News
Featured Image
Air Canada airplaneShutterstock

July 27, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — Vancouver International Airport (YVR) and Toronto Pearson Airport have ended a controversial policy that segregated “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” travelers into separate lines upon entering customs.

In a statement sent to LifeSiteNews, YVR Communications Specialist Melanie Belanger-Finnz confirmed that lines based on one’s COVID-19 jab status are gone as of July 26.

“Effectively immediately, passengers entering Canada from the U.S. or another international destination will no longer be separated based on vaccination status prior to reaching Customs,” reads the YVR statement.

Toronto Pearson Airport also scrapped separate lines for “vaccinated” and “unvaccinated” travelers as of July 26, after briefly having them in place.

“Toronto Pearson, in collaboration with the government and other partners, has determined that separation of vaccinated and partially/non vaccinated travellers in customs lines results in minimal operational efficiencies,” reads a statement from the airport.

Montreal-Trudeau International Airport also said it will not separate travelers into two lines based on COVID-19 jab status. The airport said a trial run of having the two lines for a two-day period in early July did not pan out.

According to YVR, the goal of the “dual lines for vaccinated and non-/partially-vaccinated travelers entering Canada” was to “streamline the border clearance process as there are different requirements for each group,” but that the program did not achieve its “goals”

“The configuration of the two primary border control inspection lines and the volume of fully vaccinated passengers did not achieve anticipated goals for a smooth passenger flow and faster processing times. As more vaccinated passengers than expected are entering the country, we need the full use of the customs hall and assets,” said YVR. “We recognize that the travel experience now looks different and are committed to keeping our passengers informed about what to expect when travelling through YVR.”

Belanger-Finnz confirmed with LifeSiteNews that the signs in the customs hall have been “updated.”

“Vaccinated and non- or partially-vaccinated passengers will go through the same process before seeing the CBSA agents,” said Belanger-Finnz. “Since February, when leaving the Customs area into the International Reception Lounge, people will use a different exit depending on whether or not they require a COVID test.”

Since July 5, YVR split passengers into two groups before they reached the customs desks: the “vaccinated” and the “non/partially-vaccinated.”

After photos spread on social media showing signs for the “vaccinated” and “non-vaccinated” at YVR, many blasted the dual lines. One Twitter user compared the line segregation to “vaccine apartheid.”

Alyssa Smith, Manager of Communications for Vancouver Airport Authority, told LifeSiteNews last week that lines for the jabbed and non-jabbed were put in place “under direction of the Government of Canada” with the split beginning just before reaching Canada Customs.

Louis-Carl Brissette Lesage, a spokesperson with the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), told LifeSiteNews that the government “continually assesses and adjusts its operations to best manage traveller processing flow and volumes at its ports of entry.”

Each individual airport is responsible for its own queueing procedures, Lesage told LifeSiteNews, and different ports of entry will make decisions based on “infrastructure and anticipated volumes.”

Lesage added that the CBSA will “not under any circumstances” compromise the “health and safety of Canadians in order to expedite border processing.”

— Article continues below Petition —
Canada's Health Minister: Make abortion pill reversal information available
  Show Petition Text
2226 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 2500!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

Many women who choose to undergo a medical abortion procedure (Mifegymiso in Canada) change their minds having taken the first pill.

And now, a safe and effective procedure called abortion pill reversal has been developed to assist these women in an attempt to help them save their pre-born child from the effects of this first pill (Mifepristone).

Abortion advocates are currently engaged in a campaign to silence the message that Alliance for Life Ontario is providing women undergoing a medical abortion in Canada, including even calling facts “mis-information”.

Our message is that there is a safe, effective (64%-68%) method that may save their child if they have second thoughts after starting the Mifegymiso process.

That's why Alliance for Life Ontario and LifeSiteNews are now partnering on this petition: To give Canadian women a second chance at choice!

Abortion Pill Reversal is being offered around the world with 2,000 little ones saved to-date.

But, in Canada, abortion advocates do not want women to have a second chance at choice! Alliance for Life Ontario's Facebook page has been taken down after erroneous complaints, and now their website abortionpillreversal.ca is being attacked.

Women deserve to know the truth about this second chance at choice and to know there are physicians trained and willing to help them try and save their child, if that is their choice.

We need your help to let the Minister of Health know that Canadian women do not give up their right to the truth when they choose induced abortion.

Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition today! Thank you.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Abortion Pill Reversal - A Second Chance: https://abortionpillreversal.ca/

  Hide Petition Text

Last week, Canadian civil liberties lawyer James Kitchen blasted the move by YVR to segregate people based on COVID-19 jab status.

He told LifeSiteNews that YVR’s “vaccine passport” scheme, which visibly “segregate[s] travelers based on their bodily choices and health decisions,” infringes on the rights to liberty and privacy “under sections 7 and 8 of the [Canadian] Charter [of Rights and Freedoms] because [it] expose[s] and stigmatize[s] people for these deeply personal determinations.”

On August 9, the Canadian federal government will halt its controversial three-day mandatory quarantine hotel stay for all air travelers as part of a border reopening program.

On the same day, U.S. citizens who have been “fully vaccinated” at least 14 days before their trip with a COVID-19 jab approved by Health Canada will be allowed to visit. They will still have to take COVID-19 tests.

Starting September 7, Canada will also allow tourists from other countries to visit, but only those “fully vaccinated.”

All travelers entering Canada will be subject to a new border screening program that uses biometrics.

Health Canada has authorized four COVID-19 injections for adults, all of which are connected to abortion. All of them have also been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young healthy men. 

Canadian doctor Charles Hoffe of Lytton, British Columbia, recently stated that he has seen blood clotting in the majority of his patients who have had COVID-19 jabs, and has issued a “grim” opinion that the worst is yet to come, due to potential “permanent” damage caused by the injections.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.