this country fosters an environment that helps individuals to succeed and thrive," said Andrew Auerbach, head of BMO Harris Private Banking.

"Attracting the best and the brightest demonstrates the relative prosperity and openness of Canada's economy. This bodes well for long-term wealth generation." Meanwhile, the study found only a minority of affluent Canadians overall — 38 per cent — say they are being treated fairly when it comes to taxation.
Two-thirds of the affluent would like to see a reduction in capital gains and incomes taxes.
Meanwhile, the number of affluent Canadians putting their money into tax-efficient investments has risen in recent years to 92 per cent from 73 per cent in 2008 and 67 per cent in 2005, the survey found.
While a majority of high net worth Canadians keep most of their money in Canada, about four in 10, or 37 per cent, said they allocate a portion of their wealth outside the country.
The top three foreign markets identified were The United States (69 per cent), Europe (35 per cent) and Asia (28 per cent).
"There's no question that the growth we're seeing in Asia is making it increasingly attractive to affluent Canadians," said Jennifer Chua, BMO Group's head of private banking (China), BMO Financial Group.
"Ultimately, Asia is a good market for any investor to consider, regardless of net worth," Chua added.

Canada and Asbestos

The Canadian government rejected advice from Health Canada that asbestos be added to a global list of hazardous materials in 2006, CBC News has learned.According to documents obtained under Access to Information, a senior Health Canada bureaucrat wrote that the agency believed that chrysotile — a form of asbestos that has been linked to cancer — should be added to a UN treaty known as the Rotterdam Convention.

"[Health Canada's] preferred position would be to list — as this is consistent with controlled use — i.e. let people know about the substance so they have the information they need, through prior informed consent, to ensure they handle and use the substance correctly," wrote Paul Glover then director general of Health Canada's safe environments program, in 2006.
The 2006 Rotterdam Convention comprises a list of hazardous substances that require countries to disclose any restrictions imposed for health or environmental reasons by exporting countries. Importing countries would then decide whether to import the substance, ban it, or restrict it, something known as prior informed consent.

More than 50 countries ban the use of asbestos. But Canada, one of the leading exporters of the material, lobbied to keep asbestos off the Rotterdam list with the support of producing countries such as Russia and Zimbabwe. Ultimately, chrysotile asbestos did not make the list and remains off it.
Canada exports $90 million of asbestos, all of it from Quebec, every year.

While Glover noted in his email that Health Canada cannot say that chrysotile is safe, he said the agency does feel "there is science and evidence to support that chrysotile is less dangerous than other forms of asbestos.""We also feel that the risks associated with chrysotile can be managed by using a controlled use approach — i.e. know the substance its properties and hazards, and handle and use it accordingly."

He also acknowledged that "the final decision will not be made on the basis of health alone."
In 2006, just prior to the Rotterdam Convention, the World Health Organization (WHO) stated that "the most efficient way to eliminate asbestos related diseases is to stop using all types of asbestos." The agency also said that "more than 40 countries, including all members of the European Union have banned the use of all forms of asbestos, including chrysotile."

Canada’s Department of Natural Resources also supported keeping asbestos off the Rotterdam list. "Listing of chrysotile alongside the world’s most toxic substances will be perceived as encouraging a ban of the substance" it stated on its website.

It also says on the website that inclusion of chrysotile to the Rotterdam Convention "is inappropriate because it is widely recognized that chrysotile fibre can be used safely and responsibly."Canadian officials have long held that Canada’s approach to asbestos is a responsible one. By pursuing a policy of controlled-use and working with developing countries to minimize exposure, officials have asserted that the risks associated with chrysotile can be minimized.

The Chrysotile Institute, which speaks for the industry, and has received millions in government funding, said there's no need to say anything about chrysotile before selling it, because it’s less harmful than other kinds of asbestos."The declared objective of the people who are pushing for inclusion on the convention is to ban the substance worldwide and this would be a move in that direction which is totally unwarranted," said institute spokesman Guy Versailles.But for years, Canada has been scraping asbestos out of buildings, including those on Parliament Hill and at 24 Sussex Dr., the prime minister's residence.

Asked during the recent election campaign how Canada can justify the contrast, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said as long as countries are willing to buy it, he won’t stand in the way."This government will not put Canadian industry in a position where it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted," Harper said. But criticism of this policy has been fierce.

"Canada is the only Western democracy to have consistently opposed international efforts to regulate the global trade in asbestos. And the government of Canada has done so with shameful political manipulation of science," the Canadian Medical Association Journal stated in an editorial in 2008.
The Canadian Labour Congress has also accused the Canadian government of "ignoring expert advice indicating that chrysotile asbestos is not safe and is causally linked with various forms of cancer."

"The government has failed to consult with labour and other stakeholders on steps that Canada could take to comply with international conventions calling for a ban on asbestos," the congress has stated.
A decision by the International Labour Organization’s Committee on the Application of Standards last week demanded that the Canadian government adopt the “strictest standard limits for the protection of workers’ health as regards exposure to asbestos.”

It also asked Canada to “take into account the evolution of scientific studies, knowledge and technology … as well as the findings of WHO, the ILO and other recognized organizations concerning the dangers of the exposure to asbestos.” "If you have any information about this story, or other investigative tips, please email investigations@cbc.ca"

Officials from the countries that agreed to the Rotterdam Convention will meet on June 20, but Canada remains undecided on its strategy. Despite the fact that the government has had years to co-ordinate its position on this issue, an official from Environment Canada recently told CBC News that "Canada's position for the upcoming meeting is under consideration."

But Kathleen Ruff, the co-ordinator of the Rotterdam Convention Alliance which represents environmental and health organizations criticized this position."There’s no excuse for the government’s refusal to tell the public the position we as a country will take at the UN environmental conference in a few days. This is not transparency."

"Take back" movements around the world

Hassan Diab: Canada allows bomb suspect's extradition

Mr Diab, who was arrested in 2008, says he was not in Paris at the time of the attack A Canadian judge has approved the extradition to France of a man charged in a deadly 1980 bombing outside a Paris synagogue.
Lebanese-born Canadian Hassan Diab was arrested in 2008 at the request of French authorities.
France says Mr Diab was a member of a Palestinian militant group and planted a bomb that killed four and wounded 40.

Mr Diab denies the accusation and has pledged to appeal against the extradition order.On Monday, Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Maranger ruled Mr Diab could be transferred to France. The final decision rests now with Canadian Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.

Mr Diab's lawyer René Duval requested he be granted bail until his appeal can be heard.French authorities say Mr Diab, who has taught sociology at two Ottawa universities, was a member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.



He is accused of making a bomb and it in a motorcycle outside the Copernic Street synagogue in Paris on 3 October, and is charged in France with four counts of murder, several counts of attempted murder and destruction of property.



Mr Diab was arrested in Ottawa in 2008 on an international arrest warrant issued by the French. He has said investigators are mistaken and he was not in Paris at the time of the attack.

Toronto couple has chosen to keep their baby's sex a secret

Toronto couple defend move to keep baby's sex secret

Mr Stocker and Ms Witterick say the decision to keep Storm's sex a secret was "a tribute to freedom" A Toronto couple are defending their decision to keep their infant's sex a secret in order to allow the child to develop his or her own gender identity. Kathy Witterick and David Stocker have been widely accused of imposing their ideology on four-month-old Storm.

The family were the subject of a recent profile in the Toronto Star newspaper.In an e-mail, Ms Witterick wrote that the idea that "the whole world must know what is between the baby's legs is unhealthy, unsafe, and voyeuristic".Ms Witterick, 38, and Mr Stocker, 39, have also been criticised over the manner in which they are raising their two sons Jazz, five, and Kio, two.

The boys are encouraged to choose their own clothing and hairstyles - even if that means wearing girls' clothes - and to challenge gender norms. Jazz wears his hair in long braids, and the boys are "almost exclusively assumed to be girls," Mr Stocker told the Toronto Star.

The child's grandparents do not know Storm's sex, the Toronto Star reported, and have grown weary of explaining the situation, but are supportive. In an e-mail to the Associated Press news agency, Ms Witterick, a stay-at-home mother, said a four-month-old infant was still learning to recognise him or herself, and said it was inappropriate to impose a gender identity on the child.