Theresa May must not further erode Britons’ rights to citizenship

An opinion piece in the Guardian by Matthew Gibney on removal of citizenship rights for suspected terrorists. Given there has been some talk in Canadian circles as well of similar measures, of interest. While the people that have been stripped of their citizenship are “not nice people”, the question of due process and the rule of law is an important one, although I would not be as absolutist of the right of citizenship in such cases.

Theresa May must not further erode Britons’ rights to citizenship | Matthew Gibney | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Quebec’s Tea Party Moment – NYTimes.com

While their is ongoing debate within Quebec and Canada about the degree to which criticism of the Charter within Canada is helpful or not to Quebec debates (conventional wisdom is that it falls into the PQ strategy of increasing the contrast and polarization between Quebec and Canada), an article in the New York Times, by Maclean’s analyst Martin Patriquin, (Patriquin has been consistent in his views for a long time), raises the stakes somewhat:

In catering to this white, populist rural vote, the left-of-center Parti Québécois has seemingly ventured into Tea Party territory. Janette Bertrand, the 88-year-old leader of a pro-charter group, recently told a newspaper that she would be “scared” to be served by a veiled doctor, because Muslims let women “die faster.” She wasn’t joking.

Anti-immigrant sentiment exists across Canada. Yet Quebec is the only province with a political party willing to exploit that sentiment for political gain. Will it work? Probably not, if only because winning any future referendum on Quebec’s separation from Canada would mean putting the question to each and every Quebecer — including the very people the Parti Québécois is scaring and scapegoating today.

Quebec’s Tea Party Moment – NYTimes.com.

Sure enough, the Quebec Minister responsible for the Bill felt compelled to respond to the critique , reverting to the time-honoured technique of attacking the messenger:

«Or ce n’est pas du journalisme, a commenté Bernard Drainville. C’est de l’opinion. D’ailleurs, M. Patriquin n’en est pas à ses premières frasques. Il a déjà dit que la corruption faisait partie de l’ADN des Québécois», a-t-il rappelé au sujet de ce qu’avait publié le magazine anglophone Maclean’s, en 2010. (an ironic reference, given the current hearings on corruption in Quebec’s construction industry)

La Charte des valeurs, digne du Tea Party? Bof! répond Drainville | Michel Corbeil | Politique

And in minor Charter news, François Legault, the leader of the CAQ distances itself from the comments mentioned yesterday by the former leader of its predecessor, the ADQ, cited yesterday («L’islam, une religion de violence», selon le fondateur de l’ADQ), reflecting how Quebec discussions on multiculturalism and interculturalism have evolved over the years:

Charte: François Legault se distancie de Jean Allaire | Denis Lessard | Politique québécoise

And the Liberal Party of Quebec, while considering legislation limiting the wearing of the niqab or burqa (Le PLQ prépare un projet de loi contre l’intégrisme religious), nevertheless is open – at least in theory – to potential LPQ candidates wearing the chador (in practice, hard to see how any candidate wearing a chador would be nominated a candidate, let alone win, but the party is being consistent that the dividing line is being able to see the face):

PLQ: les candidates portant le tchador seront bienvenues | Jocelyne Richer | Politique québécoise

And lastly, Lysiane Gagnon on the PQ political strategy:

If it wins a majority, Premier Pauline Marois’s government will unfold the second part of the strategy, hoping that its identity legislation will inflame the political climate, provoke an angry backlash in the rest of Canada and eventually push a majority of francophones to react by voting Yes to another sovereignty referendum. The sovereigntists will argue that “English Canada” and the federal government are imposing values alien to Quebec (multiculturalism, for instance) and depriving Quebec of the right to adopt the policies it needs for its cultural survival.

 PQ’s charter madness has a method 

Book Excerpt: Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias in Inside Policy

My excerpt, from the Anecdote or Evidence chapter, of my book, Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism, in The MacDonald-Laurier Institute‘s bimonthly publication, Inside Policy. Direct link to November issue (pdf, see page 30 for excerpt below):

Inside Policy November 2013

Signes religieux chez les élus: le PLQ dénonce un message «d’exclusion»

Consistent yes, but wrong also, banning PQ candidates from wearing religious symbols. “Harmony” indeed, according to Premier Marois. Quebec Liberal Party calling this one correctly, as they have been throughout the Charter debates and discussions.

Signes religieux chez les élus: le PLQ dénonce un message «d’exclusion» | Martin Ouellet | Politique québécoise.

And a reminder of the xenophobic current behind the third party in Quebec (CAQ, formerly ADQ), which provoked the original reasonable accommodation debate over 5 years ago and the Bouchard-Taylor Commission.

«L’islam, une religion de violence», selon le fondateur de l’ADQ | DENIS LESSARD | Politique québécoise

Remembrance Day 2013

Poppy

Values charter not an attempt to drum up sovereignty support, Marois says

Would rather believe the commentary in Quebec and English Canada than these protestations to the contrary:

Values charter not an attempt to drum up sovereignty support, Marois says – Canada, Need to know – Macleans.ca.

And the usual political games with PQ leader Marois intimating that some members of the Quebec Liberal Party oppose the position of the Party (likely true, as in the case of most political parties, but Couillard has managed to maintain party discipline):

Le PQ doute de l’unanimité anti-charte au PLQ

And an admission that the Charter is not in conformity with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms from Daniel Turp, a prominent sovereignist and former Bloc Quebecois Member of Parliament:

Charte de la laïcité – Québec devrait user de la clause dérogatoire | Le Devoir

Lastly, Haroon Siddiqui of The Star has a blistering critique of the toughening up of the Charter in Bill 60:

The bill is based on demagoguery. It proposes a solution for a problem that does not exist. It divides society.

It is Orwellian. It claims to preserve secularism by axing a fundamental secular right – the right to freedom of religion that includes the right to show it.

The ostensibly leftist PQ is following rightwing European xenophobes, anti-Semites and Islamophobes. Its bill goes in tandem with recently announced reductions in immigration to Quebec. It is pandering to Quebecers who think that immigration is a threat to “the heritage of Quebec society” (46 per cent, according to a Léger poll) and those who are alarmingly intolerant of religious minorities (according to Forum Research and Angus Reid polls).

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2013/11/09/pq_goes_all_out_in_waging_war_on_religious_minorities_siddiqui.html

The Multiple Personalities Of Multilinguals « The Dish

Some interesting observations how language affects one’s personality, no matter how bilingual or multilingual one is. The key point is that most of us are not symmetrically bilingual, but have different levels of competency and emotional affiliations.

The Multiple Personalities Of Multilinguals « The Dish.

The citizenship review: what to watch for | iPolitics

My opinion piece in iPolitics on the upcoming Canadian citizenship legislation (full article below as behind the iPolitics paywall):

Over the past five years, the federal government has engaged in a comprehensive policy renewal across the whole suite of immigration policies. The major remaining gap was in citizenship, where the government announced its intent in the 2013 throne speech:

Canadians understand that citizenship should not be simply a passport of convenience. Citizenship is a pledge of mutual responsibility and a shared commitment to values rooted in our history …

To strengthen and protect the value of Canadian citizenship, our Government will introduce the first comprehensive reforms to the Citizenship Act in more than a generation.

During the same period, and within existing legislation, the government nevertheless led an intense period of renewal of the citizenship program:

  • Issuing the new citizenship study guide, Discover Canada, and related citizenship test in 2010
  • Implementing new pre-qualification language requirements in 2012
  • Introducing a series of initiatives targeting residency fraud, starting in 2011
  • Increasing the public profile of the citizenship program and ceremonies, aligned to the messaging of Discover Canada
  • Supporting the Institute for Canadian Citizenship (ICC), and its work on strengthening the meaning of citizenship.

All of these reflect the government’s emphasis on making citizenship more meaningful, “harder to get and easier to lose”, to use former immigration minister Jason Kenney’s phrase — in contrast with previous governments’ emphasis on facilitating citizenship.

  • It is likely that the proposed Citizenship Act will continue to emphasize meaningfulness in the following areas, based upon previous bills tabled but not yet passed, and media coverage of ministerial comments:
  • Regulating citizenship consultants
  • Increasing penalties for citizenship fraud
  • Clarifying the definition of residency to mean physicalresidency, not just legal residency, and possibly increasing the required residency period from the current three years
  • Improving the government’s ability to bar criminals from becoming Canadian citizens
  • Streamlining the revocation and removal process
  • Ensuring a first-generation exemption for Crown servants
  • Possibly eliminating the current “birth on soil” grant of citizenship in favour of a more qualified right.

As the current Citizenship Act dates from the 1970s, the reformed act likely will be more in keeping with current drafting practice, giving ministers more authority and discretion compared to the extremely prescriptive current act, which goes into considerable detail on the citizenship application process and procedures.

While attention will be paid to the specific provisions in the new act, and the balance between facilitating acquisition of citizenship and making citizenship mean “ongoing commitment, connection and loyalty to Canada”, some of the broader issues to watch for include:

  • The balance between ministerial discretion and prescriptive measures in the act. While ministers and officials prefer to have more discretion, citizenship touches all Canadians and there can be advantages in having more constraints on ministers to ensure that changes enjoy wider support. The current act has a mix, specifying “adequate knowledge” of an official language and of “Canada and of the privileges and responsibilities of citizenship”, defining these in regulations, not legislation, while the wording of the citizenship oath is in the Act itself
  • Close review of measures presented as “housekeeping,” to ensure that there are no unannounced or unanticipated substantive implications. Given the technical nature of much of citizenship policy, the devil is in the details
  • Whether the act, or related initiatives, seriously addresses the chronic and ongoing under-resourcing and under-management of the citizenship program, or whether the government is silent on these issues. In 2012, this, along with other changes, resulted in a drop of 37 per cent in new citizens, an example of poor program management. No government has properly resourced the citizenship program; typically the program gets a top-up once the backlog reaches an unacceptable level, as was the case in 2013 when $44 million was allocated in the budget
  • A real commitment to citizen service through meaningful service standards. Currently, it takes an average of over 2 years to acquire citizenship compared to Australia’s two months. Surely Canada should be able to do better, without compromising the integrity of the application process.

Beyond the specifics, the broader question of citizenship policy being faced by many governments is the balance between citizenship as “place” — assuming that citizens remain in their country of immigration — and citizenship as “status”, or a more instrumental view of citizenship as a means to secure employment and other rights.

In contrast to earlier waves of immigration — largely one-way, with limited and expensive two-way travel opportunities — today’s globalization enjoys free communications, low-cost travel, community-specific media (either Canadian or internationally-produced), all of which makes identities more fluid and complex. As governments try to reinforce a strong sense of Canadian identity, they come up against this reality — which is particularly the case for the more well-educated and trained immigrants that we aim to attract, and who tend to be more mobile.

Whether it be to pursue opportunities in their country of origin, or go back and forth to pursue business and other opportunities, citizenship policy has an impact on diaspora linkages and mobility. Make it too restrictive and the linkages may be underdeveloped — make it too easy and citizenship may be instrumental, without attachment.

Hopefully, once the draft bill is tabled, both parliamentary and public comment and discussion will engage in a broader debate about what kind of citizenship approach we want.

The citizenship review: what to watch for | iPolitics.

La Charte des valeurs passerait-elle le test des tribunaux? | Le Devoir

A few pieces asking the obvious question as to whether the proposed Quebec Charter will be given a pass by the courts. As the Supreme Court of Canada has a broader understanding of religious accommodation issues, backed up by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the overall consensus, mentioned in earlier articles, is that the Quebec Charter will not ruled compatible with religious freedom:

La Charte des valeurs passerait-elle le test des tribunaux? | Le Devoir.

Why experts think Quebec’s secular charter won’t survive in court

Charte: les médecins «insultés», dit Gaétan Barrette

More opposition to Bill 60, the recently tabled proposed Charter, this time from Quebec doctors.

Charte: les médecins «insultés», dit Gaétan Barrette | Denis Lessard | Politique québécoise.