Access denied

Controversial British MP George Galloway won’t be coming to Canada after all


A Federal Court judge has upheld the the Canadian Border Services Agency’s decision to bar George Galloway. The fiery British MP, who was denied entry into Canada on national security grounds earlier this month, was supposed to give a speech in Toronto Monday evening, but he’ll instead have to settle for delivering it via live video from New York City. In his ruling, Justice Luc Martineau, concluded the CBSA had not strayed from its mandate in turning Galloway back. “The admission of a foreign national to this country is a privilege determined by statute, regulation or otherwise, and not a matter of right,” Martineau wrote. “In this respect Parliament has expressly given the CBSA officers legal authority to exclusively determine whether a foreign national who seeks to enter this country is admissible.” Galloway’s supporters, however, say the ruling greases a “slippery slope” and promise to “appeal and go to the highest court if need be.”

Toronto Star

Filed under:

Access denied

  1. Excellent news! Gotta like good ol boy Canadian judges.

    • He basically said they had the authority to deny Galloway entry, nothing about whether that decision [ which isn’t made yet ] was the right one.

      • If it were up to me I would let this grandstanding, self agrandizing motormouth have his say. Really, who cares. However don’t forget, no country is under the slightest obligation to allow access to a citizen of another country. For example no Canadian citizen has a right to enter the United States. You can be as pure as the driven snow and if the paticular border agent thinks your a smart ass or simply doesn’t like the cut of your jib he can turn you away, no reason and no explanation. Tough luck!

    • I hope so. Although we mustn’t get carried away, Galloway’s no Gandhi.

      • Couldn’t agree more, kc. I’m taking an incredibly selfish view on this saga, I must admit. And actually it’s been salutary to me to realise that all posterboys for Free Speech seem to be semi-deranged. But it would be a shame to miss out on this Le Carré-style surface plot; we don’t get enough of those in Canada, I ween.

        • The world looks nuttier and nuttier everyday. A line i love from an old Alec Guiness film has a character say: “when i was young we spent all our time trying to be mad in a sane world. Now it seems i spend all my time trying to stay sane in a mad world”. Great line, unfortunately i don’t remember which film.

  2. A sad day for Canada when a sitting British mp who has not been barred from any other country, including the overly protective US and indeed even Israel, is stopped from entering our country to speak. His purported supplying of aid to the citizens of Gaza in their hour of need is to be applauded not condemned. War is hell, the suppression of free speech in Canada is but the first step towards it, those that support this decision do not respect democracy. By this measure anyone who gives humanitarian aid to citizens in a country not “approved” by our government is subject to censure.

    • Yeah, i’d like to see our govt make its case explicitly. Instead, all we get are vague accusations and childish slurs. If he’s a terrorist sympathizer, i want to see some evidence.

      • wel… it is seems rather clear that the tories are not big on evidence KC….sees Geddes batch of weekend posts on Tory policy making.

      • Agreed – while I understand the statutory right of a country to bar entry to anyone it wants, I don’t think it’s reasonable to say it can bar entry to anyone it wants for any reason, else we risk turning into the thought police and start creating our own newspeak. If there’s concrete evidence that he is a threat to security or peace, order, and good government, let’s see it, and let him stand banned.

        I must also point out I think Galloway is getting a larger audience because of this hullaballoo than if he were permitted in the country in the first place. Way to give a platform to someone you disagree with, CBSA.

  3. Is the decision itself available anywhere yet? I’m still not sure exactly what’s going on and I hope the judgment sheds some light on the process at hand.

  4. So I guess this proves that so-called enhanced border security is really just so much trumped up political propaganda then. Why don’t we just put everyone whose name is George on the no fly list? That makes as much sense as denying entry to someone who clearly isn’t a terrorist and no security risk to Canada.

    • we’ll find out if he tries to come and visit – won’t we?

  5. Why do we need him when we have Sid Ryan to agitate things?

Sign in to comment.