Even so, he said, such groups had a right to be heard.

“I do not dispute there may be the so-called front organisations in [the] list of names but CBA did not solicit their participation,” he said by email, later clarifying that he was referring to United Front groups.

The ads condemned violence at the protests in Hong Kong on June 12, blaming “a small number of radicals”.

The protests were among a series of demonstrations drawing hundreds of thousands of people – organisers estimated the one on June 16 drew two million – opposed to a proposed bill that would allow extradition to China. The bill has been suspended, but many protesters want it completely withdrawn, fearing it represents a mainland Chinese incursion on Hong Kong’s autonomy.

The CBAV’s ads invoked blood loyalty among overseas Chinese, saying they were “obliged to unite with the Hong Kong residents and not to be taken advantage of by the separatist forces”.

They also opposed “the interference of any foreign forces”, calling the Hong Kong unrest “an internal affair of China”.

Fenella Sung, convenor of the Canadian Friends of Hong Kong, a group which has been broadly supportive of the protests, said the advertisements listed most of the groups that she and others suspected of carrying out United Front work in Canada, although others seemed innocuous.

China’s consulate-general in Vancouver did not respond to an emailed request for comment on the ads. But in a statement posted on its website on June 19, the consulate denied meddling in Canadian affairs by trying to influence local Chinese community groups.

“It must be pointed out that such accusations distort truth,” the statement said.

In a telephone interview, Ing said he “wouldn’t be surprised” that some groups named In the ad had been accused of United Front ties.

“There are differences of opinion [about Hong Kong], it has really divided up the community … In the Canadian democratic society [we] have to learn to respect each other’s opinions,” he said. “We don’t have to agree on the same issue … this is what’s so great about Canada.”

Asked if United Front groups deserved having their views respected and promoted in Canada, Ing said: “Everybody has an opportunity to voice their views … everybody has their views and will find a way to express their views.”

‘We are all the children of Emperor Yan’

The advertisements placed by the CBAV on June 21 provoked a sharp backlash from diaspora Chinese who supported the protesters, pushing long-standing differences over Hong Kong’s fate into the spotlight of Canada’s mainstream English-language media.

Sung said she objected to invoking racial unity to rally people against the protesters.

“Normally you wouldn’t think that could be an argument: ‘the reason why you should think like this is because of your blood’. That is really problematic, especially for second-generation Canadians here,” she said.

Canada has 1.8 million people of Chinese ancestry, making them the largest non-white ethnic group. In Vancouver, 500,000 people claim ethnic Chinese heritage, including 188,000 mainland immigrants and 72,000 from Hong Kong.

The ads say: “As ethnic Chinese and overseas Chinese people residing in Canada, we are all the children of Emperor Yan and Emperor Huang [two of China’s mythic founders], we belong to the same Chinese nation, based on the idea of blood being thicker than water, patriotism and love of our homeland, we are paying a close attention to the development of the current Hong Kong situation, we are obliged to unite with the Hong Kong residents and not to be taken advantage of by the separatist forces.”

Bill Chu of the Canadians for Reconciliation Society, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation he also took exception to the ads’ appeal to Chinese racial unity. “It’s divisive to say the least. It’s trying to shift our allegiance from one country [Canada] to another [China],” Chu told CBC’s Early Edition on June 25.

Ing said that while he expected differences about the ad within the Chinese diaspora, the CBAV had placed ads of a similar nature before, and he was now “taken aback” by the level of negative reaction.

He was also surprised that non-Chinese media had noticed. “We didn’t think [non-Chinese] Canadians were interested,” he said, adding that he was upset the CBC did not allow him on air to rebut the criticism.

The advertisement was conceived, said Ing, when the CBAV was contacted by members who were opposed to the protests and wanted to respond. Diaspora members in Vancouver who supported the Hong Kong demonstrators had already staged a protest outside the Chinese consulate-general. Attendees appeared to be mostly Hong Kong immigrants and their relatives.

“We were getting a lot of calls from our members and affiliates, saying ‘look at all these things going wrong, we need to express our view’, because initially it [the Canadian reaction to the Hong Kong protests] was all one-sided,” said Ing.

A group called HKCOSA – Hong Kong Canadians on Hong Kong Situation Association – had been one of the organisations that urged the CBAV to place the ads, he said.

Separately, HKCOSA placed an ad under its own name on the front page of Ming Pao’s Toronto edition on June 16, denouncing actions that “destroy the prosperity and stability” of Hong Kong.

The group, which has a professional-looking bilingual website, is based in a barrister’s office in the business tower of Vancouver’s Oakridge shopping centre. HKCOSA did not respond to an emailed request for an interview.

“We have ties to that group,” said Ing. “We’re not affiliated but we have participated in their events.”

Sung suggested both sets of ads might be intended to curry favour with local Chinese diplomats, or Beijing, but Ing strongly denied this.

“No. That never came to mind in our discussions,” Ing said.

Regarding the CBAV ads’ invocation of blood loyalty to China, Ing said the wording had gone through “umpteen” revisions to suit the signatories.

“To appease everybody, you have to add a bit of everything in there,” he said. “It doesn’t translate right [into English].”

He added that he was personally offended when people had questioned his loyalty to Canada as a result of the passage about race.

Ing said CBAV members and others were motivated by opposition to violence at the June 12 protests.

An engineer who was born in mainland China and lived in Hong Kong for about 10 years before moving to Canada in the 1960s, Ing said he was sceptical about level of support for the protests.

For instance, he did not believe 2 million people took part in the June 16 march. “You’re telling me more than a quarter of the people [in Hong Kong] have been marching? That can’t be, OK?” he said. “And I can tell you, a lot of people got dragged into it.”

He also raised the possibility that protesters had been paid to attend, citing social media posts shared by friends – although he did not necessarily believe it.

He showed the Post a supposed “pay schedule” in which protesters were said to have received HK$600 (US$77), with bonuses if they ended up in hospital, as well as photographs showing young people in black shirts handling HK$100 notes.

“They [the protesters] have a view to make. But on social media, people are telling me that those protesters are getting paid,” Ing said.

“I don’t believe it, but there may be some truth, so it leads me to think …‘are they or are they not paid’? I can’t say they are and I can’t say they’re not.”

A proliferation of Canadian Chinese groups

The CBAV was founded in 1895 and formally registered in 1906, in the waning years of the Qing dynasty, to serve diaspora members in the absence of Chinese government support.

It has been hailed for battling discrimination in the early 20th century and took a key role in pushing for the repeal of Canada’s anti-Chinese “head tax” in 1948.

It now counts over 140 Chinese organisations and societies as members. It is involved in cultural events, organises an annual Lunar New Year parade, and put on a Canada Day celebration on Monday.

Other groups listed on the ad as signatories, including an array of Chinese Freemason groups, have histories almost as old.

But scores of the signatory groups were formed relatively recently, part of a mushrooming of organisations claiming to represent various sectors of Canada’s Chinese community. Ing said that “this proliferation only happened in the recent years, with the immigrants from the mainland”.

He said he believed “less than 50 per cent” of signatories to the ads were such new groups. Not all CBAV members had signed the ad, said Ing, citing the short time frame to get approval, but many non-affiliated groups asked to take part.

The list appears to include at least 72 fraternal, Freemason, or Chinese region-based umbrella groups, based on their names, websites and various online presences; another 28, at least, appear to be trade or business-related groups, although there is some overlap.

Dozens of other groups proclaim a cultural focus, or cater to an array of special interests: there are groups apparently devoted to the appreciation of cinema, qipao dresses, philately, poetry, yachting, singing, dancing, ice wine and photography.

Others have no clear provenance, and their purpose is unclear.

At least 80 groups appear to be recently founded with some kind of mainland Chinese connection, reflecting the huge surge in mainland Chinese migration since about 2000.

Sung, of the Canadian Friends of Hong Kong, said the recent ad “includes most of what we know to be and that we suspect to be United Front groups”. Others, she agreed, seemed innocuous – “just normal hobby groups, or alumni associations”.

But Sung was dubious of the idea that the sheer number of groups indicated broad support for the ad among the Chinese diaspora.

“It’s very easy to form a community group,” said Sung. “You don’t even have to register. If you’re not incorporated, you can just get together [even] two or three people … and form a group.”

The use of groups with multiple sub groups was “kind of United Front tactic”, Sung said.

“If you don’t look in detail, [the] non-Chinese-speaking community would think that ‘oh you really are well represented, you have a lot of groups’ … But it’s really bluffing more than anything. They want to show they are stronger and have more people than they really have.”

As for the CBAV itself, Sung said it had once been devoted to combating discrimination against Chinese-Canadians, but she now believed it to be staunchly pro-Beijing.

This political affiliation was forged in the late 1970s, when internal dissent led pro-Taiwan members to split away and form a separate group, the Chinese Benevolent Association of Canada.

Ing said the CBAV was ultimately beholden to its members, and the recent ads were an expression of that.

“They approached us and said ‘I don’t think this [situation in Hong Kong] is right, is there something we can do, to express our views?’” he said.

“Our role is, if our members want us to speak on their behalf, then of course, we will take a look at the situation and see whether it is warranted or not.”