Thursday, December 27, 2012

Three Wishes

(Gabriel Yiu) I'm not a superstitious person but one should live with objectives. Wishes could be an extravagant hope or an excessive expectation, or they could form the goal of one's striving.

As this year ends, I would like to make three wishes to set as goals of my striving for the next year.

My first wish is, I want a government with integrity that does not lie to the people.

A Chinese proverb says, A government cannot last without the trust of its people. An untruthful government is also an incompetent government.

BC's deficit has been increasing drastically, from $968M in February to $1.4B now, but our government keeps increasing spending on advertisement. The advertisement for the premier's so-called "Job Plan" alone costs $15M. The more disturbing part of such an act is that these ads are "partisan ads" using taxpayer's money, and the content is untruthful.

Even though many pundits and economists pointed out that the job figures cited by the premier are exaggerated and incorrect, our unrepentant government still keeps spreading the misinformation.

Every time when I heard the government ad claimed to have achieved a "balanced budget", I frowned. Since the last election, this government has not balanced a single budget! How could a government be that untruthful and unabashed?

My second wish is, our politicians and political leaders should set as their goal governing well. There are political leaders who care only about politics and election from the first day in office. A lot of people may not see the difference, but it lies in this: Governing is to put the interests of the people and of the province first, whereas electioneering politicians seek instant benefit for their political leader and their party. They are shortsighted. The policies of such politicians are often announced in a rush without going through the process of rigorous study and consultation. Their purposes are to make a good impression and to get a photo opportunity. Such a style of government makes a lot of noise to little effect. It goes for show, not substance. The measures taken often work out to be ineffective or disastrous, making the government look stupid, wasting the province's resources, and missing real opportunities.

My third wish is, to eliminate the major weakness of western democracy, i.e. its financing. If you take a look at many of the government's policies, you can see that, coincidentally, the beneficiaries of those policies are also generous contributors to the governing party. For example, the lucky buyer of BC Rail was a major supporter of the former premier. The private energy suppliers who have been selling electricity to BC Hydro, with rates double and triple that of the market price, happened to be donors of the BC Liberal Party.

I truly believe that a platform policy of the NDP which advocates banning corporation and union donation to political parties is a good way to remove financial influence on government decisions.

Although I've made three wishes, if I look deeper, I only need to make one wish and all my above wishes will be fulfilled - to elect an NDP government in the next provincial election.

Tuesday, December 18, 2012

Who created the Chinese foreign miners’ mess?

(Gabriel Yiu) During the month of October, the top front-page story of our major newspapers reported that 2000 Chinese miners would soon arrive as foreign temporary workers to work at a northern coal mine. The national news sparked the concerns of British Columbians. The labour unions filed a petition with the court to block the Chinese foreign workers from taking over local workers’ jobs. The media and court documents revealed that the mining company listed Mandarin-speaking as a recruitment condition, but the mining company denied it and threatened to withdraw their investment…

The mining project at Murray River is in a mess. If we look beyond the surface and examine this matter at a deeper level, we will see that the affair shows that an incompetent provincial government failed to look after the interests of British Columbians.

In 2007, the China-backed Canadian Dehua International Mines Group Inc. told the BC Liberal government that they “will require approximately 400 employees with specific skills in underground coal mining.” In 2008, the BC government spent $1.3M on a mining labour force study that recommends a new trade workers’ category to receive training called “underground mine worker.” The Liberal government has failed to act on that recommendation.

In November 2011, the notes of a meeting in Beijing between the premier and HD Mining International show that the premier and staff were aware that the company intended to fill over half of the workforce for their Murray River Mine Project with their own workers. Yet, our premier did not make an effort to ensure the project’s jobs go to British Columbians.

Last week, the federal court released a plan of the mining company. The document states that the company plans to use temporary foreign workers for 30 months to build the mine. Then, if the mine is approved, the foreign workers would operate the mine for another two years. After that, the company plans to train local Canadian workers and recruit local workers at the rate of 10% a year. Thus, it would take 10 years, or 14.5 years from the building of the mine, to have the entire operation run by Canadian labour.

I find the HD plan puzzling. The controversy of this matter has been represented as over the question whether Canada has or has not enough skilled underground mining workers. Nevertheless, the work of the early stages in exploration and building the mine site involves work on the surface, not deep underground. It’s amazing that the mining company can’t find Canadian workers able to do the work overground. I find it incredible that for the first four and a half years, the company has to rely entirely on Chinese temporary workers to build and operate the mine.

The intriguing part is, when the mining company’s stewards met with Premier Christy Clark a year ago, they requested bringing in foreign workers to fill more than half the workforce to operate the mine. When our premier seemed not to care about it, the company now wants to operate the mine entirely with foreign temporary workers.

When foreigners invest in China, the Chinese government would require the use of local workers.

Yet, our government has not done its job in this coal mine project; they failed to train local skill workers and they haven’t looked after Canadian workers’ employment opportunities.

As a result of our incompetent provincial government, an uproar has been created in our community. After a great many of our manufacturing and call-centre jobs have been moved to Asia, people worry that high-paying resources jobs would also be taken away from local workers.

If the BC government has accepted the recommendation of their mining labour force study and started training underground mining workers years ago, or if our premier would press for more local workers being hired for the mine project when she met with the executives of the company, we wouldn't have to face this mess now.

Even if the company could operate according to their plan, since there’re significant differences in the mining industries, environment and labour standards and regulations between China and Canada, plus the language barrier, a mine which is wholly operated by foreign temporary workers from China will meet lots of challenges on a bumpy road ahead.

Monday, December 17, 2012

Yaowei Wu Supports Civil Liberties Protection with Donation to BCCLA

(Gabriel Yiu) Last week, the Vancouver victim in a police assault incident in 2010, Yaowei Wu, who recently reached an out-of-court settlement for his civil case against the City of Vancouver, donated $7,000 to the BC Civil Liberties Association through the concerned community group that assisted him in his case. The donation is meant to support BCCLA’s work of civil rights protection in the Chinese community to assist those who need help.

Soon after Wu’s story of police assault was reported in the media, a group of concerned citizens rallied around Wu to raise funds for him and his family and help them through the ordeal with professional counselling. All the funds raised for him by the group, including interests, have now been donated by Wu to the civil rights organization. With the donation, Wu aims to help others in need. Members of the Concerned Group are Bill Chu, Thekla Lit, Gabriel Yiu, Tommy Tao, Chak Au, and Thomas Lou.

Wu’s action received high praise from Thekla Lit of the Concerned Group: “Many Chinese people would simply put up with it when they are bullied, never mind standing up for themselves against authority. Wu deserves our admiration. After he got his justice back for himself, he turned his attention to the care of the less fortunate in society.”

Gabriel Yiu, another member of the Concerned Group, pointed out that both Wu and the Concerned Group agreed that donating the money to a local civil rights organization would be the best thing to do. Yiu said that former BCCLA executor director, David Eby, had indicated before leaving the organization that a portion of the money would be used to build a Chinese webpage to introduce the association’s mandate and work to the Chinese community, so they would know to contact the association when in need of assistance. Eby mentioned that the association had a Chinese-speaking staffer serving the public already.

Yiu said that Wu’s story would appear in the BCCLA Chinese webpage once it is constructed, which he hoped would encourage members of the Chinese community to speak up and speak out for their rights.


Wu Wei Yao (middle) presented a cheque to BCCLA through Bill Chu (right) and Gabriel Yiu (left) of the Concerned Group:

Monday, December 10, 2012

'We Support Gabriel' Fundraiser a great success...

We had a great fundraiser on December 1st.

Some 150 people attended, with performances by such local talents as Beijing opera performer Geng Qiaoyun, China's national champion opera singer Peter Zhang, erhu ('Chinese violin') master Nicole Li, singers Janice Yu and Genevieve Guerrero, and soprano Mary Ma.

Many thanks to the many volunteers who helped make this such a memorable event and all those who came out to support Gabriel.

Click here for more photos

Sunday, October 7, 2012

We Support Gabriel Fundraiser, Saturday, December 1st

An evening with fine wine, hors d’oeuvre, great performances and marvelous people

Tickets: $100

Date: Saturday, December 1, 7:00 pm
Place: Stage One Academy, 170-5731 Minoru Blvd, Richmond

You can purchase tickets online at the BC NDP secure website: https://secure.bcndp.org.

Or for reservations or further information please contact: Gabriel Yiu @ 604-889-0696.


View Larger Map

For those arriving by transit: Lansdowne Station, on the Canada Line, is only 500m from the venue.

Monday, August 27, 2012

Community barbecue a great success

Hello all, what a fantastic picnic event we had today. Approximately 350 people plus came out and enjoyed the beautiful sunshine, community hospitality, eloquent speeches and the delicious hot dogs, chicken, chips, cake, apples and all other manner of food.

Many of you volunteered and worked hard and happily, thank you so much. The young people who volunteered were fantastic – upbeat and full of smiles. Thanks for bringing your friends and neighbours and finally thanks to CUPE - BC for their community van.

Now that the summer is ending we will be increasing our activity. We want to be promoting and helping Gabriel be active and visible in Fraserview. We need to work hard to win this riding for the NDP and return a progressive NDP government to British Columbia.

Ian Mass (President, Vancouver-Fraserview BC NDP Constituency Association)

Click here to see more photos from the event.

Friday, August 17, 2012

Gabriel's community barbecue...

Gabriel Yiu and the Vancouver-Fraserview invite you to a community barbecue

When: Saturday, August 25th 11am – 2pm
Where: Gordon Park, Vancouver (see map below)

Special guests:

      Peter Julian (MP, Burnaby – New Westminster),
      Jenny Kwan (MLA, Vancouver – Mt. Pleasant),
      Kerry Jang (Vancouver City Councillor),
      Hanson Lau, Dr. Francis Ho, Thekla Lit,
      Richard Kurland, Prof. Graham Johnson,
      Bill Chu, Sohan Singh Deo, Majar Sidhu…

I hope that you’re able to attend, enjoy some good food, appreciate the (hopefully) fine weather, meet some old friends, and make some new ones.

Seating will be limited, so please bring a chair for yourself and others if you can.


View Larger Map

Monday, August 6, 2012

Monday, July 16, 2012

Vancouver Punjabi Mela

Gabriel helped open the festivities at Vancouver's first annual Punjabi Mela, celebrating Punjabi culture, on July 15th at Sunset Park.

Click here to see more photos from the event.

Monday, July 9, 2012

Abolishing the immigrant applications backlog is a slap in the face of Canada’s fundamental values

(Gabriel Yiu) I wrote this article on July 1 when we’re all supposed to be celebrating Canada.

In regard to the Conservative government’s decision to abolish the 105,491 skilled worker immigrant applications (each applications could have more than one person) which have been waiting in line for eight years, I feel ashamed and frustrated. What the Conservatives have done flies in the face of the spirit of contractual and procedural justice. It is against the values that Canadians cherish: compassion, justness and fairness. It also undermines Canada’s international integrity and reputation.

Canada is built up by immigrants and we open our door to people around the world, beckoning them to join us. The federal government sets the rules and requirements for selecting those who want to immigrate to Canada. Our rules are impartial and non-discriminatory because irrespective of the applicants' origin, skin color, religion, sex or sexual orientation, once they meet our set criteria, the government will accept their application.

The skilled worker immigrant applications which are going to be abolished come from those who applied in and before February 2008 (some as early as 2004). These people filed their applications according to the rules and requirements set by Canada. When they submitted their applications, they were promised that their applications would be examined within 24-30 months. They waited year after year and when they inquired about their applications at our foreign consulate or embassy, our representatives there reaffirmed Canada’s commitment to assess their files. The applicants were asked to be patient.

When Jason Kenney became immigration minister in 2008, he declared that he would deal with the huge application backlog. He put the blame for the backlog on the former Liberal government and at the same time established a new skilled worker immigration category to solicit applications. He suspended the processing of the applications filed before 2008 under the old system. Seeing the unusual practice, the immigrant backloggers asked our consulate staff whether they should follow the new system to re-file their application but the reply they got was, “No, your application will be processed. Please be patient.”

Until March 29th this year, in response to the queries about the status of their application, the Canadian Consulate General in Hong Kong replied with the assurance that the applications were not forgotten. They would be processed according to the rules in place when they were submitted, and urged the applicants to be patient.

Then the Conservatives tabled a legislation to abolish the pre-2008 skilled worker immigration applications as a way to resolve the accumulated backlog.

Instead of blaming the Liberals, the Conservatives must bear the biggest responsibility. First, it was their decision to suspend the processing of the pre-2008 skilled worker applications and therefore to let the new applications jump the queue.

Second, if we take a look at the numbers in the skilled worker application inventory and cases our immigration department has processed in recent years, we can see that the government has the capacity to resolve the backlog problem, provided the minister has the will to do it.

Number of Federal Skilled Worker Files Finalized
 2006   2007   2008   2009   2010   2011 
 79,447   70,900   72,326   114,549   93,242   57,253 

Federal Skilled Worker Inventory, 6 January 2012
2004 to
26 Feb '08
27 Feb '08 to
25 Jun '10
26 Jun '10 to
30 Jun '11
1 Jul '11 to
6 Jan '12
Total
105,491 43,994 9,371 5,495 164,351

If the Conservative government had maintained the level of processing witnessed in the year 2009 in recent years, they would have cleared the entire backlog already. It is unfortunate that the minister’s will was only shown during the 2009 election. Once the Conservatives formed the majority government, the processing numbers dropped. The latest announcement is that the government would stop processing all the skilled worker and investor classes of immigration applications.

In order to deal with the backlog issue, rather than refunding the application fees, the government should use the fund (estimated at over $100 million) to increase the staff to process the accumulated applications. It’s unfortunate that Conservatives did not look for a decent honourable way out.

It appeared that the Conservatives had been planning to abolish the backlog for quite some time. In 2008, the government legislated to change the word “shall” to “may” in terms of processing immigration applications, plus granting the power to the minister to shelve, destroy and return the applications and thus opening the door for abolishing the pre-2008 applications. The Conservatives waited until they formed the majority government to implement their plan. Under the recently passed Bill C-58, the government further removed the right of applicants to appeal their case in court.

The Conservatives might choose to pass a law forbidding the victims to appeal their case in court, but like the head tax and the Chinese or East Indian exclusion acts in the past, these discriminatory laws may not be subject to legal ramifications, but an act that violates the contractual spirit, fairness and justice would be subject to condemnation by history.

Since many of these backloggers filed their applications with the assistance of professional immigration consultants, they knew their case met the requirements and they have been preparing to migrate to Canada. Many people put aside their career and business opportunities (when your superior knows that you’re going to immigrate, he/she will pass you in favour of someone else if they want to promote one staff member.) There are even cases of women waiting to get to Canada before they will give birth; they have waited for eight years.

Like us immigrants who have settled in Canada, the backloggers are from different parts of the world (with a large proportion in China and India). They yearn for the Canadian way of life; they appreciate our democratic, free and just society. They have faith in our country and trusted that Canada would act according to its set rules, commitment and principle. They waited year after year, but in the end, their applications and dreams are tossed to the garbage bin.

The Conservatives' abolition act destroyed the dreams of some 105,491 applicants and their family members at one fell swoop. It also tarnished Canada's international reputation and integrity which it has taken years for successive governments to build up.

Wednesday, June 13, 2012

Hundreds at risk of immigration ax

(The Hong-Kong Standard, Phila Siu) Up to 1,000 Hongkongers who applied to emigrate to Canada may have to abandon their plans or reapply if the authorities there accept a proposal to scrap a backlog of pre-2008 applications.

[...]

In Beijing, activists Jiang Yiming and Vancouver-based Gabriel Yiu Wing-on, a Hongkonger who emigrated to Canada two decades ago, yesterday handed a petition signed by around 100 mainlanders to minister counsellor Louis Dumas of the Canadian embassy.

The petition calls on Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper to intervene.

[...]

Read the full article here.

Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Don't scrap us

(The Hong-Kong Standard, Phila Siu) A group of mainlanders will petition Canada's top diplomat in Beijing today to vent their anger at a proposal to scrap a backlog of pre-2008 immigration applications.

[...]

Gabriel Yiu Wing-on, a Hongkonger who immigrated to Canada 21 years ago, will be among those accompanying Jiang this afternoon.

He is confident the proposal will be withdrawn because other potential immigrants, many from India and the Philippines, have also voiced anger.

Yiu, who is in Beijing on holiday and to help Jiang, is an activist in Vancouver and will run in the provincial election next year.

The petition, seen by The Standard, says: "The minister, once the budget is passed, will introduce legislation to abolish our files without anyone ever determining whether we meet the selection criteria."

It says the immigration department adopted a "queue-jumping policy" in 2008, and began to process newer applications in preference to older files.

[...]

Read the full article here.

Monday, May 21, 2012

The Conservatives’ Anti-Asian Immigration Policies

(Gabriel Yiu) Once the Conservatives formed a majority government with all the power to wield, they have been bringing in a lot of changes. Immigration Minister Jason Kenney has been making so many changes and announcements that even the most attentive critics have difficulty in following them.

The Conservatives are using this tactic of rapid changes because they don’t want the public to see what they’re up to.

Whether it’s to raise the language requirement, to cancel 300,000 applications (most of which were from China and India), or to raise the requirement of sponsoring parent immigration ($40,000 per head plus life-time sponsorship), all the new measures have an adverse effect on Asian immigrants.

The Conservatives not only want to hinder future immigration from Asia, they even block the immigration of those who applied years ago.

But what has upset me most is their level 4 language requirement for citizenship. The new measure requires immigrants who have been accepted, who fulfilled their immigration obligations, who have settled down and lived in Canada, and who have been contributing to the country, to achieve a minimum standard of CLB 4 (Canada Language Benchmark level 4) in an English or French test (which includes listening, speaking, reading and writing) before being accepted as citizen.

Canada is indeed an English and French speaking country. Immigrants’ command of one or both of the official languages would help them in their lives and in achieving prosperity.

At the same time, Canada is a democratic country where voting is a most sacred fundamental right of being a citizen. Looking into Canada's history, we learn that Asian immigrants had painful experiences of being discriminated against. It takes them generations of struggling and fighting to gain equality.

A century ago, Chinese were discriminated against by the government and by society. They were exploited in work, their children’s education and development were retarded, and they did not have the right to vote, not to mention to run for public office. History has proven that governmental discrimination based on reasons like race and language is a mistake. It is unjust and it’s against Canadian values. Yet, today’s Conservative government is reviving that spirit in their new immigration policies.

The Conservatives' new requirement will strip away the voting right of a great many immigrants who having been living in Canada for years, paying taxes and contributing to their new homeland.

I agree that immigrants should learn English, but the government should employ encouragement rather than measures that oppress immigrants who have been an asset to the country.

Our history in the past century has shown that, even with a language barrier, Asian immigrants and their offspring have contributed immensely to Canada.

In today's world, when Asia is a dominant player in the global economy, Asian immigrants with their language capacity, cultures and relations should be recognized as Canada’s assets instead of being viewed as a burden.

In the past decades, Canada’s generosity and forgiving attitude have won the world's respect and the heart of immigrants. Canada’s immigration policy has been set according to our needs and interests. We have welcomed and embraced people from different parts of the world. We have taken immigrants according to criteria like skill, investment and family connection.

In the investor and family immigration classes, even when applicants have a language barrier, the government would still accept their application if they’re able to fulfill their obligations to invest or reunite with their family here in Canada.

But now, the Conservative government wants the investor and family classes of immigrants to pass a language exam at level 4 before they’re allowed to become citizens. I have to say that this measure is outdated, unjust and would turn immigrants with a language barrier into “second class" citizens.

In the US, the so-called “big melting pot” country, they don’t have this kind of language requirement for their new citizens. In Hong Kong, the place I was born and brought up in, the government doesn’t require their Caucasian or East Indian residents to speak and read Chinese before they can cast their vote.

Of course, Chinese are not the only immigrant group with a language barrier. Asian immigrants from India, Korea, Japan, Vietnam, and immigrants from some central American, Latin American or eastern European countries could face the same hurdle.

Canada's history has clearly illustrated that in the last century, a language barrier did not hinder immigrants and their offspring from contributing to society. So why, in the age of global village, should Canada take the old path, applying discriminatory policies to restrict immigrants from becoming citizens and exercising their democratic right?

To those who are brought up in an English-speaking society, they might think that learning English or French is not that difficult. But we should understand that different people have different language learning capacities. There’re people who can command several languages and there’re those who can’t command or write well even in their own language, let alone a second one.

I have been listening to Japanese songs and watching Japanese films and TV series since high school; but after more than thirty years, I don’t think I’ve reached the minimum level of Japanese language proficiency.

Several years ago, I traveled to Japan. What shocked me was that even in Tokyo’s top international hotels, their lobby receptionist couldn’t speak English well. What I’m saying is, we can’t see others only from our angle. Learning English or French may not be a problem for you, but it can be a problem for other people.

Vancouver is praised for having the best Chinese food in the world, but have you thought about the real contributors to this fame, those who worked hard in the kitchen? How many could pass a language exam at level 4 in all four skills? I can tell you that most, if not all, will not be able to pass and I believe this phenomenon is not unique to Chinese restaurants. If the chefs were denied their citizenship, that would be a heavy blow to the Canadian culinary industry.

In the South Asian community, I’ve seen many young women who married here and who can’t speak English. I was told many hard-working farm workers have a language barrier too.

The above are just a few examples. If the new citizenship language requirement is implemented, these hard-working immigrants who have been contributing to their family and to our society would become “second class" citizens. The fact is, new immigrants usually work longer than those who’re locally born, they have to look after their children and family, and they have to adapt to the new culture and environment. They can function effectively within their community and to a certain extent outside it. Stripping them of their citizenship and voting right because of their weakness in English is not going to improve their language capacity.

Monday, May 7, 2012

The Prime Minister Should Apologize for the Komagata Maru Incident in Parliament

The centennial of the Titanic has received wide coverage in the Canadian media. Yet, another ship, the Komagata Maru, which had left a stain in Canadian history, has received almost no mainstream media coverage. The occasion was the opening of the world’s first museum commemorating the journey of the ship, two years before the centennial of its fateful voyage.

RMS Titanic collided with an iceberg and sank in the Atlantic Ocean a century ago. The accident cost the lives of over 1500 passengers, mostly white people.

Two years later, in 1914, a Japanese steamship, the Kamagata Maru, sailed from India, via Hong Kong, Shanghai, Yokohama to Vancouver. The ship carried 376 passengers from Punjab, India. Like other passengers traveling to Canada at that time, those were migrants seeking a new life in the New World.

It is unfortunate that even though the Asian Indian migrants were British subjects (India was under British occupation), they did not receive the same treatment as migrants from Europe. The Indian migrants were simply forbidden to land. In order to block Indian migration to Canada, the Conservative government prohibited the immigration of persons who did not “come from the country of their birth or citizenship by a continuous journey.”

The exclusion law was specifically targeted at Indians because Europe and the Canadian east coast were close enough for a ship to sail and reach its destination without stopping, whereas a voyage from India to the west coast had to stop over at some port due to the greater distance. Since Indian migrants were British subjects, the Canadian government could not apply the head tax to them.

Coincidentally, the Chinese Head Tax and the exclusion acts against the Indian migrants were legislated by the then Conservative governments. These exclusion measures were brought in at a time when Canada was accepting a great many immigrants (over 400,000 in 1913 alone – a figure that remains unsurpassed to this day), almost all of whom from Europe.

After two months of holdup while the ship was forbidden to disembark, the Komagata Maru returned to India. When it arrived in Calcutta, there was a conflict with the British military and passengers were killed, wounded or imprisoned.

Like the Chinese Head Tax and the persecution of Japanese-Canadians in the Second World War, the Komagata Maru incident has left a stain of injustice in Canada’s history. The Chinese-, the Japanese- and the Indo- Canadians have been fighting generation after generation for the redressing of the historical wrongs inflicted on them and their ancestors.

It is interesting to note that whether it be the redress of the internment of Japanese-Canadians, the apology to the Chinese community or the apology to the aboriginal community, such redresses took place under the Conservative government.

Nevertheless, there are visible differences in terms of how the Conservatives dealt with the three different communities. Conservative prime ministers have apologized to the Japanese, Chinese and aboriginal community in parliament, whereas as prime minister, Stephen Harper decided to deliver the apology to Indo-Canadians in August 2008 in a community event in Surrey.

When the prime minister and the Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, Jason Kenney, were asked whether the government would apologize in parliament, Kenney bluntly said, “The apology has been given and it won't be repeated”.

As the minister who has been responsible for redressing the Chinese Head Tax, Kenney’s words are quite incredible and inconceivable. If the Conservative government could apologize to Japanese-Canadians, Chinese-Canadians and the aboriginals in parliament for past wrongs, why would they refuse to apologize for the Komagata Maru incident in parliament?

There is a huge difference in meaning between the prime minister apologizing in an ethnic community event with few or no mainstream media reporters present, and his apologizing in parliament. The former is an address to the participants of a community event, whereas the latter is an address to the country and would be duly recorded into history.

Since the exclusion acts against the Indians were legislated in parliament, so if today’s government has the courage to admit past wrongs, the proper way is to have the matter settled in parliament.

Former Prime Minister Paul Martin attempted to redress the Chinese Head Tax in 2005 but failed because the Liberals initially refused to apologize in parliament. Announced prior to the federal election, Martin’s so-called “historic” redress did not include an apology. During the election campaign, Martin felt the heat of the Chinese community and apologized in a Chinese-language radio show. His half-hearted act was not well-received; thus, Martin vowed a week later that after the election he would apologize to the Chinese community in parliament. As things turned out, it was Prime Minister Harper who made the official apology in Ottawa five months after the election.

Perhaps next time when the media meet with the prime minister or minister Kenney, they could ask them specifically why it is not necessary to apologize in parliament. The public could also ask their Conservative MP the same question.

I believe that with solidarity among the ethnic groups, there is hope that a dignified apology could be issued before the centennial of the Komagata Maru incident.

Located at the Khalsa Diwan Society’s Sikh temple (8000 Ross Street, Vancouver), the Komagata Maru museum is now open to the public, admission free.

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Gabriel Yiu at Vancouver Vaisakhi

Following his call last week, with temple leader Sohan Singh Deo, to invite non-Sikh communities to participate in the Vancouver Vaisakhi, Gabriel Yiu took the lead and set up his own tent at the event. Distributing Chinese snacks, candies, drinks and carnations, and chatting with all who stopped by, the day was a great success. This cheerful photo with Yiu giving carnations to two lovely girls dressed in traditional outfits, was taken by Sukh Johal.

Thursday, April 12, 2012

Media Release: Khalsa Diwan Society President Sohan Singh Deo and Gabriel Yiu Open Ross St. Temple to Chinese Media

(Vancouver) For the first time ever, the doors of the Ross St. Temple were opened to the Chinese media where Khalsa Diwan Society president Sohan Singh Deo, joined by provincial election hopeful Gabriel Yiu, gave them a tour of the temple and the soon to be open Komagata Maru Museum.

Happening days before the widely celebrated Vaisakhi, an important annual celebration of Sihkism, the two set out to bring awareness to the Chinese community about Sikh culture, Vaisakhi, and the notorious Komagata Maru incident.

The temple is located in South East Vancouver where the latest census shows that Chinese and South Asians make up about 60% of the population.

"As a member of the community, I want to dedicate myself to breaking down the barriers between communities of different cultures so that we can respect and appreciate other people and live in harmony with them in our multicultural homeland," said Yiu.

Vaisakhi is one of the most important and celebrated events in Sikhism. Associated with the harvest festival in Punjab, it also symbolizes the anniversary of the birth of the Khalsa and the establishment of equality.

In Vancouver, Vaisakhi is a widely attended event, attracting hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life.

"Vaiskhi is an incredibly important day in Sikhism that we hope to share with as many people as possible. That is why we are inviting the Chinese community, along with all of Vancouver's different cultures, to take part in this annual event," said Deo.

Yiu will take the lead this year, setting up his own tent at the Sunset Community Centre, offering free Chinese drinks and crackers, Taiwanese candies and fresh flower.

"As my own experience testifies, participating in Vaisakhi can help us learn more about the South Asian community. I earnestly encourage everyone to take part in the upcoming Vaisakhi on April 14, to walk with our neighbours and feel their energy and generosity," said Yiu.

Vaisakhi this year will be taking place on Saturday, April 14th 2012, between 10:00am and 3:00pm, on Main St. and Fraser St. between 49th Ave. and Marine Drive.

Saturday, March 31, 2012

Join Gabriel and the BC NDP to celebrate Vaisakhi 2012

Vaisakhi Day is one of the most important and celebrated events in Sikhism. Associated with the harvest festival in Punjab, it also symbolizes the anniversary of the birth of the Khalsa.

Thousands of people come together every year to join Vancouver’s Sikh community in celebrating this important event. A true example of Vancouver’s multiculturalism, individuals from all walks of life are welcome to take part in the festivities.

Gabriel Yiu, longtime resident of Vancouver-Fraserview, parent, community activist, and small business owner, is inviting you to join him, along with the BC NDP, to celebrate Vancouver’s Vaisakhi. We hope to see you there!

What: Vaisakhi Day - Celebrating Vancouver’s Sikh community. Parades, performances, music, dancing, food, and much, much more!

Where: On Main St. and Fraser St. between Marine Dr. and 49th Ave. Gabriel’s tent will be located at the Sunset Community Centre (6810 Main Street), beside the BC NDP tent

When: Saturday April 14th, 2012, between 10 am - 3 pm

Who: Gabriel Yiu and other representatives of the BC NDP, along with members of the community, families, youth, seniors, individuals and anyone else interested in celebrating this important event

Monday, March 12, 2012

Is Twisting Facts the Usual Tactic of the BC Liberals?

(Gabriel Yiu) I recently read a peculiar article on the Global Chinese Press by Bill Yuen who is the community liaison of the BC Liberal Party’s caucus.

I find this article “peculiar” because of its logic; its logic is unsound.

The article said, “In a Chinese media news commentary show, a BCNDP candidate criticized the BC government’s contract freezing, saying it is unreasonable. What he meant in effect is to give in to the contract demand of the BCTF for a 15% pay raise, i.e. an extra expense of $2 billion. If that is the case, regardless of the consequences, it would viciously increase government spending. It means our children in the next generation will have to pay for this expenditure.”

This writer is so far the only Chinese candidate of the BCNDP and I’ve recently commented about the budget on radio and newspapers. I think Bill Yuen was referring to me.

Indeed, I do take issue with the BC Liberals for freezing government spending for three years. I said that I disapproved of freezing government spending, but Yuen said that I support giving the teachers a 15% raise. This kind of logic is pathetic, and this kind of commentary misleading.

There is a distinction between “freezing government spending” and “freezing government contract spending.” What I said on the radio and wrote on the newspapers was about freezing government spending.

I wonder whether Yuen could still remember the BC Liberals’ deal with the teachers the last time their contracts were renewed. The teachers got a 16% pay increase, plus about $4000 signing bonus for each teacher.

As a former school trustee, Yuen should know that when government freezes spending, due to inflation, population growth and factors like increase in government fees, the same funding cannot provide the same level of services compared to that of the year before.

Take education as an example. This year’s budget contains an increase of 7% for Hydro, 4% for MSP. Property tax, carbon tax and the ICBC rates will all go up. So schools have to pay higher hydro fees and carbon tax, higher employee MSP and pension and higher insurance for school bus and so on. But government has not increased funding accordingly. Then there will be the inevitable cuts, like cutting library services, education programs, special need and ESL teachers.

Think about this: what will the impact be like if government freezes its spending for three years? People think there is always some waste in the government and spending freeze would not affect services and their quality. But when we take a closer look at previous experiences, be they federal or provincial, there’re always undesirable consequences in a spending freeze. The federal Liberals’ cut in the 90s had caused big problems in our health care and the situation of the homeless.

In British Columbia, a decade of BC Liberal governance has caused damage to various areas: justice, social service, health care, education, forestry, transportation, hydro, etc. In the field of economic development, the lack of resources has resulted in a backlog of thousands of unprocessed investment applications. The opinions expressed here are not only mine, but those of the auditor general, the children’s commissioner, judges, medical professionals. They have publicly expressed their concerns and what they said was a matter of record reported on the news.

At the same time when the government freezes spending and the freeze affects public services, British Columbians have to pay more taxes and fees while big corporations continue to enjoy their tax benefits. Is this fair?

The fact is that the Liberals’ policy of favoritism towards big business has not brought about higher employment or investment. Instead, it has widened the gap between the rich and the poor, increased the burden of the middle class and made government resources insufficient. See the BC Progress Board’s report released earlier and recent commentaries by veteran pundits Will McMartin and Ethan Baron.

Of course, Yuen can hold a different opinion from mine and state his reasons, so that readers can consider and think about things from a different perspective. Then there would be a healthy and civilized discussion. But when he put words into another person’s’ mouth, that’s not appropriate. That is misleading.

Yuen concluded his article with this: “I definitely don’t believe government should incur debt to advance a certain social idea and in so doing harm our next generation. Such an action would only bring about tax increases and a loss of employment opportunities.”

Government shouldn’t incur high debt to harm the future generation -- this is indeed a wise saying. But Yuen has the facts reversed. The public should know which party has incurred $100 billion debt for BC in a decade of its governance. Which party has increased debts from $33.8B in 2001 to $133.6B in 2011?

Even in the budget which Yuen was referring to, there will be a 30% increase in BC’s “traditional” debt in three years.

Nevertheless, Yuen just ignored all this and accused the BC Liberals’ opponent of incurring huge debts for our children.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Can We Take Christy Clark’s Budget Seriously?

(Gabriel Yiu) The budget is always big news -- getting front pages, inside pages, graphs and charts, stakeholders’ responses, political commentaries etc. etc.. I have only one question: can we take Christy Clark’s budget seriously?

The answer is yes and no. Yes, the budget matters because it is the spending plan of the provincial government and it affects pretty much all aspects of our life: health, education, senior care, social service, public safety, justice, economic development, transportation, the environment and so on. When the government does not provide funding increase according to inflation or population growth, then there will be a cutback of services.

On the other hand, I have serious doubts about the credibility of the Liberals’ financial plan. Remember, in 2009, when they said again and again that the budget deficit was $495 million, it turned out to be several times more. How about the last budget? It was announced to have a deficit of $925 million but that figure was later revised to $3.1 billion. So does it really matter when the Liberals told us that the deficit is $968 million this year and they will balance the budget on election year?

In addition, the BC Liberal government has been reprimanded by the auditor general for their deceptive accounting practices. Last year, the auditor general released two critical reports condemning the Liberal government for allowing BC Hydro to improperly defer billions of dollars of expenses to future years. The practice turned the crown corporation’s finance from deficit into surplus. The “surplus” allowed the government to collect revenue from BC Hydro while its executives could collect their performance bonuses. If such a practice occurred in a business corporation, it’s known as fraud.

The second report was released in November. The auditor general concluded that the Liberal government was not in compliance with the general accepted accounting principles (GAAP) and issued an audit opinion “with reservation.” Probably knowing the public wouldn’t realize how serious the matter is, the auditor general explained in his report that in BC, “if a [publicly-traded] corporation were given an audit opinion with a reservation, the British Columbia Securities Commission would normally place a ‘cease trade’ order against the corporation. The public corporation then runs the risk of being delisted by the stock exchange on which it is traded.”

So we’re told that the Liberals are going to balance the budget by means of selling public assets and freezing government expenditures and this is called “fiscal prudence”? Then why is there a big jump in debt? The 30% jump of “traditional” debt (excluding the P3 debt ledger, i.e. another $80 billion) in three years is staggering, from $50.9 billion (2011/12) to $66.3 billion (2014/15), that is, an increase of $15.4 billion.

Finance Minister Kelvin Falcon said, "The tax, spend and borrow approach is not just wrong — it is potentially catastrophic.” Those words were meant to be an attack on the NDP, but given the Liberal record of massive debt increase for this province, how can he condemn anyone other than themselves?

The Liberals are going to increase personal income tax, MSP, carbon tax, BC Hydro, ICBC, plus the HST, but government spending would be frozen. Small businesses are going to pay higher tax. Yet, big corporations can continue to enjoy their tax cuts and the HST tax rebate. Do you really believe that the Liberals would raise the corporate income tax for their big-business friends after the next election? By raising small business tax now and deferring the corporate tax increase after the next election, you can clearly see whom this government serves.

That the Liberals plan to privatize liquor distribution is indeed disturbing, especially when you see that it was the same lobbyists who helped privatize BC Rail and the administration of BC Hydro, i.e. the same people who helped put Gordon Campbell and Christy Clark on the premier’s chair.

According to the news report of Business in Vancouver, the Progressive Strategies (the Progressive Group) has been lobbying the BC government “to develop a new liquor distribution system” on behalf of their client. Patrick Kinsella, chair of the Progressive Group, was involved in two of the biggest privatization schemes of the former premier Gordon Campbell’s administration. In addition, Kinsella was also the political strategist behind Christy Clark’s successful leadership race.

The service plan released this week shows that the BC Liquor Distribution Branch is forecasting $2.9 billion in sales in 2012-13 and $906.1 million in net income. To British Columbians, the operation is indeed like a duck that lays golden eggs, generating the much needed revenue to support public services.

What is disturbing is that according to the media report, the Liberal government wants to raise $700 million by privatizing liquor warehouses and selling other properties. To sell off for $700 million an operation that could generate an annual income of $900 million? No wonder the mastermind behind the BC Rail sell-out is involved.

It’s interesting to note that not long ago, Premier Clark was painting a rosy picture of the province under her leadership with her job plan advertising campaign (which costs taxpayer $15 million) and all the feel-good announcements. All of a sudden, the tone is reversed and her finance minister is now telling us that the government has to freeze spending for three years because the economic outlook is grim.

I guess that’s another credibility issue that the public should pay attention to.

Monday, February 20, 2012

The Problem with Premier Christy Clark

(Gabriel Yiu) I still remember prior to the voting of the 2001 provincial election, I interviewed Christy Clark on my television show. At that time Clark was the deputy leader of the BC Liberal Party. She’d left me quite an impression as a result of that encounter. It’s because I’d never seen a politician that would just blurt out her views in front of the camera with such glibness.

For example, she said BC would never have a deficit once the Liberals formed government. The development that followed was that the biggest government deficits seen in the province were recorded under the Liberal administration. The real issue is this: how can a politician say that his/her government will never have a deficit once they form government? There’re so many external factors that could impact the economy and finance beyond the control of the government. In the 90s, BC’s second largest trading partner, Japan, fell into a long deep recession. In 1997 there was the Asian Financial Crisis. These were external factors that had a huge impact on this province.

A decade later, Clark has not changed. On the morning she announced her bid for the BC Liberal leadership, she said on radio that resolving the HST issue was simple -- just call a vote in the legislature and the MLAs would vote according to the wish of their constituents and presto, problem resolved. I guess everyone knows that even as entrenched a figure as Gordon Campbell had to step down because of the HST, but Clark had the idea that the Liberal government’s huge problem could be resolved with a magic wand.

Once Clark became the premier, she spent over $5 million of taxpayers’ money and led her team of MLAs in a fight to save the HST. Even after the Liberal government lost the referendum, she is still delaying the annihilation of the HST.

During her leadership campaign, when Clark talked about her economic strategy, she declared that she would visit India and China in two months after she became the premier. That was a shallow promise aiming at the Chinese- and Indo-Canadian community because there’s no way she could get away from her new job in two months. At that time Clark did not even have a seat at the legislature.

Last fall, Premier Clark released her first Throne Speech and one of the key highlights was to put the Stanley Cup rioters to a public trial. The crown prosecution did not receive the extraordinary decision favorably, so the attorney general had to exercise her authority to make the prosecutors follow the wish of the premier and file the request for broadcasting the trials with the court. Although Clark’s decision was widely questioned and criticized, she stood by her decision.

On Feb 13, the morning before the legislature was recalled, in a morning radio show, Premier Clark was being pressed for her views on the issue again and she maintained that it’s the right decision. However, if you compare what Clark said on Monday to her demand last fall, you will see that Clark had stealthily shifted her position, from public broadcast of “the proceedings in every prosecution arising from the Vancouver riot… to trials and sentencing hearings” to only “the sentencing of those found guilty”. I guess Clark also came to realize that her great idea was not that great after all.

Several hours after Clark’s radio appearance, when the radio and web media were still reporting Clark’s position to seek the broadcasting of the riot trial sentencing, the court ruled against the government’s application for the public broadcast of the first rioter case. Shortly afterwards, British Columbians heard on the news that the premier and her attorney general were trying to explain why they’re now abandoning the pursuit of riot TV.

From HST, China-India trip to riot TV, such major policies of Clark’s were supposed to have gone through a vigorous examination before being announced to the public. These policies were shallow and unable to stand public scrutiny.

The veteran pundit Vaughn Palmer’s recent column has highlighted Clark’s shortcoming. When Clark was on the above-mentioned radio show, she was asked by a caller on the fairness of tolling the Port Mann bridge. Clark’s response was this: “The previous government’s policy was to only have tolls on new highway infrastructure.”

Her answer prompted the host to cut in and pointed out that the government Clark referred to was actually her government. Clark declared that she wasn’t part of the Liberal government in the past five years because she was hosting a show at the radio station.

Palmer rightfully pointed out in his newspaper article that the selective tolling policy set up by the “previous government” was in fact adopted at a cabinet meeting in April 2003 when Clark was the deputy premier of that government.

So would Premier Clark change the policy of the “previous government”? Clark said she won’t because “Fiddling with it at this stage would be very, very difficult. The government of the day came up with the fairest policy they could do.”

The exchanges truly reflect Clark’s craftiness and unwillingness to take responsibility. When the premier is confronted with one of her government’s unpopular policies, she would shift the responsibility to “the previous government.”

Even though Clark refuses to take responsibility for the “previous” Liberal government, she has been saying a lot and has even launched an ad campaign claiming that the Opposition Leader, Adrian Dix, is responsible for the NDP government in the 90s.

No wonder Clark’s public support is going downhill fast.