Podcasts about foip

Time for another look at the biggest political scandal in Alberta's history!That Danielle Smith effectively threw $80 million down the drain in an attempt to own the feds by trying to buy childrens medication is largely a matter of public record.But it's the story beneath the surface that begins to show the real problems. There's been a lot of speculation as to who did what and when, but in this episode we are able to finally reveal the results of a FOIP request that seems to confirm a lot of the allegations and that potentially has huge implications for Albertans!If you're able to support our legal defense fund to fight back against the $6 Million lawsuit against us by Sam Mraiche, the man who imported Vanch masks and the Turkish Tylenot as well as who hosted MLA's and Ministers in his skybox as he had business with the government...You can do that at www.savethebreakdownab.ca!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Bluesky, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

FoIP: The Overlooked MSP Opportunity, Many businesses still rely on fax to send and receive legally binding orders, insurance documents, and compliance paperwork "If our fax or email system fails, that's a catastrophe—we lose connection to our customers and orders stop coming in." — Martin Hager, Founder & CEO, Retarus Spring 2025 has been dominated by AI, cybersecurity, branded calling, and POTS replacement. But in this special Technology Reseller News podcast, we return to a foundational—and often forgotten—technology that continues to power mission-critical communications: fax. Martin Hager, CEO of Retarus, joined Doug Green to discuss how the Munich-based cloud communications company was recently named a Leader in the IDC MarketScape for Worldwide Digital Fax Solutions—the only European provider to earn that distinction. “Fax” may still conjure images of curling thermal paper and screeching machines, but Hager wants the channel to see it for what it is today: FoIP—Fax over IP—highly secure, server-to-server communication trusted by the world's largest enterprises. With over 700 million fax pages sent annually through Retarus' privately run global data centers, the company plays a critical role in industries ranging from finance to healthcare to manufacturing. Hidden Costs, Missed Messages Why should MSPs and service providers care about fax in 2024? As Hager explained, a 1% improvement in fax reliability can save large enterprises hundreds of thousands of dollars in administrative costs, regulatory penalties, and customer churn. One client lost $860,000 from a single failed fax tied to a regulatory deadline. Many businesses still rely on fax to send and receive legally binding orders, insurance documents, and compliance paperwork. With analog lines disappearing and traditional fax servers aging out, there's a massive opportunity to consolidate and modernize fax infrastructure using FoIP. A Channel-Ready Market More than 80% of Retarus' business flows through the channel, and Hager says it's an easy upsell for MSPs and agents already providing voice or UCaaS services. Whether it's a dentist office, a healthcare network, or a manufacturer, fax remains a critical link in business operations. Retarus' solutions offer full delivery traceability, SOC 2 and ISO 27001 compliance, and direct integrations with enterprise apps and multifunction devices. With a simple conversation—"How do you send orders?"—partners can uncover opportunities that deliver both operational improvements and recurring revenue. To learn more, visit: www.retarus.com #FoIP #FaxOverIP #ChannelOpportunity #DigitalFax #Compliance #MSP #FaxSecurity #Retarus #IDCLeader #EnterpriseCommunication

2025年 5月15日（木）ニュース ▼米中、追加関税115%引き下げ発効 ▼4月の企業物価指数、4.0％上昇　コメ値上がりで高止まり続く ▼自民党政務調査会「FOIP（自由で開かれたインド太平洋）戦略本部」会合を開催 ▼トランプ大統領がカタール訪問　29兆円分のジェット機購入などで合意 ▼Microsoft、好業績でも世界で従業員6000人を削減 ▼上場企業の決算発表 トランプ関税の影響で今年度業績見通し減益相次ぐ ▼自民　農林部会などの幹部会で備蓄米流通の改善策を議論 　⇒　元農林水産省官僚　山下一仁さんが解説　　（キヤノングローバル戦略研究所研究主幹） コメンテータージョセフ・クラフト（経済アナリスト） See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Almost 2 years ago we did a deep dive on the Western Standard and where they get their funding from, despite claims they accept no government funding whatsoever.As we finally got our FOIP results back after involvement from the office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner, this is a follow up on the 100's of thousands of taxpayer dollars that the Western Standard has recieved from Danielle Smith's government!And on that note...If you're able to support our legal defense fund to fight back against the $6 Million lawsuit against us by Sam Mraiche, the man who imported Vanch masks and the Turkish Tylenot as well as who hosted MLA's and Ministers in his skybox as he had business with the government...You can do that at www.savethebreakdownab.ca!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Bluesky, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

It seems like someone has cut the brakes on Alberta Politics!From the start of the week with Smith's cell phone presser to address her Mar A Lago visit to her standing alone against confederation and everything in between, we've got you covered with our Alberta Politics Roundup! Plus we also reveal the results of two of our FOIP requests, with the first pulling back the curtain on the UCP government funding yet another right wing media group that claims to not take government funding and the second seeming to show that the UCP government took the lead on their objections to national Pharmacare from big business!If you're able to support our legal defense fund to fight back against the $6 Million lawsuit against us by Sam Mraiche, the man who imported Vanch masks and the Turkish Tylenot as well as who hosted MLA's and Ministers in his skybox as he had business with the government...You can do that at www.savethebreakdownab.ca!Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Bluesky, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

With changes to FOIP legislation, the surprise firing of the AIMCO board, a UCP legislative agenda that's entirely about social regression with nothing to address cost of living and a byelection looking in Lethbridge, we figured it was time to sit down for another conversation with Alberta Party leader Lindsay Amantea! Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Bluesky, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

Time for another Alberta politics roundup!In this episode we take a look at the onslaught of ABPoli news, including the UCP's reaction to emission reduction regulations, the introduction of halal mortagages to crown corporations, the changes to FOIP laws, the UCP adding two seats to the legislature, the redrawing of electoral maps, and a whole lot more!You can donate to skipping stone at https://www.skippingstone.ca/legalfundDon't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

We're back with another Live Alberta Politics Roundup!With the confluence of Danielle Smith's leadership review, the UCP AGM and the Legislature returning to session, there's no shortage of things to talk about! We start with our regular look at the events of the week before we do a deep dive on several of the new pieces of legislation, including the Bill(s) of Rights and the three anti-trans pieces of legislation. From there we take a look at a sampling of the policies passed at the UCP AGM before we follow up on last weeks Skybox episode with a new FOIP and...A correction? Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

It's time for another Alberta Politics Roundup and FOIP reveal!We run through some of the bigger and more embarrassing moments in Alberta Politics, including the Western Standards new government funding, Vote tabulators, the marching on of the Free Alberta Strategy before we take a look at the FOIP we recieved back that again appears to prove on other lie in th ongoing skybox scandal!Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

By special request!We've split off our segment from Sunday where we begin the deep dive on Danielle Smith's Skybox Scandal, starting with our recent FOIP that appears to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that while the UCP wrote new "ethics" rules, it didn't take them long at all before they completely violated them! Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

Not only is this another Alberta politics roundup, but we're also starting to peel back the layers of the UCP Corruption onion, and it's a lot worse than you think!We start with our regular run down of the week in Alberta politics, including The Rebel's official designation as being part of the 1%, Danielle Smith's week of dogwhistles, the recent school construction announcement and a lot more! From there we get into our recent FOIP that appears to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt that while the UCP wrote new "ethics" rules, it didn't take them long at all before they completely violated them as we do the first of a series of deep dives on the skybox scandal!Don't forget, we have merch that's available at https://www.abpoli.ca/category/the-breakdown-ab!As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

On January 31, 2024, Danielle Smith shocked many Albertans with a suite of policies designed to insert her personal beliefs into doctors offices across the province. Not only did these policies limit access to health care for trans youth, they also attacked trans participation in sports and will override the rights of parents to make decisions on their children's medical care. 
Smith defended these policies saying that she would be engaging in “robust” consultation, but as a recent FOIP we completed revealed, that consultation wasn't about whether the policies should proceed, but how to manage rolling them out.
Dr. Victoria Bucholtz is a fierce advocate on a number of issues, and as a academic and a member of the Trans community she agreed to help us review the FOIP results, interpret them and suggest what Albertans can do going forward.Don't forget, we've got a whole lineup of merch at 
As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/ thebreakdownab and we can now accept e-transfers at info@thebreakdownab.ca!
If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!


In 2019, Derek Fildebrandt revived Ezra Levant's former publication th Western Standard and set about building a media empire out of Western Canada that was predicated on (among other things) not accepting any government funding. But can they really say that they don't accept any government funding and that they don't get taxpayer money? Over that last 6 months we've completed a series of FOIP's that show that The Western Standard has indeed been getting taxpayer funds. Not only has the government of Alberta been paying the Western Standard for their content and for subscriptions, but they've also been directing taxpayer dollars to the Western Standard for Advertising as well! Which is all pretty "conflict-of-interesty" given the fact that the WS was the previous media home of Danielle Smith and two of her highest ranking officials! We unpack all of that an more in this episode! Don't forget, we now have merch that's available at www.abpoli.ca, including a spring lineup! As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab. If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

As part of Freedom to Read Week celebrations, Senator Simons moderated a panel discussion with journalists Danielle Paradis, Jason Markusoff, and Jonny Wakefield on the state of journalism. This event was presented in partnership with the Edmonton Public Library, LitFest, and Calgary Public Library. Jonny Wakefield has been with the Edmonton Journal/Sun newsroom since 2017. He is now the courts and crime reporter, covering the Edmonton Law Courts and other justice issues. He came to Canada from the U.S. as a student in 2009 and became a dual citizen in 2020. Danielle Paradis is an award-winning Indigenous (Métis) magazine writer, journalist, editor, educator, podcaster and mentor who lives in Treaty 6 (Edmonton, Alberta). She has written for both local and international audiences. You can read (or hear) her work at Aboriginal Peoples Television (APTN), Canadaland, Chatelaine, The Walrus, Alberta Views, Toronto Star (Edmonton), Canadian True Crime Podcast, and The Sprawl. Danielle covers politics, arts and culture, and Indigenous Issues. Danielle loves a good FOIP story and studied investigative journalism, story-based inquiry method, at the Centre for Investigative Journalism out of the UK. She has journalism, focusing on advanced reporting and reporting on diverse communities at MacEwan University and Humber College. She has also worked for a non-profit, Indigenous Friends Association, that focuses on connecting traditional knowledge and digital technology for Indigenous youth. She also has a background as a literary editor for Other Voices and in-depth media experience in both television and audio journalism. Jason Markusoff has been writing about what's happening – and not happening, but maybe should – in Alberta for more than two decades. He's a writer, editor and producer with CBC Calgary, and before that he's been a correspondent for Maclean's, Calgary Herald and Edmonton Journal. He's on Twitter a lot less these days, for patently obvious reasons. Paula Simons was appointed to the Senate of Canada in 2018, after a long and distinguished career as one of western Canada's most acclaimed journalists. She has been a radio documentary-maker, a playwright, and an author of popular history, but she is best known for her work as a political columnist and reporter with the Edmonton Journal.

Time for another Alberta Poliotics Roundup! This week We're talking about the ongoing healthcare crisis, especially in EMS and in Red Deer, the infamous Tylenot Childrens Medication scandal that just keep getting worse, Fracking and the Brazeau Damn plus we go through our latest FOIP results! And we now have merch that's available at www.abpoli.ca, including a fall lineup! As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab. If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

We're back for another weekly Alberta Politics roundup! We start by breaking down some of the biggest news stories of the last week of Alberta politics, including the Westlock Crosswalk situation, a CSIS report that should turn significantly more heads than it has, Tanya Fir's very bad week in the Legislature, multiple leaks from the oils sands up north, Smith launching the Sovereignty Act (kinda) AND... We get into th results of our FOIP requests on the Pension Report that seem to strongly suggest that there's much, much more to the story than the government is telling Albertans. Make sure to look for the bonus episode that goes with this one with our regular open mic as well! Plus we now have merch that's available at www.abpoli.ca, including a fall lineup! As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our Patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab. If you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating, and don't forget to like and follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and Threads!

In late 2022 Japan released its new security and defence policy. It swept away much of the self-restraint that had characterised Tokyo's attitude to security since 1945, and saw the Kishida Administration bringing defence and security issues to the fore. Today on the podcast we speak with Japanese foreign policy experts Professor Akiko Fukushima and Professor Ken Jimbo, on Japan's new national security strategy, the progress made on the "Free & Open Indo-Pacific" initiative (the FOIP) , and Japan's role in shaping the regional order.  Tweet us at @AsiaMediaCentreWebsite asiamediacentre.org.nz Email us at media@asianz.org.nzWhakawhetai mo te whakarongo .. thanks for listening !

Journeyman mechanic, power lifting champion, he has his Black belt in karate, Author & has filed 21 FOIP's (Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act) in the province of Saskatchewan showing no cost/benefit analysis on lockdowns among other things. Emergencies Act Inquiry https://publicorderemergencycommission.ca/ November 5th SNP Presents: QDM & 2's. Get your tickets here: https://snp.ticketleap.com/snp-presents-qdm--222-minutes Let me know what you think Text me 587-217-8500

The EMS Crisis in Alberta has been making the news for quite some time now, with news outlets reporting stories of extremely long times for ambulances to arrive at an emergency, or even worse, increasing stories about no ambulances being available. To get a better understanding of what's going on, we sat down for a conversation with citizen FOIPer and Paramedic Ryan Middleton! Ryan has been FOIPing EMS data for a while now, and using this publicly available data, he is able to help us understand just how serious the current situation is in EMS and what that means for Albertans! TO BE ABSOLUTELY CLEAR - All of the views expressed in this episode of The Breakdown are solely the views of those expressing them and should not be Interpreted as representing any other individual or organization. Additionally, all data referred to is publicly available or obtained through FOIP requests. No personal, Health or business information is presented. As always, if you appreciate the kind of content that we're trying to produce here at The Breakdown, please consider signing up as a monthly supporter at our patreon site at www.patreon.com/thebreakdownab, and if you're listening to the audio version of our podcast, please consider leaving us a review and a rating and don't forget to like and follow us on facebook, twitter and instagram all at @thebreakdownab.

出身日本戰後最顯赫政治世家，安倍晉三：「到了台灣會覺得心情放鬆平靜。卸下首相一職的好處之一，就是可以去台灣了。」與李登輝、金美齡關係密切，安倍與台灣還有什麼背景淵源？ 無懼中國，安倍全力支持台灣加入 CPTPP、WHO，長期以實質行動挺台。為了強化太平洋國家民主同盟，安倍提出了什麼樣的戰略思考？又如何影響世界局勢？ 讓我們繼續追劇！ —— 僅以此系列影片，向安倍晉三先生致敬，台灣謝謝您。 このシリーズの動画より，安倍晋三さんに最上の敬意を表すと共に，台湾人として心から感謝を申し上げます。 ——

On today's show we tackle the impending Roe V Wade political fallout in the US, Israeli assassination of an Al Jazeera reporter, Skippy's hijacking of the CPC and our monetary system, Alberta Court of Appeal's attempt to build pipelines again, Jonathan Denis' never-ending 15 minutes of fame, there's a new Conservative Party in Saskatchewan, thanks for showing the way and Musk pulls another fast one on everyone! Thanks for Watching Albertastan Live we couldn't do it without you so, If you enjoyed what you saw and heard on this episode like, share & subscribe to the many options listed below and, help support the show or our other efforts including placement of sponsorships and donations (Thank you so much) FOLLOW US ! FACEBOOK— https://m.facebook.com/AlbertastanLive INSTAGRAM— https://www.instagram.com/albertastan.ca YOUTUBE— https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbGhoUAByTXOHd-h3WZq9Uw SPOTIFY— https://open.spotify.com/show/5JRQyDXMDEnltrdoU5NKas PODCAST— https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/albertastan-ca/id1431546582 STITCHER— https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=389474&refid=stpr TWITTER— https://twitter.com/AlbertastanLive OG WEBSITE— https://www.Albertastan.ca CONTACT US! EMAIL— Whatsyourdeal@Albertastan.ca SUPPORT US ! PATREON— https://www.patreon.com/albertastan PAYPAL— https://www.paypal.me/albertastanca

The data center industry has a large electricity appetite, accounting for at least 1% of electricity use worldwide1. Demand for data center services . The data center industry has a large electricity appetite, accounting for at least 1% of electricity use worldwide1. Demand for data center services is rising with the expansion of data-intensive technologies such as artificial intelligence, autonomous vehicles, and smart energy systems. Given the current and growing impact of the sector, finding and implementing sustainable energy solutions in data centers will be crucial to reduce their carbon footprint. Enter the data center customer. Nearly every company uses data, and many purchase space in colocation data center facilities or contract with public cloud service providers. This buying power affords customers substantial leverage to make asks of their data center providers that accelerate the decarbonization of the data center industry. In addition, pushing for renewable energy solutions in their data services contracts can help companies advance their own emissions goals, often more easily than by addressing emissions sources that are deeper in their supply chains. Data center customers can ask some probing questions to help accelerate renewable energy procurement and initiate conversations with their service providers: What are my company's emission reduction goals, and how can working with my data service providers help advance those goals? Do I have a Scope 2 goal? A Scope 3 goal? Understanding your company's goals will help guide your conversations with your data service providers. Are my data service providers measuring their electricity usage? If so, how is this usage measured? Do I have access to electricity data that is relevant to my data usage? Do my data service providers offer renewable energy solutions? What are these solutions? Can I make renewable energy claims based on the renewable energy my data service provider procures? By asking these foundational questions, companies can advance their own energy and sustainability goals while also accelerating the decarbonization of the data center industry. Requesting renewable options and pushing for customer-provider collaboration is crucial to inform data center providers that there is customer demand for more sustainable energy solutions, and to ensure the feasibility and mutual benefits of these solutions. REBA's Future of Internet Power (FoIP) program brings together data center customers and providers to create collaborative solutions to renewable energy procurement in data centers. Most recently, REBA members participating in FoIP made key updates to the Corporate Colocation & Cloud Buyers' Principles and Toolkit to reflect the increasing presence of outsourced cloud service providers in the market, and to support corporates in taking more aggressive action on climate and renewables. The Principles outline six criteria that companies using colocation or cloud services would like to see their service providers meet, and the Toolkit provides tactical guidance on how data center customers and providers can put the Principles into practice. Get Involved REBA members are encouraged to join the FoIP initiative to get more involved with the effort to power the internet with 100% renewable energy. All data service customers, regardless of REBA membership, are encouraged to use and sign the Corporate Colocation and Cloud Buyers' Principles listed on the FoIP webpage. If you have any questions about FoIP, renewable energy in data centers, or other ways to get involved, please contact supplychain@rebuyers.org. 1 Energy Innovation (March 2020). How Much Energy Do Data Centers Really Use?

This week, Mike is back in the studio with Heino Klinck, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for East Asia, to unpack the Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy and how it relates to U.S. allies and partners. Heino and Mike begin by exploring Chinese strategy towards the U.S. alliance network in Asia. They then discuss how U.S. allies and partners like Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Australia should think about their roles, missions, and capabilities in response to Chinese aggressive behavior in the region.

This podcast contains SPOILERS and also a big Trigger warning. There is a large section of this movie that deals with gender presentation and the idea of a man in a dress as a serial killer and we talk about it. It’s a good conversation but it’s understandable if any of the trans and gender diverse part of the audience would like to skip it. Check the time codes and check in with yourself. We love you, listeners. In addition to that we spend some time discussion the manufacture of rocking horses, the importance of FOIP and a plea to let people use their regular accents in movies if they are not the best at impersonating another one. Time codes 00:00:23 Introductions 00:11:48 Trailer 00:13:45 Post movie discussion 00:41:08-01:02:45 Talking about gender representation in movies and the weird twist this movie uses that is almost entirely negative to the plot. 01:28:22 SPOTEM 01:31:14 Ratings and would we watch again 01:41:41 Something to Cheer Section! Next week we take a dive back into that wild wild time of the late 1990s and watch the meta movie to end all meta movies, Scream. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/nothingtofear/message

The only thing grass roots about the UCP now is a call to flush crap leader. FOIP request proves Kenney ignored warnings of second wave. People died. Mayors in the ridings of conspiracy-theorist Alberta MLAs who spoke out against COVID-19 restrictions call bullshit on community support for MLA fantasies Barrelled and lazy assed UCP caught withholding supplies of Moderna vaccines they received from feds while they simultaneously blame them for the same shitty roll out. Did you kill scores of elderly due to both your negligence as a long term care home provider during the onset of the pandemic and know that you're going to be sued into oblivion because of criminal liability? No problem! The UCP has you covered with Bill 70 that will make your atrocities simply go away along with any pesky questions about the provinces mangling of their response to the pandemic and their horribly corrupt and negligent practice of letting the Long term care industry regulate itself. Bye bye gam gam, bye bye! In opposites land Alberta education minister accuses teachers of politicising the curriculum. The “working mans” party tells federal liberals that it is going to shoot itself in the dick before it saves Albertans 83% on child care.  Stupid Liberals. Saskatoon Super spreader event, for the kids! Guess where Ontario’s cases are coming from, while Doug Ford cries on TV. Biden calls Slaughter of Armenians a genocide. Thanks for listening to the www.Albertastan.ca Podcast!! Check us out at www.albertastan.ca and please consider a donation to the show! If not, please share, comment, rate and subscribe to the show wherever you get your podcasts from! Same goes for the YouTube channel!!! Spotify URL https://open.spotify.com/show/5JRQyDXMDEnltrdoU5NKas ApplePodcast https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/albertastan-ca/id1431546582 GooglePlay https://playmusic.app.goo.gl/?ibi=com.google.PlayMusic&isi=691797987&ius=googleplaymusic&apn=com.google.android.music&link=https://play.google.com/music/m/Iomv5nweqb4yijczcxx5bxdyyte?t%3DAlbertastan.ca%26pcampaignid%3DMKT-na-all-co-pr-mu-pod-16 Stitcher https://www.stitcher.com/s?fid=389474&refid=stpr AND YOUTUBE!!!! http://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbGhoUAByTXOHd-h3WZq9Uw Follow us on face book https://www.facebook.com/Albertastanca ***Help make this possible***  Pay pall https://www.paypal.me/albertastanca Join us on Patreon !!! https://www.patreon.com/albertastan Join us and help kick ass for the middle class!

■7-9月GDP速報値 ■日本など15カ国、RCEPに署名 ■中国軍制服組トップ「能動的な戦争立案への転換」に言及 ◎ご意見・ご感想は iidatdn@gmail.com まで。 ◎番組内の発言は個人の見解であり、所属する組織の公式見解ではありません。

Japan, world's once second biggest economy, is among the first countries to articulate its Indo-Pacific vision. Then-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe delivered his famous "Confluence of the Two Seas" before the Indian Parliament back in 2007. In his more recent term as Japan's Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe once again reiterated Japan's interest to pursue a Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP). But what does Japan's FOIP entail? In this episode of In The World Podcast's Indo-Pacific Insider series, we will explore the vision, position, and role of Japan in the Indo-Pacific region.

Mike sits down with Keio University professor Yuichi Hosoya to discuss one of the longest-tenured players on the Asia chessboard, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Mike and Yuichi kick off the episode by discussing Yuichi's role as both an academic and an informal adviser to the Abe government on foreign policy. The two then turn to discussing how history and foreign policy are taught in Japanese universities. The conversation then moves towards analyzing the cornerstone of Abe's contribution to the Asia chessboard, the Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP). What does FOIP mean to Japan and to Abe? Is it fair to characterize FOIP as a counter-China strategy? What is ASEAN's role in FOIP, and how should the U.S. understand FOIP's evolution with the present thaw between Japan and China?

Nukes, missiles, and being oblivious to risk. The Indo-Pacific strategy is freaking some people out. Allies worry that the US doesn't know what it's doing in Asia, and a nuclear Japan and South Korea may just be a matter of time.  Trump doesn't care about Hong Kong.  Also this episode, why it sucks to have a liberal foreign policy in the Second Nuclear Age. When New Zealand will start developing nukes. And why post-INF missiles are the Christmas present no ally wants. In Ask Me Anything: Why Van Jackson is a good example of how not to build a career in foreign policy.Stay Off Twitter:David Frum on honorable resignations - https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1199528319483596800Brett McGurk on the Trump/Erdogan bromance - https://twitter.com/brett_mcgurk/status/1199041509317701632Mike Mazarr on the INF Treaty and missiles in Kansas - https://twitter.com/MMazarr/status/1197011144759595008Vipin Narang on a new nuclear age - https://twitter.com/NarangVipin/status/1197924400428810241Armchair Analysis:Mira Rapp-Hooper on decoupling and the new nuclear age - https://warontherocks.com/2019/11/decoupling-is-back-in-asia-a-1960s-playbook-wont-solve-these-problems-2/

Have a question for the podcast? Click on this Link http://goo.gl/forms/wLOcXGT9fD OR call and leave a question at +1 833 872 4242 (toll free) Sponsored by http://redacted.ting.com Save $$$ on your monthly phone bill and get $25 credit on your first bill. Star Citizen podcast Hosted by the [REDACTED] Content creator team. Focusing on news and updates to the game Star Citizen and Squadron 42 - including Star Marine and Arena Commander every Wednesday at 11am PST/2pm EST/7pm BST Streamed live every Weds. at 11am PST/7pm UTC: http://twitch.tv/wtfosaurus Questions: http://goo.gl/forms/wLOcXGT9fD Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/REDACTEDtv Merch: https://www.teepublic.com/user/redacted Discord: http://discord.gg/redacted Website: http://redacted.tv Twitch team: http://twitch.tv/team/redacted

Political awareness, Kayne West visits the white house, Soyuz launch failure, Star Citizen 3.3, FOIP and WoW patch 8.0.1

Welcome to some more Star Citizen News with a Recap of the weeks goings on, with Roadmap Updates, Calling All Devs & Official CIG Shows n Posts & Highlights of the Monthly Report. RSI NEWSLETTER | https://mailchi.mp/cloudimperiumgames/100518_power-to-the-people-141265 PATREON | http://www.patreon.com/BoredGamer F-SECURE TOTAL | https://fbit.co/8q2v - 20% off with discount code BOREDGAMER SHADOW - CLOUD GAMING PCs | https://shadow.tech/usen - USE THE CODE BOREDGAMER FOR A DISCOUNT GET STAR CITIZEN & 5000 UEC | http://www.boredgamer.co.uk/enlist BOREDGAMER DISCORD | https://discord.gg/boredgamer WEBSITE | http://boredgamer.co.uk TWITCH | http://www.twitch.tv/boredgameruk TWITTER | http://twitter.com/BoredGamerUK REDDIT | https://www.reddit.com/r/BoredGamer/ PODCASTS | https://soundcloud.com/boredgameruk T-SHIRTS & MERCH | https://boredgamer.teemill.com DONATE TO HELP SUPPORT THE CHANNEL | http://www.boredgamer.co.uk/donate MY SYSTEM SPEC | https://www.reddit.com/r/BoredGamer/comments/6y816w/boredgamer_system_specs/ BOREDGAMER STREAM TEAM | https://www.twitch.tv/team/boredgamer BOREDGAMER EXTRA VIDEOS | https://www.youtube.com/boredgamerextra Star Citizen is an Open Development Alpha Project that aims to build a First Person MMO Space Sim that covers gameplay in ship & on ground, economy and pretty much anything else you would want. It's built in the StarEngine (a modified Lumberyard Engine). You'll see massive Space Ships that you can fly with friends, land on planets, explore or whatever your way to whatever goal you choose. It's available to try in it's current Alpha State Now & you can help give feedback & influence the direction of the game. Squadron 42 is the Single Player Campaign of Star Citizen & the Spiritual Successor of Wing Commander. The Idea is the game is maximum pretty and seamless... NO LOADING SCREENS. Both Games are currently in the Alpha of their development with the hope that SQ42 Episode 1 may be released Q3-4 2019. I am suspecting to see a Star Citizen MMO/PU Beta end of 2020. Full Disclosure: I am an independent Star Citizen Fan & Content Creator. I am not paid or contracted by CIG/RSI in anyway. I am an Evocati Member and as such I am under an NDA for Closed Early Patch Releases, known as the Evocati Test Flight (ETF). Shadow Cloud Gaming referrals give me a small kickback, however I am not paid by them for any specific videos or promotion. CURRENT STAR CITIZEN PATCH REVISION ALPHA 3.3 Evocati #StarCitizen #CitizenCon #Squadron42

Star Citizen with a 3.2.2 LIVE release, a summary of AtV Looking at some work in 3.3 with Mining, FOIP & VOIP. Some Vanduul FPS stuff & a some highlights of the monthly report talking about in game ship rentals, underground structures and more! AROUND THE VERSE | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs2fpfJd68E MONTHLY REPORT | https://robertsspaceindustries.com/comm-link/transmission/16696-Monthly-Studio-Report-July-2018 PATREON | http://www.patreon.com/BoredGamer SHADOW - CLOUD GAMING PCs | https://shadow.tech/usen/ USE THE CODE BOREDGAMER FOR A DISCOUNT FORGOTTEN HEARLDS ORG SPOTLIGHT | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z211ncwENPQ FORGOTTEN HEARLDS ORG PAGE | https://robertsspaceindustries.com/orgs/FHERALDS GET STAR CITIZEN & 5000 UEC | http://www.boredgamer.co.uk/enlist BOREDGAMER DISCORD | https://discord.gg/boredgamer WEBSITE | http://boredgamer.co.uk TWITCH | http://www.twitch.tv/boredgameruk TWITTER | http://twitter.com/BoredGamerUK REDDIT | https://www.reddit.com/r/BoredGamer/ SOUNDCLOUD | https://soundcloud.com/boredgameruk T-SHIRTS & MERCH | https://boredgamer.teemill.com DONATE | http://www.boredgamer.co.uk/donate WHOOTING KEYBOARDS - 5% OFF | https://goo.gl/QB5rvQ MY SYSTEM SPEC | https://www.reddit.com/r/BoredGamer/comments/6y816w/boredgamer_system_specs/ BOREDGAMER STREAM TEAM | https://www.twitch.tv/team/boredgamer BOREDGAMER EXTRA VIDEOS | https://www.youtube.com/boredgamerextra Star Citizen is an Open Development Alpha Project that aims to build a First Person MMO Space Sim that covers gameplay in ship & on ground, economy and pretty much anything else you would want. It's built in the StarEngine (a modified Lumberyard Engine). You'll see massive Space Ships that you can fly with friends, land on planets, explore or whatever your way to whatever goal you choose. It's available to try in it's current Alpha State Now & you can help give feedback & influence the direction of the game. Squadron 42 is the Single Player Campaign of Star Citizen & the Spiritual Successor of Wing Commander. The Idea is the game is maximum pretty and seamless... NO LOADING SCREENS. It's currently in the Alpha of it's development with the hope that SQ42 Episode 1 will be released Q3 2019. Full Disclosure: I am a Star Citizen Fan BUT am not paid or contracted by CIG in anyway other than I am an Evocati Member and as such am under an NDA for Closed Early Patch Release Tests (ETF). Shadow Tech referrals give me a small kickback, however I am not paid by them for any specific videos or promotion. CURRENT STAR CITIZEN PATCH REVISION ALPHA 3.2.2 LIVE #StarCitizen #BoredGamer #Squadron42

Through a FOIP the Wildrose Party has discovered which parts of AB highways are the most deadly. Grant Hunter, Wilrose MLA and Shadow Cabinet Minister for Transportation and Technology.  The map is here. Rob takes a few calls as well about where the roads get ugly in our province. 

CanadianImmigrationPodcast.com Mark Holthe: I'm here with my good friend and colleague, Raj Sharma. Raj, thanks for joining me. Raj Sharma: My pleasure. Mark Holthe: We're testing this out with our digital recorder here. I usually do these interviews via Skype call, but I've got high hopes that the audio is going to be great regardless. Thanks for putting up with me, Raj, and happy to have you with us. Today, Raj has agreed to come in and talk a little bit about criminal inadmissibility and some of the consequences that can flow when people get themselves into trouble here in Canada, but before we get into that I want to take a moment to share a little bit of background on Raj, and where he's come from professionally, and where he's at. Raj Sharma's a lawyer and founding partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, one of Western Canada's largest dedicated immigration law firms. He received his masters of law from Osgoode Hall and is a former refugee protection officer with the Immigration and Refugee Board. Now, I'll get to the question of how you got into immigration and I'm going to go out on a limb and think that that probably influenced it a little bit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe: With over a hundred reported decisions, Raj has indicated to me, he frequently appears before all divisions, as well as the Federal Court, the court of appeal, and has also appeared before every level of court in Alberta. Raj regularly speaks on immigration matters in the media, and he's been a panelist and speaker at the CBA National Immigration Conference in 2014 and '15. He also writes a lot on immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity. Recently he was the recipient of the Legal Aid of Alberta's Access to Justice award and has been recognized as well as one of Calgary's Top 40 Under 40. Raj is an extremely accomplished individual and I know that he won't plug himself, so I'll do that for him, but whenever I have a difficult case with respect to enforcement, or appeal work, or anything like that I send it to him and his firm. Once again, thanks for joining, Raj. Raj Sharma: Thanks, Mark. I'm East Indian, or as I like to describe ourselves as brown, so no matter how accomplished I am, obviously given that I'm not a doctor I'm probably a disappointment to my parents. Mark Holthe: Well, we'll have to get your parents on to come back and I'm almost positive with everything that you've done, at least within our industry and how you've distinguished yourself, that there wouldn't be a parent on this planet that wouldn't be proud of you. Enough of the feel good stuff, fill us in. How did you get into immigration? Raj Sharma: I never intended to get into immigration law. I did my JD at the University of Alberta. While I was there, I didn't take any immigration courses, immigration just wasn't even on my radar. I summered at a large law firm here in Calgary, Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer. I didn't like the large law firm milieu so to speak. Then I spent some time with Dennis Edney, who's now the lawyer for Omar Khadr. Then I also clerked up the Alberta Court of Appeal and ended up doing my articles with the federal department of justice. I think I had at that point an understanding that I would be somewhat closer to a barrister or a litigator than I would be in terms a solicitor. There was one case that I handled and my mentor at that time at the federal Department of Justice was Glennys Bembridge, who is now a Federal Court justice with a different last name, but there was one case and it involved a family, they're doctors, and their son had autism. I was the articling student, so I had to put together the affidavit and supporting the officer's finding of medical inadmissibility. I found that really, really interesting, but I kept saying to my mentor at that why can't we just consent on this file, the family's really deserving, and ultimately I think that the family did get relief. After that, I'd met my wife at Winnipeg at a wedding ... Mark Holthe: I'm going to jump in. Raj Sharma: Yes. Mark Holthe: You said, "Why can't we just consent to this?" What was his response? Raj Sharma: It was a strange response. The response was just like, "Oh, we just have to ..." Mark Holthe: Carry it through. Raj Sharma: It was more like it was like, "Oh, the client instructions ..." I'm like, "What client? We're the government." I was explained that different departments are actually clients of the department of justice. I found that very odd because I don't think that's true. I think that a client/solicitor relationship doesn't encapsulate departments of government being clients of each other. I found that odd. In any way, I'd met my wife in Winnipeg at a wedding, my cousin's wedding. She was in Calgary, born and raised in Calgary, so I needed a way to get to Calgary somehow, so I was applying for jobs in Calgary and I got this called up to do this test or examination at the Immigration Refugee Board. I was offered this position to become a refugee protection officer. That's where in fact I met my partner, Bjorn Harsanyi, so we both started off as refugee protection officers, hearings officers in 2002. Mark Holthe: Obviously that makes a pretty nice background for sliding over to the other side. It gives you an opportunity at least having worked on the other side to get a better understanding of how the government operates, how the department operates, a little bit more inside to the minds of what goes through a decision maker on that side. I have to assume that that helped you as you moved over to the other side with your advocacy on behalf of clients. Raj Sharma: I think so and I think that, and again there's this tradition of this entrepreneurial tradition within my community, and of course my second and third languages also helped, there was a burgeoning South Asian community in Calgary at that time. Really, it was timing, and so Calgary's just really good to me. I'd moved to Calgary at about the right time and I went into private practice at about the right time, right before Calgary took off, so to speak. 2004 I started my practice, late 2004 I started my practice. At that time, just trying to take whatever you can get, so again, I wasn't really centered in immigration. Then there was this legal aid file, this three hour legal aid file for criminal inadmissibility. It involved a foreign national in Canada accused or there was an allegation of weapons, and gun smuggling, and weapons trafficking. At that point I thought, "Well, this is a foregone conclusion." I looked at the IRPA and I said, "Well, this is just, there's no way out here," but my partner at that time pushed me a little bit and so I looked at it, I looked at it again. I put in far more hours than the three hours allotted to me, and low and behold I was able to succeed. I think that was the first time that I was in the media, that was the first time I was on TV or the newspapers, at least when it came to my legal practice. It was after that that my practice in immigration took off because it was after that that I joined Caron & Partners and then again after I left Caron & Partners there was another Vietnamese fellow, [another] fork in the road. There was another Vietnamese client, Jackie Tran, and that file I took on in 2009. Both of these cases probably had something to do with the direction of my practice. Mark Holthe: Yeah, that makes perfect sense because I think for most of us business immigration lawyers, I guess that's how I classify myself, when there's a sticky situation I get uncomfortable pretty quick. I have a tendency to try to take the path of easiest and least resistance with my clients. If there's push back from the government, I tend to try and say, "Do we need to refile? Do we need to rethink our strategy?" Sometimes it's faster to just accept the stupid decision that you get from an officer and then just try to satisfy whatever they want, and refile, and get it approved, but there's a number of situations where people get themselves into a corner where they really don't have a nice, easy solution other than taking the government on. Raj Sharma: I think .. it depends on what you're facing. Now, in your case you have to solve a sort of business problem. Prior to 2009, before Tran, I was actually doing hundreds of LMIA's, or LMO's that they were called at the time, so I was representing major corporations, I was getting fat, I was just doing pure solicitor work, and I think again timing came to my rescue because once I got into the Tran file, which necessitated three different Federal Court applications, [emergency] stay application, IAD, ID, and right about that same time the economy in Calgary sort of collapsed, so to speak. If you're a one trick pony, that is you're only doing one aspect of immigration, you could be susceptible to that sort of change. I was very lucky in the sense of I did quite a bit of solicitor business work, but given that strong litigation year we were able to just basically switch our practices over to a litigation aspect. In business [immigration], you're tasked with making sure that the business runs smoothly. Where it's an individual facing loss of status, it's a zero sum game. In business there may be not, it's not a zero sum game, but in someone facing removal or deportation to a country that they haven't been in since they were a kid, it's a zero sum game which is you win or you lose, so at that point you start bringing out all the arrows in your quiver and you're doing whatever you can for your client because it is, for them to some degree, it's life or death in the sense of it's a death of a relationship, it's a death of your relationship to Canada, and it's a death of your status in this country. Mark Holthe: Let's shift to the topic at hand. I think a lot of our listeners, this isn't something that they're very familiar with because I think genuinely people try to avoid committing crimes in Canada and getting themselves removed. Raj Sharma: Right, and we know for a fact that immigrants or first generation Canadians have a lower crime rate than native born Canadians, so you're absolutely right. Most of your listeners and our clients, most of them, the vast majority enjoy a lower criminal rate or criminality than Canadians would. Mark Holthe: Yes, absolutely. As those that are listening in here, as I introduced when I started the podcast here, the interview with Raj Sharma, I indicated that we're going to be talking a little bit about criminal inadmissibility, so Raj, can you give us a little bit of an introduction? When we talk about criminal inadmissibility, how does that play into this world of immigration? Raj Sharma: Immigration is about, and notwithstanding whatever we hear these days from Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton, there are no such thing as truly open borders. A country will always dictate who enters and who remains, so there was a case that went to the supreme court of Canada involving a woman actually -- most of the cases I deal with actually do involve men -- but Medovarski involved a woman and Medovarski reaffirmed that concept that non-citizens do not have an unqualified right to enter or remain inside of Canada. When we look at criminality, the threshold for removing non-citizens from Canada is spelled out in intricate detail in the Immigration Refugee Protection Act and there is a bifurcation, i.e., it's somewhat harder to remove permanent residents from Canada and quite a bit easier to remove foreign nationals from Canada. When we talk about foreign nationals, we're talking about students and those here on work permits or those that are visitors in Canada. When we talk about permanent residence, obviously those are individuals that have applied for permanent residency, they're not citizens yet, and so we have a paradigm, a very detailed framework that deals with non-citizens that get in trouble with the law. Mark Holthe: When we talk about getting in trouble with the law, does the Immigration Act or the government, do they view certain crimes more seriously than others? How is that distinction set up? Raj Sharma: No, and maybe they should. That would have been a proper starting point. Maybe you should have been involved in this sort of legislation of these laws, but unfortunately the distinction of the severity of a crime is based on the maximum term of imprisonment or the actual incarceral or term that's imposed. When we talk about prison or incarceral term, we're including conditional sentences or sentences to be served in the community, so the distinction is not between the type of offense, someone that's convicted of a white collar offense such as fraud could face removal just as easily or perhaps more easily than someone accused or charged with simple assault. Mark Holthe: Even if an offense, let's say it's a hybrid offense, so it could proceed summarily or via indictment, the person that is sentenced to ten years imprisonment for that offense versus someone that's sentenced to six months under the eyes of the lovely immigration authorities, it's irrelevant. Raj Sharma: That's right, and it also doesn't take into account your length of time in Canada, so you could be a permanent resident and you could be here since you were two or three, and you could be [here] thirty years, and you could have an issue. Of course, this is the fragility of the human condition, we all make mistakes, so it doesn't take into account the length of time that you're in Canada…, nor does it take into account the nature of the offense, whether it's violent or whether it's non-violent. It's a blunt instrument unfortunately, Section 36 in particularly. Mark Holthe: If you have an individual that's committed a crime in Canada it's pretty clear we know what the offense is, we know what the conviction was, there's not a lot of debate about it, but what happens if someone wants to enter Canada or comes to Canada and has a conviction that occurred over seas or in another country, how does Canada treat those? Raj Sharma: Those things get complicated really quickly because different countries have different legal systems and different countries have different standards in terms of the ... You could have a situation [if] you're from China. Now, China has a 99.9% conviction rate. Mark Holthe: Wow, maybe I won't ask too many questions as to how that justice system plays out for those people accused, but ... Raj Sharma: I mean, so when we start making equivalent, or making offenses, or acts that individuals have done outside of Canada, and we have to somehow try and make them equivalent to offenses in Canada, those things get tricky really, really quickly. That's one subset of what we do.[But] I just keep getting reminded, even this morning, had a client applied on the Alberta Immigrant Nominee Program, skilled individual, excellent English, everything's fantastic, no criminal record whatsoever, applied on the ANP, got the nomination, applied for the PR forms to [CPC] Sydney. We got the passport request two days ago, three days ago, problem. Last week after a birthday party or someone's party, one in the morning, [he's] charged with impaired driving. Those are the sort of simple, understandable criminality because I think some politicians paint criminals as this broad brush, but criminals are no different than [you or I], it's just there's one incorrect decision. I think impaired driving is like that, this is impaired driving, could result in no jail time whatsoever, probably will result in a fine if he ever gets convicted, and a driving suspension. Won't spend a day in jail, but that's a hybrid offense and that [a conviction] makes him [as a foreign national] inadmissible. That's where I feel a lot of sympathy because you're seeing literally in front of you the end of a dream and you're seeing a person that for all other purposes would be an ideal addition to Canada's multicultural fabric. It's not really the media, it's not my cases that hit the news or the front pages that really give a proper idea of my practice. It really is those guys that are within an inch of permanent residency and we wouldn't consider them to be criminals, but of course they've made a grievous and horrendous error by drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car. Mark Holthe: Let's carry that through, I think that would be interesting. An individual who is in that type of a situation, this happens to them. What can they expect? Raj Sharma: Number one, if they come to me my first response to them, and there may be some sort of false hope, or some sort of strange fever dream that they're existing under, or they may get some sort of strange advice from someone, or a friend, or a cousin, and there may be a suggestion as to just somehow let it ride out and CIC may not figure this out. My first advice to them is that if they want my assistance, that we will be disclosing the charge and the encounter with the police immediately. That's the first thing that should happen and once they agree to these sort of terms, then we can start figuring out a solution. Now, the solution of course, and I kind of outlined that earlier today in my speech here, which is now start looking into conviction options or post conviction options. These conviction options, number one, beat out the charge in trial, because the system is binary, because it's a zero sum game, we can't now ... I think criminal lawyers and immigration lawyers that dabble in criminal law, there's no options now. You actually have to go and try to beat this out, you got to find, even if your client is factually guilty, you got to find a way to make him legally not guilty because if he's not guilty, that doesn't lead to any criminal consequences. If it's an offense, a domestic violence type of situation, and a peace bond is in the offering, take a peace bond. A peace bond doesn't have any criminal consequences either. There may be possibilities for some offenses for absolute or conditional discharges, take it, take it. That bird in the hand, we can safeguard that immigration at that point. In terms of a DUI, we're really looking to these curative discharges now and that's one option as well. Mark Holthe: Maybe you can explain what that is. What is a curative discharge? Raj Sharma: Curative discharge involves a process by which there is a guilt or there is factual guilt and there's again…. A curative discharge we've used where there's indication of alcoholism [as a] medical condition. If we can establish that, then the judge may see fit to grant a curative discharge. If that happens, then there is no criminal record that could waylay an immigration application or application for permanent residence. That's not to say, by the way, that that won't lead to other issues, i.e., you may still need a waiver to get into the US, but the curative discharge is something that we explore for impaired driving, and conditional, and absolute where ever possible [for other offences]. Now, bear in mind there's a whole host of offenses that result in mandatory minimum sentences and so we can't do any number of these things for those types of offenses, but those are some of the arrows in our quiver in terms of post conviction. Where ever possible, if you are facing a charge, either you're a permanent resident or a foreign national, try to get immigration lawyer involved alongside your criminal lawyer. There may be options to get positive sentencing remarks or positive remarks that are spoken into the record. Those transcripts can come in handy. If you are convicted, if you are sentenced, it's important that the client demonstrate remorse, and rehabilitation, engage in programming, and try to turn that life around. If we can demonstrate that, there are some options, which is that that initiating document to establish criminal inadmissibility, the Section 44 report, there is a scope for the officer not to write that report. Again, when I started down this journey I didn't realize the scope of discretion that's in the act. There is significant discretion. An officer may choose not to write a report against a permanent resident or foreign national and that may be the first, and maybe the last, real line of defense for a lot of these individuals. We've seen that happen, we've seen permanent residents, I've represented permanent residents, young guys, a technical armed robbery, four years plus sentence ... Mark Holthe: A technical armed robbery. Raj Sharma: A technical armed robbery... Mark Holthe: I love this terminology, technical versus a real, is there any distinction there? Raj Sharma: Let me tell you and you tell me whether that terminology or that splitting of hairs is appropriate. A guy got fired from a job at a liquor store, was angry, young guy, and decides to rob the liquor store as some sort of payback, buys a gun that is not operational, just this old, rusted out gun. There's no bullets in it, it's inoperable. Goes into the store, people see the gun, so they flee, so he goes to the cashier, he tries to open the cash box, is unable to do so, and runs out without stealing anything. Misfortune added to his idiocy, there's an off duty police officer who immediately arrests him outside the liquor store, so this guy goes through this process and his criminal lawyer after wasting tens of thousands of dollars of his money, pleads him guilty to an offense that includes a mandatory minimum sentence. At that point, and I met the judge actually afterwards and the judge said, "Hey, I wonder why that lawyer did that because if the lawyer challenged that on a charter ground of cruel and unusual punishment, that that mandatory minimum sentence in this case offends the Charter, I would have granted it to him." This lawyer tells this guy and his family, "That's it, game over, you will be deported," but of course that's not actually the end of it. [So] I do stand by my characterization of that as a technical armed robbery because this guy, he's more of an idiot than he was a criminal. This family went through a lot, this family, his sister in fact, who lived with was married, [her] husband had some mental issues, and she was attacked actually. The police attended and in fact that man was actually brought down by the CPS, so the family went through a lot. We put all this together, put the sentencing transcripts in, the judge, they got a really compassionate judge who said a lot of things into that record. [The client] was out on bail for four years, and upgraded himself, and it really was an ill advised decision. Ultimately, we had an understanding officer. She ended up interviewing him over the telephone, I think, at the Remand institution, and [she ultimately] decided not to write the report. Mark Holthe: I guess that's the beauty of this is the discretion that's laced into the immigration process. Raj Sharma: They won't lightly do it, but if you've got the goods .. it can be done. We had another case, we had another individual originally from Hong Kong, came over as a kid, got into some gambling issues, and then got into selling drugs to pay off some of those debts. Served his time, was a model prisoner, and his entire family was here, we set out everything. In this case we asked the Report not to be written, it was written. We challenged the Report at the Federal Court, we received approval or leave on one, it went back, and ultimately a Minister's Delegate decided to issue a warning letter. That's drug trafficking [involving a “hard” drug] and that was again significant, so these things can be done for the right individual. You will have people that have turned their lives around and you can see, you can tell. There's no faking this because it's a year's long journey. If you've got it, you've got it, and thankfully our officers, what I've seen is that we have fair individuals, open minded individuals, and that's not to say that I haven't lost on something that I think I should have won, I have, but even that decision, at least that individual had an open mind. I think our [CBSA/CIC] officers by and large are open minded individuals. Again, this may be the last line of defense for a lot of these individuals because there may not be an appeal to the ID anymore because the atrociously entitled Fast Removal of Foreign Criminals Act has amended the IRPA, so permanent residents that have been sentenced to more than six months, including conditional sentences, don't have an appeal to the IAD anymore. Whatever they've got, they've got to address that Section 44 report, that procedural fairness process, maybe Federal Court, maybe a TRP, maybe an H&C, a humanitarian and compassion application, but without that IAD backup, options are limited. Mark Holthe: That's really interesting because like I said, from my perspective, someone who does not do a lot of that type of work, very little in fact, I see walls, absolute walls sometimes for people that I can't see past, whereas individuals such as yourself who have a little bit of a broader perspective, and have actually gone and looked behind the wall have realized that sometimes there's ways through. The message that I got, especially, and just to clarify for the listeners, Raj and I are just meeting at the Canadian Bar Association Office here in Calgary after Raj gave a presentation [to the CBA Immigration Subsection] on this similar topic. One of the messages that came through loud and clear is that maybe people give up too easy, especially counsel, us. I put us under the bus in many circumstances because sometimes we're just too willing to roll over. We need to take a serious look at what the possibilities, are and not be afraid to question and challenge an allegation that's being made against our clients. Even in circumstances where based on a clear reading of the law there's a certain outcome that's supposed to flow doesn't necessarily mean there isn't discretion to go around that and that there isn't some compassion laced into the system. Raj Sharma: I learned this relatively recently. I went to visit my eighty-five, ninety years old grandmother in Edmonton. I didn't learn until much later -- my grandfather died, so my grandmother came over with my youngest uncle to Canada to her children here. None of us kids actually knew that our uncle was actually her sister's son. Her sister had died, so she had taken my uncle in. I guess his dad wasn't interested in caring for him, so I learned this later that Uncle is not actually our uncle, he's actually my mom's cousin. …I knew that there was some immigration issues that he was going through early on when he came, so my grandmother explained it to me, because there was no adoption papers and because my grandmother I think is incapable of lying, she's very straight out that we have no adoption papers, but he has nowhere else to be other than with me. They battled for like three or four years to try and get my uncle to be here. Ultimately CIC indicated, "Well, he can't be here, there's no adoption papers, we have no consent from his guardian, or his biological father, or whatever the case may be." We're from this small mining town in BC and the family was helped by an immigration lawyer out of Vancouver. Ultimately my uncle got what was then called a minister's permit, which is now we call a TRP, a temporary resident permit. When I learned that I was, "Well, I guess that's what I do." So I [do] think people minimize or perhaps don't understand the scope of discretion that's available. There are roadblocks, there's hurdles, [but] there's very few problems without an absolute solution. That being said, if you are unmitigated, incorrigible criminal, no officer's going to give you the benefit of whatever doubt there may be, but there are these avenues that can be pursued and there is a sort of system. You got to work through that system, work with the criminal lawyers, put your client in the best possible light, take advantage of any little nook, cranny, any little shaft of light, and you might be able to widen that crack a little bit for your client to step through, but yes, very few things are foregone conclusions and it's our job as counsel to put the best possible foot forward for the client. Again, in my twelve years of practicing immigration law there's very few actual incorrigible [criminals]. I said this before … that hard cases make bad law and outliers shouldn't make the world a harder place for the vast majority of people that simply want to come to Canada and give their families a better life. These outliers don't reflect the vast majority of cases that we deal with. The vast majority of cases we deal with are human fragility, human error, understandable mistakes. Mark Holthe: You mentioned this concept of a TRP, a temporary resident permit, which is now the new version of a Minister's Permit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe: In some circumstances, individuals will have appeal rights when there is criminality involved and they're facing some harsh consequences, they have appeal rights and other times they don't. You had talked a little bit about the discretion that an officer has to write that report to refer it or not. Can you maybe clarify that just a little bit for counsel who maybe have individuals that are at the stage where the consequences could be pretty nasty? Maybe there is no appeal right and you indicated that sometimes an officer does have some discretion whether or not to write it. Raj Sharma: That's right. That Section 44 report, so let's say there's a conviction in Canada. Establishing that would be pretty straightforward, pretty easy. What counsel can do is respond to a procedural fairness letter, say, "Please don't write the Section 44 report and here's why," and these are going to be [modeled on] the typical Section 25 type of application or submission, so time in Canada, establishment in Canada, those ties here, the family ties here, hardship, or adverse conditions, or challenges upon return, children that are affected by the decision, the circumstances leading to the events, any indicia of remorse, rehabilitation, insight. All those should be placed squarely before the officer and you say to the officer, "Don't write this report, please. The guy's been here for a long time, this is a singular mistake, the criminal record is limited or none other than this lapse in judgment." If the officer writes the report, its then has to be referred under Section 44 sub 2 by a Minister's Delegate. If it's referred, for a permanent resident that means it goes to the immigration division. If it's criminality or serious criminality in Canada, that's Section 44 sub 2, that becomes a removal order for a foreign national. Again, there's less options for foreign nationals here. If it's referred to the immigration division, not much you can do if it's a conviction in Canada. The ID is not going to look beyond the certificate of conviction. If it's a conviction outside of Canada or an allegation that some offense has occurred outside of Canada, that would be equivalent to serious offenses inside of Canada. Then the immigration proceeding becomes a substantive proceeding. That's when it takes on some degree of significance. You are then going to start talking about foreign legal laws, standard of proof, burden of proof, and at that point you probably should be retaining a foreign legal expert. It gets complicated really quickly at that point. After a removal order is issued, post removal order options are limited. A TRP can overcome or allow you to remain in Canada notwithstanding a removal order. An H&C can do the same. One option might be to get a TRP pending record suspension for a conviction inside Canada, for example, if there's eligibility. Mark Holthe: If an officer chooses to write the report when you've made your submissions, can you challenge that part before it gets to the immigration division? Raj Sharma: Yes, you can challenge both the writing of a Report to the Federal Court and the referral of the report to the Federal Court. You probably won't do that if the person concerned is a permanent resident and has an appeal right to the IAD, there's no sense in that, but if you don't have that appeal, you're left with these limited options, so you're going to buy some more time. By going to the Federal Court either you buy some more time, it goes back, a different officer might come to a different conclusion, or you simply might need time for record suspension. Mark Holthe: Just buying the time, interesting. Raj Sharma: Might be one because you need strategic depth, so strategic depth is usually time, more time in Canada gives you more options. Mark Holthe: Define strategic depth for those who are not following. What are you talking about when you use that terminology? Raj Sharma: Strategic depth I was thinking more in terms of war. If you've got a country like Russia and you want to invade Russia, and Napoleon and Hitler both tried that. One of the problems is that Russia has a lot of depth, so you can invade, and invade, and keep invading, and the Russians will have time to mount a response. You can contrast that with, for example, Pakistan, which is thin wasted [country] geographically speaking, there's not a lot of strategic depth there. If we were to apply that terminology to immigration in Canada, then I would say strategic depth would be time. A lot of time, we don't have time, and so give me some time, give me enough time and I can do quite a bit. You need time to marshal resources, to file Federal Court obligations, to file TRP applications, to file H&C applications, to maybe get a rehabilitation application in, so time is our strategic depth and most of the time we don't have it. Mark Holthe: Yes, that is abundantly clear within our practice. I really appreciate that overview and the insight, it was awesome. Let's talk about some practice tips maybe. If counsel finds themselves in these types of positions dealing with an issue, a potential criminal inadmissibility, what are some of the things that go through your mind right away that you'd give in terms of advice, things that people want to make sure they do every single time, or little tips or strategies? You've already indicated here that you want to try to buy as much time as you can, that's obviously really important, but are there any specific things or pieces of advice that we haven't maybe talked about yet that you'd like to share with the listeners? Raj Sharma: I think definitely take a look at the IRCC or CIC policy manuals, Enforcement Manual 5, Enforcement Manual 6, take a look at the loose leaf publication by Mario Bellissimo and Genova, Immigration and Admissibility, they've got a handbook as well. You need to get an understanding of the facts and understand the law in a relatively quick fashion. Once you understand the context that you're in, so if the context is a permanent resident, and there's an offense, and you're looking at the loss of appeal rights, and you've got a procedural fairness letter, and the sentence has been served, what I would do immediately is probably do ATIP requests, access to information requests, and I would try to get and reconstruct the client's immigration history as much as possible. That's probably the first thing I would do is do an ATIP request. I would do FOIP requests for the correctional service documents, the institution documents, and see what's been going on over there and try to get access to those parole documents, take a look at their recidivism rankings. I would probably get the sentencing transcripts right away, I would get any pre-sentence reports that were filed or that were before the sentencing judge right away. After I looked at that I would see if I could update that pre-sentence report by a qualified forensic expert and reassess recidivism. Then I would probably put together these substantive submissions. Again, relying on maybe the IRB, IAD, Removal Order Appeals publication. Having regard to the sort of H&C factors and Ribic and Chieu factors. I would put all that together and get it into that officer probably as soon as possible. That's probably what I would do and that's probably what anyone should probably do with a PR facing removal where there's been a length of sentence greater than six months. If it was less than six months, then obviously maybe I'd just keep my powder dry to some degree, I'd still put in something, but I'd probably just keep my powder dry for the IAD. Mark Holthe: It's pretty much they're going to send it that way and choose not to make a decision at that stage. Raj Sharma: I would think as an officer, this is not in the manuals at all, but ... Mark Holthe: This is what we want, Raj, yes. Raj Sharma: As an officer, and I used to be an officer, but as an officer if I saw that a PR had a right of appeal, then really I would probably give short shrift to any sort of request for exercising my discretion at the 44 stage. I'd be like, "Look, let me just do my job, let me write this 44 report, and refer it, and let them make whatever submissions he needs to the IAD." I think the relationship to discretion and the loss of appeal rights is inverse, so if there's an appeal right, then I would narrow my own discretion. Then if there's no appeal rights, then I would probably take and expand my scope of discretion within, of course, the ambit of the law. Mark Holthe: That's awesome and it makes perfect sense. Officers, despite how some people feel, are human beings. When they feel like someone is trying to screw the system over, they're probably not going to give you a lot of help, but if they feel people are genuine and they've made a mistake, and there's a whole host of ... Raj Sharma: The system, maybe the system has been narrowed against, for example, any further request for relief. I think that they'll substantively consider. Mark Holthe: That's awesome. I really appreciate everything that you've shared here. Raj Sharma: Any time. Mark Holthe: This is fantastic. Now, as always when I have guests on, people are going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Hey, I've got a friend," or, "I know someone who's in this exact situation," and their counsel that they have right now is telling them that they might as well start singing 'Happy Trails,' and packing their bags, and they're saying to themselves, "There must be something else that I can do." They're going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Raj Sharma, how do I get a hold of this guy?" How do people track you down? What's the best way of getting in contact with you and engaging your services? Raj Sharma: For sure, Mark. Anyone can email us at info@sshlaw.ca, that's info@sshlaw.ca, number is 403-705-3398. I think we have a toll free number, but I'm not sure what it is. Mark Holthe: You can go to the website, right, too. Raj Sharma: Yes, you can definitely reach us and we'd be happy to help. It's something that we've developed for the last seven, eight years or so. Mark Holthe: Awesome, thanks a lot. I appreciate your time. Take care. Raj Sharma: Thanks a lot, Mark.

CanadianImmigrationPodcast.com Mark Holthe: I'm here with my good friend and colleague, Raj Sharma. Raj, thanks for joining me. Raj Sharma: My pleasure. Mark Holthe: We're testing this out with our digital recorder here. I usually do these interviews via Skype call, but I've got high hopes that the audio is going to be great regardless. Thanks for putting up with me, Raj, and happy to have you with us. Today, Raj has agreed to come in and talk a little bit about criminal inadmissibility and some of the consequences that can flow when people get themselves into trouble here in Canada, but before we get into that I want to take a moment to share a little bit of background on Raj, and where he's come from professionally, and where he's at. Raj Sharma's a lawyer and founding partner of Stewart Sharma Harsanyi, one of Western Canada's largest dedicated immigration law firms. He received his masters of law from Osgoode Hall and is a former refugee protection officer with the Immigration and Refugee Board. Now, I'll get to the question of how you got into immigration and I'm going to go out on a limb and think that that probably influenced it a little bit. Raj Sharma: That's right. Mark Holthe:  With over a hundred reported decisions, Raj has indicated to me, he frequently appears before all divisions, as well as the Federal Court, the court of appeal, and has also appeared before every level of court in Alberta. Raj regularly speaks on immigration matters in the media, and he's been a panelist and speaker at the CBA National Immigration Conference in 2014 and '15. He also writes a lot on immigration, multiculturalism, and diversity. Recently he was the recipient of the Legal Aid of Alberta's Access to Justice award and has been recognized as well as one of Calgary's Top 40 Under 40. Raj is an extremely accomplished individual and I know that he won't plug himself, so I'll do that for him, but whenever I have a difficult case with respect to enforcement, or appeal work, or anything like that I send it to him and his firm. Once again, thanks for joining, Raj. Raj Sharma:  Thanks, Mark. I'm East Indian, or as I like to describe ourselves as brown, so no matter how accomplished I am, obviously given that I'm not a doctor I'm probably a disappointment to my parents. Mark Holthe: Well, we'll have to get your parents on to come back and I'm almost positive with everything that you've done, at least within our industry and how you've distinguished yourself, that there wouldn't be a parent on this planet that wouldn't be proud of you. Enough of the feel good stuff, fill us in. How did you get into immigration? Raj Sharma: I never intended to get into immigration law. I did my JD at the University of Alberta. While I was there, I didn't take any immigration courses, immigration just wasn't even on my radar. I summered at a large law firm here in Calgary, Burnet, Duckworth & Palmer. I didn't like the large law firm milieu so to speak. Then I spent some time with Dennis Edney, who's now the lawyer for Omar Khadr. Then I also clerked up the Alberta Court of Appeal and ended up doing my articles with the federal department of justice. I think I had at that point an understanding that I would be somewhat closer to a barrister or a litigator than I would be in terms a solicitor. There was one case that I handled and my mentor at that time at the federal Department of Justice was Glennys Bembridge, who is now a Federal Court justice with a different last name, but there was one case and it involved a family, they're doctors, and their son had autism. I was the articling student, so I had to put together the affidavit and supporting the officer's finding of medical inadmissibility. I found that really, really interesting, but I kept saying to my mentor at that why can't we just consent on this file, the family's really deserving, and ultimately I think that the family did get relief. After that, I'd met my wife at Winnipeg at a wedding ... Mark Holthe:  I'm going to jump in. Raj Sharma:  Yes. Mark Holthe: You said, "Why can't we just consent to this?" What was his response? Raj Sharma: It was a strange response. The response was just like, "Oh, we just have to ..." Mark Holthe: Carry it through. Raj Sharma: It was more like it was like, "Oh, the client instructions ..." I'm like, "What client? We're the government." I was explained that different departments are actually clients of the department of justice. I found that very odd because I don't think that's true. I think that a client/solicitor relationship doesn't encapsulate departments of government being clients of each other. I found that odd. In any way, I'd met my wife in Winnipeg at a wedding, my cousin's wedding. She was in Calgary, born and raised in Calgary, so I needed a way to get to Calgary somehow, so I was applying for jobs in Calgary and I got this called up to do this test or examination at the Immigration Refugee Board. I was offered this position to become a refugee protection officer. That's where in fact I met my partner, Bjorn Harsanyi, so we both started off as refugee protection officers, hearings officers in 2002. Mark Holthe:  Obviously that makes a pretty nice background for sliding over to the other side. It gives you an opportunity at least having worked on the other side to get a better understanding of how the government operates, how the department operates, a little bit more inside to the minds of what goes through a decision maker on that side. I have to assume that that helped you as you moved over to the other side with your advocacy on behalf of clients. Raj Sharma:  I think so and I think that, and again there's this tradition of this entrepreneurial tradition within my community, and of course my second and third languages also helped, there was a burgeoning South Asian community in Calgary at that time. Really, it was timing, and so Calgary's just really good to me. I'd moved to Calgary at about the right time and I went into private practice at about the right time, right before Calgary took off, so to speak. 2004 I started my practice, late 2004 I started my practice. At that time, just trying to take whatever you can get, so again, I wasn't really centered in immigration. Then there was this legal aid file, this three hour legal aid file for criminal inadmissibility. It involved a foreign national in Canada accused or there was an allegation of weapons, and gun smuggling, and weapons trafficking. At that point I thought, "Well, this is a foregone conclusion." I looked at the IRPA and I said, "Well, this is just, there's no way out here," but my partner at that time pushed me a little bit and so I looked at it, I looked at it again. I put in far more hours than the three hours allotted to me, and low and behold I was able to succeed. I think that was the first time that I was in the media, that was the first time I was on TV or the newspapers, at least when it came to my legal practice. It was after that that my practice in immigration took off because it was after that that I joined Caron & Partners and then again after I left Caron & Partners there was another Vietnamese fellow, [another] fork in the road. There was another Vietnamese client, Jackie Tran, and that file I took on in 2009. Both of these cases probably had something to do with the direction of my practice. Mark Holthe:  Yeah, that makes perfect sense because I think for most of us business immigration lawyers, I guess that's how I classify myself, when there's a sticky situation I get uncomfortable pretty quick. I have a tendency to try to take the path of easiest and least resistance with my clients. If there's push back from the government, I tend to try and say, "Do we need to refile? Do we need to rethink our strategy?" Sometimes it's faster to just accept the stupid decision that you get from an officer and then just try to satisfy whatever they want, and refile, and get it approved, but there's a number of situations where people get themselves into a corner where they really don't have a nice, easy solution other than taking the government on. Raj Sharma:   I think .. it depends on what you're facing. Now, in your case you have to solve a sort of business problem. Prior to 2009, before Tran, I was actually doing hundreds of LMIA's, or LMO's that they were called at the time, so I was representing major corporations, I was getting fat, I was just doing pure solicitor work, and I think again timing came to my rescue because once I got into the Tran file, which necessitated three different Federal Court applications, [emergency] stay application, IAD, ID, and right about that same time the economy in Calgary sort of collapsed, so to speak. If you're a one trick pony, that is you're only doing one aspect of immigration, you could be susceptible to that sort of change. I was very lucky in the sense of I did quite a bit of solicitor business work, but given that strong litigation year we were able to just basically switch our practices over to a litigation aspect. In business [immigration], you're tasked with making sure that the business runs smoothly. Where it's an individual facing loss of status, it's a zero sum game. In business there may be not, it's not a zero sum game, but in someone facing removal or deportation to a country that they haven't been in since they were a kid, it's a zero sum game which is you win or you lose, so at that point you start bringing out all the arrows in your quiver and you're doing whatever you can for your client because it is, for them to some degree, it's life or death in the sense of it's a death of a relationship, it's a death of your relationship to Canada, and it's a death of your status in this country. Mark Holthe:  Let's shift to the topic at hand. I think a lot of our listeners, this isn't something that they're very familiar with because I think genuinely people try to avoid committing crimes in Canada and getting themselves removed. Raj Sharma:    Right, and we know for a fact that immigrants or first generation Canadians have a lower crime rate than native born Canadians, so you're absolutely right. Most of your listeners and our clients, most of them, the vast majority enjoy a lower criminal rate or criminality than Canadians would. Mark Holthe:  Yes, absolutely. As those that are listening in here, as I introduced when I started the podcast here, the interview with Raj Sharma, I indicated that we're going to be talking a little bit about criminal inadmissibility, so Raj, can you give us a little bit of an introduction? When we talk about criminal inadmissibility, how does that play into this world of immigration? Raj Sharma:  Immigration is about, and notwithstanding whatever we hear these days from Donald Trump or Hilary Clinton, there are no such thing as truly open borders. A country will always dictate who enters and who remains, so there was a case that went to the supreme court of Canada involving a woman actually -- most of the cases I deal with actually do involve men -- but Medovarski involved a woman and Medovarski reaffirmed that concept that non-citizens do not have an unqualified right to enter or remain inside of Canada. When we look at criminality, the threshold for removing non-citizens from Canada is spelled out in intricate detail in the Immigration Refugee Protection Act and there is a bifurcation, i.e., it's somewhat harder to remove permanent residents from Canada and quite a bit easier to remove foreign nationals from Canada. When we talk about foreign nationals, we're talking about students and those here on work permits or those that are visitors in Canada. When we talk about permanent residence, obviously those are individuals that have applied for permanent residency, they're not citizens yet, and so we have a paradigm, a very detailed framework that deals with non-citizens that get in trouble with the law. Mark Holthe:  When we talk about getting in trouble with the law, does the Immigration Act or the government, do they view certain crimes more seriously than others? How is that distinction set up? Raj Sharma: No, and maybe they should. That would have been a proper starting point. Maybe you should have been involved in this sort of legislation of these laws, but unfortunately the distinction of the severity of a crime is based on the maximum term of imprisonment or the actual incarceral or term that's imposed. When we talk about prison or incarceral term, we're including conditional sentences or sentences to be served in the community, so the distinction is not between the type of offense, someone that's convicted of a white collar offense such as fraud could face removal just as easily or perhaps more easily than someone accused or charged with simple assault. Mark Holthe: Even if an offense, let's say it's a hybrid offense, so it could proceed summarily or via indictment, the person that is sentenced to ten years imprisonment for that offense versus someone that's sentenced to six months under the eyes of the lovely immigration authorities, it's irrelevant. Raj Sharma: That's right, and it also doesn't take into account your length of time in Canada, so you could be a permanent resident and you could be here since you were two or three, and you could be [here] thirty years, and you could have an issue. Of course, this is the fragility of the human condition, we all make mistakes, so it doesn't take into account the length of time that you're in Canada…, nor does it take into account the nature of the offense, whether it's violent or whether it's non-violent. It's a blunt instrument unfortunately, Section 36 in particularly. Mark Holthe: If you have an individual that's committed a crime in Canada it's pretty clear we know what the offense is, we know what the conviction was, there's not a lot of debate about it, but what happens if someone wants to enter Canada or comes to Canada and has a conviction that occurred over seas or in another country, how does Canada treat those? Raj Sharma:  Those things get complicated really quickly because different countries have different legal systems and different countries have different standards in terms of the ... You could have a situation [if] you're from China. Now, China has a 99.9% conviction rate. Mark Holthe:  Wow, maybe I won't ask too many questions as to how that justice system plays out for those people accused, but ... Raj Sharma:  I mean, so when we start making equivalent, or making offenses, or acts that individuals have done outside of Canada, and we have to somehow try and make them equivalent to offenses in Canada, those things get tricky really, really quickly. That's one subset of what we do.[But] I just keep getting reminded, even this morning, had a client applied on the Alberta Immigrant Nominee Program, skilled individual, excellent English, everything's fantastic, no criminal record whatsoever, applied on the ANP, got the nomination, applied for the PR forms to [CPC] Sydney. We got the passport request two days ago, three days ago, problem. Last week after a birthday party or someone's party, one in the morning, [he’s] charged with impaired driving. Those are the sort of simple, understandable criminality because I think some politicians paint criminals as this broad brush, but criminals are no different than [you or I], it's just there's one incorrect decision. I think impaired driving is like that, this is impaired driving, could result in no jail time whatsoever, probably will result in a fine if he ever gets convicted, and a driving suspension. Won't spend a day in jail, but that's a hybrid offense and that [a conviction] makes him [as a foreign national] inadmissible. That's where I feel a lot of sympathy because you're seeing literally in front of you the end of a dream and you're seeing a person that for all other purposes would be an ideal addition to Canada's multicultural fabric. It's not really the media, it's not my cases that hit the news or the front pages that really give a proper idea of my practice. It really is those guys that are within an inch of permanent residency and we wouldn't consider them to be criminals, but of course they've made a grievous and horrendous error by drinking and getting behind the wheel of a car. Mark Holthe:   Let's carry that through, I think that would be interesting. An individual who is in that type of a situation, this happens to them. What can they expect? Raj Sharma:  Number one, if they come to me my first response to them, and there may be some sort of false hope, or some sort of strange fever dream that they're existing under, or they may get some sort of strange advice from someone, or a friend, or a cousin, and there may be a suggestion as to just somehow let it ride out and CIC may not figure this out. My first advice to them is that if they want my assistance, that we will be disclosing the charge and the encounter with the police immediately. That's the first thing that should happen and once they agree to these sort of terms, then we can start figuring out a solution. Now, the solution of course, and I kind of outlined that earlier today in my speech here, which is now start looking into conviction options or post conviction options. These conviction options, number one, beat out the charge in trial, because the system is binary, because it's a zero sum game, we can't now ... I think criminal lawyers and immigration lawyers that dabble in criminal law, there's no options now. You actually have to go and try to beat this out, you got to find, even if your client is factually guilty, you got to find a way to make him legally not guilty because if he's not guilty, that doesn't lead to any criminal consequences. If it's an offense, a domestic violence type of situation, and a peace bond is in the offering, take a peace bond. A peace bond doesn't have any criminal consequences either. There may be possibilities for some offenses for absolute or conditional discharges, take it, take it. That bird in the hand, we can safeguard that immigration at that point. In terms of a DUI, we're really looking to these curative discharges now and that's one option as well. Mark Holthe:  Maybe you can explain what that is. What is a curative discharge? Raj Sharma: Curative discharge involves a process by which there is a guilt or there is factual guilt and there's again…. A curative discharge we've used where there's indication of alcoholism [as a] medical condition. If we can establish that, then the judge may see fit to grant a curative discharge. If that happens, then there is no criminal record that could waylay an immigration application or application for permanent residence. That's not to say, by the way, that that won't lead to other issues, i.e., you may still need a waiver to get into the US, but the curative discharge is something that we explore for impaired driving, and conditional, and absolute where ever possible [for other offences]. Now, bear in mind there's a whole host of offenses that result in mandatory minimum sentences and so we can't do any number of these things for those types of offenses, but those are some of the arrows in our quiver in terms of post conviction. Where ever possible, if you are facing a charge, either you're a permanent resident or a foreign national, try to get immigration lawyer involved alongside your criminal lawyer. There may be options to get positive sentencing remarks or positive remarks that are spoken into the record. Those transcripts can come in handy. If you are convicted, if you are sentenced, it's important that the client demonstrate remorse, and rehabilitation, engage in programming, and try to turn that life around. If we can demonstrate that, there are some options, which is that that initiating document to establish criminal inadmissibility, the Section 44 report, there is a scope for the officer not to write that report. Again, when I started down this journey I didn't realize the scope of discretion that's in the act. There is significant discretion. An officer may choose not to write a report against a permanent resident or foreign national and that may be the first, and maybe the last, real line of defense for a lot of these individuals. We've seen that happen, we've seen permanent residents, I've represented permanent residents, young guys, a technical armed robbery, four years plus sentence ... Mark Holthe: A technical armed robbery. Raj Sharma: A technical armed robbery... Mark Holthe:  I love this terminology, technical versus a real, is there any distinction there? Raj Sharma:  Let me tell you and you tell me whether that terminology or that splitting of hairs is appropriate. A guy got fired from a job at a liquor store, was angry, young guy, and decides to rob the liquor store as some sort of payback, buys a gun that is not operational, just this old, rusted out gun. There's no bullets in it, it's inoperable. Goes into the store, people see the gun, so they flee, so he goes to the cashier, he tries to open the cash box, is unable to do so, and runs out without stealing anything. Misfortune added to his idiocy, there's an off duty police officer who immediately arrests him outside the liquor store, so this guy goes through this process and his criminal lawyer after wasting tens of thousands of dollars of his money, pleads him guilty to an offense that includes a mandatory minimum sentence. At that point, and I met the judge actually afterwards and the judge said, "Hey, I wonder why that lawyer did that because if the lawyer challenged that on a charter ground of cruel and unusual punishment, that that mandatory minimum sentence in this case offends the Charter, I would have granted it to him." This lawyer tells this guy and his family, "That's it, game over, you will be deported," but of course that's not actually the end of it. [So] I do stand by my characterization of that as a technical armed robbery because this guy, he's more of an idiot than he was a criminal. This family went through a lot, this family, his sister in fact, who lived with was married, [her] husband had some mental issues, and she was attacked actually. The police attended and in fact that man was actually brought down by the CPS, so the family went through a lot. We put all this together, put the sentencing transcripts in, the judge, they got a really compassionate judge who said a lot of things into that record. [The client] was out on bail for four years, and upgraded himself, and it really was an ill advised decision. Ultimately, we had an understanding officer. She ended up interviewing him over the telephone, I think, at the Remand institution, and [she ultimately] decided not to write the report. Mark Holthe:   I guess that's the beauty of this is the discretion that's laced into the immigration process. Raj Sharma:    They won't lightly do it, but if you've got the goods .. it can be done. We had another case, we had another individual originally from Hong Kong, came over as a kid, got into some gambling issues, and then got into selling drugs to pay off some of those debts. Served his time, was a model prisoner, and his entire family was here, we set out everything. In this case we asked the Report not to be written, it was written. We challenged the Report at the Federal Court, we received approval or leave on one, it went back, and ultimately a Minister’s Delegate decided to issue a warning letter. That's drug trafficking [involving a “hard” drug] and that was again significant, so these things can be done for the right individual. You will have people that have turned their lives around and you can see, you can tell. There's no faking this because it's a year's long journey. If you've got it, you've got it, and thankfully our officers, what I've seen is that we have fair individuals, open minded individuals, and that's not to say that I haven't lost on something that I think I should have won, I have, but even that decision, at least that individual had an open mind. I think our [CBSA/CIC] officers by and large are open minded individuals. Again, this may be the last line of defense for a lot of these individuals because there may not be an appeal to the ID anymore because the atrociously entitled Fast Removal of Foreign Criminals Act has amended the IRPA, so permanent residents that have been sentenced to more than six months, including conditional sentences, don't have an appeal to the IAD anymore. Whatever they've got, they've got to address that Section 44 report, that procedural fairness process, maybe Federal Court, maybe a TRP, maybe an H&C, a humanitarian and compassion application, but without that IAD backup, options are limited. Mark Holthe:   That's really interesting because like I said, from my perspective, someone who does not do a lot of that type of work, very little in fact, I see walls, absolute walls sometimes for people that I can't see past, whereas individuals such as yourself who have a little bit of a broader perspective, and have actually gone and looked behind the wall have realized that sometimes there's ways through. The message that I got, especially, and just to clarify for the listeners, Raj and I are just meeting at the Canadian Bar Association Office here in Calgary after Raj gave a presentation [to the CBA Immigration Subsection] on this similar topic. One of the messages that came through loud and clear is that maybe people give up too easy, especially counsel, us. I put us under the bus in many circumstances because sometimes we're just too willing to roll over. We need to take a serious look at what the possibilities, are and not be afraid to question and challenge an allegation that's being made against our clients. Even in circumstances where based on a clear reading of the law there's a certain outcome that's supposed to flow doesn't necessarily mean there isn't discretion to go around that and that there isn't some compassion laced into the system. Raj Sharma:  I learned this relatively recently. I went to visit my eighty-five, ninety years old grandmother in Edmonton. I didn't learn until much later -- my grandfather died, so my grandmother came over with my youngest uncle to Canada to her children here. None of us kids actually knew that our uncle was actually her sister's son. Her sister had died, so she had taken my uncle in. I guess his dad wasn't interested in caring for him, so I learned this later that Uncle is not actually our uncle, he's actually my mom's cousin. …I knew that there was some immigration issues that he was going through early on when he came, so my grandmother explained it to me, because there was no adoption papers and because my grandmother I think is incapable of lying, she's very straight out that we have no adoption papers, but he has nowhere else to be other than with me. They battled for like three or four years to try and get my uncle to be here. Ultimately CIC indicated, "Well, he can't be here, there's no adoption papers, we have no consent from his guardian, or his biological father, or whatever the case may be." We're from this small mining town in BC and the family was helped by an immigration lawyer out of Vancouver. Ultimately my uncle got what was then called a minister's permit, which is now we call a TRP, a temporary resident permit. When I learned that I was, "Well, I guess that's what I do." So I [do] think people minimize or perhaps don't understand the scope of discretion that's available. There are roadblocks, there's hurdles, [but] there's very few problems without an absolute solution. That being said, if you are unmitigated, incorrigible criminal, no officer's going to give you the benefit of whatever doubt there may be, but there are these avenues that can be pursued and there is a sort of system. You got to work through that system, work with the criminal lawyers, put your client in the best possible light, take advantage of any little nook, cranny, any little shaft of light, and you might be able to widen that crack a little bit for your client to step through, but yes, very few things are foregone conclusions and it's our job as counsel to put the best possible foot forward for the client. Again, in my twelve years of practicing immigration law there's very few actual incorrigible [criminals]. I said this before … that hard cases make bad law and outliers shouldn't make the world a harder place for the vast majority of people that simply want to come to Canada and give their families a better life. These outliers don't reflect the vast majority of cases that we deal with. The vast majority of cases we deal with are human fragility, human error, understandable mistakes. Mark Holthe:   You mentioned this concept of a TRP, a temporary resident permit, which is now the new version of a Minister’s Permit. Raj Sharma:    That's right. Mark Holthe:    In some circumstances, individuals will have appeal rights when there is criminality involved and they're facing some harsh consequences, they have appeal rights and other times they don't. You had talked a little bit about the discretion that an officer has to write that report to refer it or not. Can you maybe clarify that just a little bit for counsel who maybe have individuals that are at the stage where the consequences could be pretty nasty? Maybe there is no appeal right and you indicated that sometimes an officer does have some discretion whether or not to write it. Raj Sharma:    That's right. That Section 44 report, so let's say there's a conviction in Canada. Establishing that would be pretty straightforward, pretty easy. What counsel can do is respond to a procedural fairness letter, say, "Please don't write the Section 44 report and here's why," and these are going to be [modeled on] the typical Section 25 type of application or submission, so time in Canada, establishment in Canada, those ties here, the family ties here, hardship, or adverse conditions, or challenges upon return, children that are affected by the decision, the circumstances leading to the events, any indicia of remorse, rehabilitation, insight. All those should be placed squarely before the officer and you say to the officer, "Don't write this report, please. The guy's been here for a long time, this is a singular mistake, the criminal record is limited or none other than this lapse in judgment." If the officer writes the report, its then has to be referred under Section 44 sub 2 by a Minister’s Delegate. If it's referred, for a permanent resident that means it goes to the immigration division. If it's criminality or serious criminality in Canada, that's Section 44 sub 2, that becomes a removal order for a foreign national. Again, there's less options for foreign nationals here. If it's referred to the immigration division, not much you can do if it's a conviction in Canada. The ID is not going to look beyond the certificate of conviction. If it's a conviction outside of Canada or an allegation that some offense has occurred outside of Canada, that would be equivalent to serious offenses inside of Canada. Then the immigration proceeding becomes a substantive proceeding. That's when it takes on some degree of significance. You are then going to start talking about foreign legal laws, standard of proof, burden of proof, and at that point you probably should be retaining a foreign legal expert. It gets complicated really quickly at that point. After a removal order is issued, post removal order options are limited. A TRP can overcome or allow you to remain in Canada notwithstanding a removal order. An H&C can do the same. One option might be to get a TRP pending record suspension for a conviction inside Canada, for example, if there's eligibility. Mark Holthe:  If an officer chooses to write the report when you've made your submissions, can you challenge that part before it gets to the immigration division? Raj Sharma:   Yes, you can challenge both the writing of a Report to the Federal Court and the referral of the report to the Federal Court. You probably won't do that if the person concerned is a permanent resident and has an appeal right to the IAD, there's no sense in that, but if you don't have that appeal, you're left with these limited options, so you're going to buy some more time. By going to the Federal Court either you buy some more time, it goes back, a different officer might come to a different conclusion, or you simply might need time for record suspension. Mark Holthe:    Just buying the time, interesting. Raj Sharma:    Might be one because you need strategic depth, so strategic depth is usually time, more time in Canada gives you more options. Mark Holthe:    Define strategic depth for those who are not following. What are you talking about when you use that terminology? Raj Sharma:  Strategic depth I was thinking more in terms of war. If you've got a country like Russia and you want to invade Russia, and Napoleon and Hitler both tried that. One of the problems is that Russia has a lot of depth, so you can invade, and invade, and keep invading, and the Russians will have time to mount a response. You can contrast that with, for example, Pakistan, which is thin wasted [country] geographically speaking, there's not a lot of strategic depth there. If we were to apply that terminology to immigration in Canada, then I would say strategic depth would be time. A lot of time, we don't have time, and so give me some time, give me enough time and I can do quite a bit. You need time to marshal resources, to file Federal Court obligations, to file TRP applications, to file H&C applications, to maybe get a rehabilitation application in, so time is our strategic depth and most of the time we don't have it. Mark Holthe:     Yes, that is abundantly clear within our practice. I really appreciate that overview and the insight, it was awesome. Let's talk about some practice tips maybe. If counsel finds themselves in these types of positions dealing with an issue, a potential criminal inadmissibility, what are some of the things that go through your mind right away that you'd give in terms of advice, things that people want to make sure they do every single time, or little tips or strategies? You've already indicated here that you want to try to buy as much time as you can, that's obviously really important, but are there any specific things or pieces of advice that we haven't maybe talked about yet that you'd like to share with the listeners? Raj Sharma:    I think definitely take a look at the IRCC or CIC policy manuals, Enforcement Manual 5, Enforcement Manual 6, take a look at the loose leaf publication by Mario Bellissimo and Genova, Immigration and Admissibility, they've got a handbook as well. You need to get an understanding of the facts and understand the law in a relatively quick fashion. Once you understand the context that you're in, so if the context is a permanent resident, and there's an offense, and you're looking at the loss of appeal rights, and you've got a procedural fairness letter, and the sentence has been served, what I would do immediately is probably do ATIP requests, access to information requests, and I would try to get and reconstruct the client's immigration history as much as possible. That's probably the first thing I would do is do an ATIP request. I would do FOIP requests for the correctional service documents, the institution documents, and see what's been going on over there and try to get access to those parole documents, take a look at their recidivism rankings. I would probably get the sentencing transcripts right away, I would get any pre-sentence reports that were filed or that were before the sentencing judge right away. After I looked at that I would see if I could update that pre-sentence report by a qualified forensic expert and reassess recidivism. Then I would probably put together these substantive submissions. Again, relying on maybe the IRB, IAD, Removal Order Appeals publication. Having regard to the sort of H&C factors and Ribic and Chieu factors. I would put all that together and get it into that officer probably as soon as possible.  That's probably what I would do and that's probably what anyone should probably do with a PR facing removal where there's been a length of sentence greater than six months. If it was less than six months, then obviously maybe I'd just keep my powder dry to some degree, I'd still put in something, but I'd probably just keep my powder dry for the IAD. Mark Holthe:  It's pretty much they're going to send it that way and choose not to make a decision at that stage. Raj Sharma:   I would think as an officer, this is not in the manuals at all, but ... Mark Holthe:  This is what we want, Raj, yes. Raj Sharma:     As an officer, and I used to be an officer, but as an officer if I saw that a PR had a right of appeal, then really I would probably give short shrift to any sort of request for exercising my discretion at the 44 stage. I'd be like, "Look, let me just do my job, let me write this 44 report, and refer it, and let them make whatever submissions he needs to the IAD." I think the relationship to discretion and the loss of appeal rights is inverse, so if there's an appeal right, then I would narrow my own discretion. Then if there's no appeal rights, then I would probably take and expand my scope of discretion within, of course, the ambit of the law. Mark Holthe: That's awesome and it makes perfect sense. Officers, despite how some people feel, are human beings. When they feel like someone is trying to screw the system over, they're probably not going to give you a lot of help, but if they feel people are genuine and they've made a mistake, and there's a whole host of ... Raj Sharma:  The system, maybe the system has been narrowed against, for example, any further request for relief. I think that they'll substantively consider. Mark Holthe:  That's awesome. I really appreciate everything that you've shared here. Raj Sharma:  Any time. Mark Holthe: This is fantastic. Now, as always when I have guests on, people are going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Hey, I've got a friend," or, "I know someone who's in this exact situation," and their counsel that they have right now is telling them that they might as well start singing 'Happy Trails,' and packing their bags, and they're saying to themselves, "There must be something else that I can do." They're going to listen to this and they're going to say, "Raj Sharma, how do I get a hold of this guy?" How do people track you down? What's the best way of getting in contact with you and engaging your services? Raj Sharma:   For sure, Mark. Anyone can email us at info@sshlaw.ca, that's info@sshlaw.ca, number is 403-705-3398. I think we have a toll free number, but I'm not sure what it is. Mark Holthe:  You can go to the website, right, too. Raj Sharma:  Yes, you can definitely reach us and we'd be happy to help. It's something that we've developed for the last seven, eight years or so. Mark Holthe:   Awesome, thanks a lot. I appreciate your time. Take care. Raj Sharma:    Thanks a lot, Mark.  

Calgary Council is drafting new rules that could see all FOIP requests end in a data dump online. Michael Platt with the Calgary Sun has written about it and joins Rob on air to chat, you can read his column here: http://www.calgarysun.com/2016/09/27/city-councils-policy-of-open-information-serves-to-muzzle-media?token=d7c8a9c441af8996a6646e6f90f4befc  

Councillor Diane Colley Urquhart joins Rob to chat about her perspective of why FOIP requests need to be looked at. Rob also asks her about a poll that showed dismal approval for Calgary police. 

In this FREE 30-minute Practice Management Nugget Webinar with Dustin Rivers you will get a behind-the-scenes peak at the upcoming 2016 Saskatchewan Connections conference. http://informationmanagers.ca/Connections The Connections events are each regionally based conferences designed for Access, Privacy, Security and Information / Records Management professionals working for public agencies. Through a series of plenary, breakout and workshop sessions, delegates will gain a clearer understanding of access to information, protection of privacy, information security, and records management issues that arise in organizations subject to FOIP, LAFOIP, and HIPA. More importantly, discussion focuses on the connections between these disciplines. 25+ sessions and 35+ speakers over 2 daysRegina SK May 10-11, 2016 Learn how you can 7x your professional education starting with listening to this interview with Dustin Rivers, Executive Director, Verney Conference Management right now! Register for 2016 Saskatchewan Connections #SK_Connections @SK_Connections http://skconnections.ca Brought to you by your Practical Privacy Coach and Practice Management Mentor http://www.informationmanagers.ca

If you’re serious about practical learning in privacy, access and security and want to join speakers, delegates and thought leaders with shared interests on privacy that you can apply in your own environment right away make sure to check out this exciting interview with Sharon Polsky right now! Privacy and Access Council of Canada offers a congress where delegates have a realistic opportunity to attend the sessions of interest. Plenaries and breakout sessions are longer than usual , and formal remarks are shorter, leaving time for speakers and delegates to engage in genuine conversation. And we ask speakers to offer practical guidance borne of their experience (not just theoretical advice or historical reviews) that delegates can put to work in their own organizations. Learn, share and network at the 2016 National Privacy & Data Governance Congress. Join industry experts, risk management professionals, thought leaders and regulatory authorities to explore critical connections between privacy, access, security and compliance. Join speakers, delegates and thought leaders with shared interests in privacy, access and security.Colleagues from public and private institutions, federal, provincial and territorial governments, industry, academia and regulatory authorities will meet in a relaxed setting to enjoy workshop, breakout, keynote and plenary sessions. Congress 2016 takes a refreshingly practical approach. Breakout sessions are longer than at most conferences, but formal presentations are shorter. Speakers offer practical examples and case studies, but are discouraged from using PowerPoint or similar tools (or distractions). Continuing Education Credits applicable to PACC Professional Certification, and may qualify for CPD credits from other organizations as well. Who should attend the Privacy and Data Governance Congress? privacy officer security officer access and disclosure administrators compliance officer FOIP Co-ordinators human resources manager insurance agents healthcare administrators, health information management medical ethicists and genetics Sharon Polsky, MAPP Sharon Polsky is president of AMINA Corp. and a Privacy by Design Ambassador with more than 30 years’ experience advising corporations, governments and organizations about privacy and access implications and unintended consequences of emerging laws, technologies and global trends. She is also president of thePrivacy and Access Council of Canada, the nonpartisan national non‑profit association of privacy and access professionals in Canada’s private and public sectors.For more information, see: http://informationmanagers.ca/privacy-and-data-governance-congress/