Haute fonction publique fédérale – Après le silence, la révolte | Le Devoir

2014/02/11 Leave a comment

More on Library and Archives Canada (LAC) and its former head, Daniel Caron. Part of his problem was that the savage cuts to traditional archival activities, done to meet government expenditure reductions and generate savings to capture the digital records or contemporary events, never had a public constituency. Meanwhile, the LAC constituency of academics, librarians and archivists strongly protested about the loss of traditional archive activities (see Jack Granatstein’s excellent Who will preserve the past for future generations?).

M. Caron dit avoir été injustement cloué au pilori, sans l’appui du ministre du Patrimoine, James Moore, ni même de BAC, où les réformes liées à la numérisation du présent qu’il était en train de mener créaient beaucoup de remous, admet-il. « Les changements étaient importants et ne plaisaient pas à tout le monde, dit-il. Il y a des gens qui avaient un intérêt à me voir partir. Quant au ministre, il avait, lui, un intérêt à se faire du capital politique en tapant publiquement sur un fonctionnaire pour des allégations de mauvaises gestions de fonds publics. Cela est cohérent avec le discours sur la réduction des dépenses ». Et il ajoute : « J’ai également résisté sur des projets d’acquisition de documents liés à la guerre de 1812 [un dossier historique hautement controversé et alimenté par les conservateurs], et poussé pour documenter des mouvements comme Idle No more [mouvement d’affirmation des autochtones et de contestation ciblant l’administration Harper] ou des projets comme Keystone XL [oléoduc canado-américain]. Cela n’a pas été très bien perçu. J’étais au milieu d’un tir croisé, dans une impasse. Je n’avais pas d’autres choix que de me retirer ».

Haute fonction publique fédérale – Après le silence, la révolte | Le Devoir.

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Commentary on Bill C-24: Citizenship Act Revisions

2014/02/10 Leave a comment

Not surprisingly, the Toronto Star has a field day criticizing the new citizenship bill, with an editorial and commentary by Haroon Siddiqui and Thomas Walkom:

In typical fashion for Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s law-and-order obsessed government, the laws promise to “protect the value of Canadian citizenship” by cracking down on problems that largely don’t exist. The vast majority of new Canadians are loyal, honest, law-abiding citizens. They have contributed enormously to the building-up of this nation. But you wouldn’t know it to judge from the unwelcome mat rolled out this week by Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander. It’s all about cracking down on the marginal few who turn out to be treasonous, terrorists, criminals or fraudsters, and raising the bar for everyone else.

Canada’s new Citizenship Act reeks of mistrust: Editorial | Toronto Star.

He [Minister Alexander], too, is promising “reforms” and more get-tough measures. He will reduce the backlog in citizenship applications (now at 320,000) and waiting times (now between 25 and 35 months). If Kenney cleaned up the backlog in the skilled workers program by throwing out 98,000 applicants who had waited years in the queue, Alexander is going to “improve” the clogged citizenship processing by making immigrants wait four years instead of three to get citizenship, and make them pass a stringent English and French language test, as well as another test on their knowledge of Canada. Never mind that many native Canadians may not pass those tests, either.

As he heralded the “strengthening” of the Citizenship Act, he slipped in such measures as tripling the fee and giving himself the power to grant and strip citizenship — no need for the rule of law and due process, as he appointed himself the Citizenship Czar in some cases.

How to read Ottawa’s latest immigration changes: Siddiqui

Whether they know it or not, there are plenty of dual nationals here. Even the United States extends citizenship to Canadians with at least one American parent.

It can be argued that citizenship is a privilege rather than a right. It can be said that anyone who commits high crimes and misdemeanors — regardless of birthplace — should lose this privilege.

In an ideal world, that might make sense. But in the real world, public opinion can be fickle and government arbitrary.

After World War II, for instance, Ottawa seriously contemplated deporting all Japanese-Canadians, including those born in this country, to Japan. It probably would have been a popular move.

In the real world, as the career of iconic anti-apartheid fighter Nelson Mandela demonstrates, yesterday’s terrorist can be tomorrow’s hero.

Canada’s new citizenship bill a Trojan horse: Walkom

The National Post has limited commentary, but Kelly McFarland strongly supports the Bill:

Canada has always embraced immigration; the country was built on it and depends on it for our continued growth and vibrancy. But past policies have too often been designed to reflect a spirit of generosity so eager that it exposed the process to abuse, and cheapened the value of what is, in a practical sense, the greatest honour a country can bestow. Citizenship means more than simply buying a passport, or obtaining a bolt hole to be used when life in another country becomes too dangerous or inconvenient. Canada has been preyed on openly by people who put in the minimum time required to gain access to its benefits, only to spend the bulk of their lives outside its borders and careless of its culture. Mr. Alexander’s changes should go some distance to remedying those failings.

Some elements of his plan may prove contentious, and perhaps open to challenge in court. The new rules would enable Ottawa to revoke citizenship from dual citizens who commit treason, take up arms against Canada or engage in terrorist acts here or abroad, freeing Ottawa from the need to assist “citizens” who involve themselves in terrorist escapades overseas. Other countries have similar provisions, but while they would apply only in “exceptional” cases, they may be open to challenge on the basis that they create two standards of citizenship, with some Canadians more equal than others….

But overall the reforms are an excellent start, which emphasize the value of citizenship and demand applicants demonstrate a real desire to make Canada their permanent home, absorb its culture and contribute to its progress and well-being.

Citizenship changes recognize high value of being Canadian

Interestingly, there does not appear to be any commentary in Quebec French language media. Whether this reflects the internal focus on Quebec (e.g., the Values Charter and pre-election positioning) or bigger federal stories (e.g., electoral reform) is unclear.

Some immigration and refugee organization issued critical statements. The Canadian Council for Refugees:

“Citizenship is a fundamental status – not something that is ‘deserved’. It is wrong to use citizenship rules to punish people for wrong-doing – that’s the role of the criminal system,” said Loly Rico, President. “Treating dual citizens differently is discriminatory and violates the fundamental principle that all citizens are equal.”

The CCR also opposes the proposal to make permanent residents wait longer before they can apply for citizenship. Extending the wait period undermines efforts to integrate newcomers.

Offering citizenship is a key way Canada embraces newcomers and encourages them to quickly become full participating members of our society. Traditionally this has been an area where Canada excelled.

The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers:

Unlike the Conservative government, CARL has full confidence in the Canadian criminal justice system’s ability to effectively punish individuals who violate the law.  As such, CARL condemns the proposed provisions that will allow for citizenship stripping. We do not need to revive the medieval practice of banishment to achieve the goals of punishment, namely deterrence, retribution, denunciation, and rehabilitation.  We now have the benefit of a modern judicial process that includes prosecution, trial before an independent judge and, in the event of conviction, a punishment that expresses society’s condemnation with the full weight of the law.

The current Minister of Citizenship and Immigration’s predecessor falsely claimed that citizenship stripping is commonplace in other countries, including the United States.  In fact, the only western state to make use of this practice in the last few years is the United Kingdom, and it is an outlier whose use of it should serve as a cautionary tale.  Citizenship stripping has been unconstitutional in the United States for over 50 years.

PRESS RELEASE: Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers reacts to proposed government citizenship bill

Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants (OCASI)

Issue: Increasing the amount of time a permanent resident must wait before becoming a full participant in Canadian society will not strengthen democracy in Canada. Some permanent residents, such as those who were Convention Refugees, will face difficulties in travelling to see family or take advantage of overseas employment opportunities.

Issue: The government has said that the Bill will reduce the processing time. But this may not make a real difference to immigrants since they will have to wait longer to apply…

Issue: The change will impact on seniors who are currently exempt from these provisions, including those who have been working since they arrived and did not have time to take a language test, those who know enough English or French to live and work in Canada but not enough to pass the required language test, and those who do not have the capacity to learn a new language such as older refugees.

Issue: Increasing the amount of time a permanent resident must wait before becoming a full participant in Canadian society will not strengthen democracy in Canada. Some permanent residents, such as those who were Convention Refugees, will face difficulties in travelling to see family or take advantage of overseas employment opportunities.

Issue: The government has said that the Bill will reduce the processing time. But this may not make a real difference to immigrants since they will have to wait longer to apply.

OCASI Comments On Proposed Citizenship Changes

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with , , ,

Can Virtual “Racism” Evoke Empathy? | There’s an App for That

2014/02/10 Leave a comment

Interesting concept, poor execution.

The app creators seemingly hope to reach people who discriminate against others, and to encourage these users to change their ways — after virtually experiencing “racism.” This limits their target audience to conscientious racists. And if there are such self-aware racists, are they really so oblivious to what needs to change?

Perhaps this app could better achieve its goals if it chose a name that didn’t perpetrate misconceptions and stereotypes, and if it marketed itself as a resource for multicultural education programs, practical diversity trainings or even sensitivity workshops.

Imagine if the app were renamed to reflect reality: Being Different Is Normal — But It Ain’t Easy.

Can Virtual “Racism” Evoke Empathy? | Re/code.

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with

Religious extremism growing at a rapid pace: Marmur

2014/02/10 Leave a comment

Good piece on the struggle between the moderate middle and the radical extremists by Dow Marmur of Toronto’s Holy Blossom Temple:

It has led to a polarization between indifferent secularists and radical extremists. The latter have much more fire in their bellies and are frequently bent on using the democratic system they despise to their advantage.

In Israel, for example, there have been cases of segregated public transport with women sitting at the rear to accommodate ultra-Orthodox men. In Saudi Arabia, women aren’t even allowed to drive a car. Perhaps this has influenced the York student.

The polarization brought about by fanatics plays into the hands of atheists who have a need to point to religion in its most bizarre manifestations as proof of its depravity. There’s thus a perhaps unintended unholy alliance between radicals at both ends of the spectrum that’s further weakening the moderate centre.

The incident at York is a mild, characteristically Canadian version of a worldwide phenomenon. Mainstream churches and synagogues are hemorrhaging throughout the West while radical groups are thriving. Fringe views are allowed to take centre stage.

Optimists believe that this is only a temporary phase. They’re seeing signs of new ways of affirming God that go beyond both liberalism and fanaticism, and espouse values many of us hold dear. I hope that this is more than wishful thinking.

Religious extremism growing at a rapid pace: Marmur | Toronto Star.

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion Tagged with ,

News Release — What people are saying about Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act

2014/02/08 1 Comment

Interesting mix of endorsements from the expected (e.g., Centre for Immigration Policy Reform, Foundation for Defence of Democracies, True Patriot Love, Central Mennonite Committee in case of Lost Canadians) to the less so (individual tweets). And finding likely the one immigration lawyer, Chantal Desloges, in favour is quite a coup.

Plays against the backdrop of the Maytree survey posted earlier.

News Release — What people are saying about Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act.

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with ,

Maytree Survey Research Reveals Canada’s Attitudes towards Citizenship

2014/02/08 Leave a comment

While over two years old, this survey, conducted by Maytree, the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, the CBC and Royal Bank, is nevertheless interesting, as it indicates that in general Canadian citizenship policies are working and little appetite for change.

As the Government moves forward with revision to the Act, it will be interesting whether the debate reflects these findings or not.

Maytree New Survey Research Reveals Canada’s Attitudes towards Citizenship » Maytree.

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act, Polling Tagged with ,

Ottawa to consult with provinces on dealing with “birth tourism” | Toronto Star

2014/02/08 Leave a comment

No surprise that not included in the changes to the Citizenship Act given the implications for the provinces (and the government may have learned something from the Jobs Grant experience). Hopefully, the consultations with the provinces will ask for hard data on the number of births that were to mothers who were not covered by medicare (i.e., birth tourism and immigrants within the three-month waiting period) to give more than anecdotal information on the extent of the issue.

“We want to address the issue of people who have absolutely no strong connection to Canada and have no desire to live here, coming solely for the purpose of giving birth and then leaving,” Alexander told a news conference in Toronto after Bill C-24, Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, was tabled.

“It will be addressed down the road in an appropriate way. It does involve consultation and co-ordination with the provinces and territories who deliver health care obviously.

“We have to make sure we get it right in a way that doesn’t disrupt the vast majority of Canadians who are having their legitimate births in hospitals, but does detect and deter those cases where our generosity is being abused.”

Ottawa to consult with provinces on dealing with “birth tourism” | Toronto Star.

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with ,

Quebec Values Charter Commentary: Francine Pelletier, Chris Selley, Louise Arbour

2014/02/08 Leave a comment

Good commentary on Quebec and the values charter by Francine Pelletier:

Certains diront que le PQ a fait preuve de génie à si bien exploiter ce qu’Hubert Aquin appelait « la fatigue culturelle du Canada français », le sentiment d’insécurité qui colle à la peau des Québécois francophones d’un certain âge. C’est cette même frilosité que dénonçait d’ailleurs le chroniqueur Marc Cassivi de La Presse cette semaine, se désolant du caractère « blanc francophone » de la télé québécoise. Le Québec n’est ni moins métissé ni moins accueillant que bien des coins d’Amérique, mais la peur de l’Autre — ou si vous voulez, la peur de disparaître — y est plus manifeste. Le PQ l’a très bien compris. Malheureusement, plutôt que de tenter de nous hisser hors de ce guêpier, il nous y enfonce.

Crise d’identité | Le Devoir.

Some other commentary of note, starting with a good piece by Chris Selley, reminding that the sky may not in fact be falling:

It doesn’t look much like the first step of a revolution, really. And Occam’s Razor suggests a simple reason for that: Every time a pollster asks Quebecers if the “values charter” is a priority for them, they say no. The Léger poll last month found the issue was most pressing to just 14% of Parti Québécois voters, never mind the others. An even stickier wicket is that when Ipsos asked in October whether public servants should actually lose their jobs if they refuse to take off their religious symbols, just 38% of Quebecers said yes — many fewer than ostensibly support the law that would compel them to do so.

It all suggests that unexciting could yet win the day in Quebec. The charter might become law, but when it comes time to fire that renowned kippa-wearing surgeon, and hijab-wearing day care workers start bidding tearful farewells to their charges, Quebecers’ better angels might leap back into action. Hospitals and universities might simply disobey the charter, as they’ve promised to do, and there mightn’t be any political profit in demanding enforcement.

At this point, we would have to call that a win. We can hope. But what a spineless spectacle Quebec’s politicians would have given us along the way. Just 20% of intended Liberal voters support the charter; just 10% consider it the most important issue, and presumably most are opposed. Still Mr. Couillard can’t find his way to simply opposing an incoherent and buck-naked political provocation from a desperate and unpopular government fronting a sovereignty movement that’s running on fumes. One hopes he at least has trouble sleeping.

Chris Selley: How Quebec’s secularism debate could still fizzle | National Post.

Louise Arbour, former Supreme Court judge and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, is particularly damming:

«Il est particulièrement odieux d’en faire payer le prix à des femmes déjà marginalisées et pour qui l’accès à l’emploi est un facteur clé à la fois d’autonomie et d’intégration», écrit-elle en référence aux musulmanes qui portent le hijab, dans une lettre publiée en exclusivité par La Presse.

Mme Arbour y critique vivement le projet de loi mené par Bernard Drainville.

Les Québécois doivent se garder d’être charmés par un certain nationalisme rétrograde et continuer à s’ouvrir sur le monde, plaide-t-elle.

«La Charte de la laïcité nous incite à céder au chant des sirènes, illustre Mme Arbour. Ce chant évoque l’image nostalgique d’une société homogène catho-laïque, où «nos» symboles religieux nous paraissent inoffensifs […] alors que ceux des «autres» feraient au contraire peser une menace permanente sur nous.»

Des conséquences odieuses, dit Louise Arbour

Filed under Charte des valeurs québécoise, Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Strengthening and Modernizing the Citizenship Act – Some Thoughts

2014/02/07 2 Comments

For those who have not seen it, the release and backgrounders to the revisions of the Citizenship Act, with the high level messaging as follows:

“Our government is strengthening the value of Canadian citizenship.  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. I am pleased to bring forward the first comprehensive and overdue reforms of the Citizenship Act in more than a generation.”

“Our government expects new Canadians to take part in the democratic life, economic potential and the rich cultural traditions that are involved in becoming a citizen. We are proud to introduce changes that reinforce the value of citizenship while ensuring the integrity of the immigration system is protected.”

Chris Alexander, Canada’s Citizenship and Immigration Minister

News Release — Strengthening and Modernizing the Citizenship Act.

Ten ways Ottawa is changing how to become a Canadian citizen (Globe)

It is a comprehensive package (and well put together by my former team). Looking through the various aspects through the lens of citizenship integrity, citizenship fairness, competitiveness with other countries, and citizenship focus, it is clear that the focus is on citizenship integrity and meaningfulness. No surprise with this policy continuity with the earlier initiatives by then CIC Minister Kenney (Discover Canada, more rigorous knowledge test and language assessment, anti-fraud measures).

The following table is illustrative:

Element  
Integrity Increased fees for full cost recovery ($100 to $300 – 200%, but comparable to other countries)Physical presence requirement clarified (2010 bill)Period extended (current 3 of 4 years to 4 of 6 years, 183 days in each of 4 years)PR waiting period no longer gives credit towards citizenship period (currently each day counts as half day)

Require applicants to state their intention to reside in Canada (citizenship of convenience)

Required income tax filing (if required under the Income Tax Act)

Knowledge and language tests expanded from 18-54 to 14 to 64 (reversing 2005 change for older applicants)

Stronger penalties for citizenship fraud ($100k) and regulation of citizenship consultants (2010 bill)

Revocation from dual nationals convicted of terrorism, high treason and spying offences. 

Barring Permanent Residents from applying for citizenship for foreign criminality and national security, 

Judicial review available beyond Federal Court, subject to leave and certification filters (from “will” to “has, is or may engage”

Strengthening safeguards for adoptees (Hague Convention on Inter-Country Adoption or other legal safeguards

Authority to declare applications abandoned should applicant not submit information or attend interview
Fairness “Lost Canadians” remaining issues addressed for those born before 1947 as well as their children (1st gen)Crown servant exemption (waiver for first generation limit for children born of Crown servants) (2010 bill)
Competitiveness Overall, changes remain largely in line with comparator countries (some are less stringent (e.g., national interest revocation only applies to dual nationals unlike UK) and some more (e.g.,  fast-track for Canadian Forces – US has similar provision)
Citizenship Focus Business process: Reduction in decision process from 3 steps to 1 to reduce processing time to 1 year by 2015-16Citizenship judge role limited to ceremonial role (CIC officers to make decisions directly)Stronger authority for CIC to define “complete application” and what evidence is provided (not defined in background info)Streamlined process for discretionary grants (Minister rather than GIC, one step rather than two)

Allow for electronic means to verify citizenship in the future

Streamlined revocation from 3 steps to 2 (2010 bill). Fraud to be decided by CIC Minister (barred to reapply for 10 years compared to 5 currently), more complex (e.g., war crimes, security, organized criminality) to be decided by Federal Court

Fast track for members of Cdn armed forces

In terms of “winners and losers,” the big winners are the remaining “lost Canadians” who are no longer penalized for being born pre-1947 (when Canadian citizenship started) and Crown servants with respect to their children born abroad and previously subject to the first generation limit. For most applicants, these changes will not make citizenship much more difficult, although it will take require longer residency (and residency meaning physical presence – being in Canada).

Applicants who may have greater challenges with these changes include:

  • Groups that already have difficulty with the current knowledge test and language requirements (no major change);
  • Mobile professionals, although based in Canada, whose work requires frequent and extensive travel;
  • Low income applicants given fee increase; and,
  • The target group of “citizens of convenience.”

The package is weaker on issues related to fairness, whether that means ensuring that citizenship materials (e.g., Discover Canada, test etc) are written in plain language and focus group tested to ensure readability and comprehension, expanding settlement or integration services to include citizenship knowledge and preparation for groups with lower success rates, and lastly, published service standards that are reported quarterly, as in Australia, to ensure accountability.

Much of the debate over the bill will likely be over the revocation provisions, particularly as they apply to dual nationals convicted of terrorism or high treason. Apart from the break that this represents of treating all Canadians equally irrespective of whether they were born in Canada or became Canadian, a large focus will be on the whether due process will be followed or not in determining whether citizenship should be revoked. It will be an interesting debate and discussion as while the numbers are small, they have symbolic value. But as always, where some cases appear clear cut (e.g., Al-Qaeda affiliates), others may not be.

Some selected commentary. In favour of the changes (iPolitics The meaning of citizenship, Kelly National Post: Ccitizenship changes recognize high value of being Canadian), reactions from stakeholders (Toronto Star Citizenship changes will mean longer wait to become Canadian, including quote from me), and an editorial from the Globe, generally in favour but strongly objecting to the treating naturally born and naturalized citizens differently:

That is effectively creating two-tier citizenship. Canadians who commit crimes should be punished, and they are. But even Canadians behind bars are still Canadians. Loss of citizenship, except in cases of citizenship fraudulently obtained, should not be on the menu of possible punishments, even for the gravest crimes.

It was an earlier Conservative government, that of John Diefenbaker, that changed the law to ensure that Canadians could not be stripped of citizenship. The decision was made in the wake of a particularly damaging scandal: In 1957, former MP Fred Rose was stripped of his Canadian citizenship after being convicted of spying for the Soviet Union. Diefenbaker thought that was wrong. Even in the case of treason, he didn’t believe any Canadian should ever again be threatened with a similar fate.

 Chris Alexander’s flawed overhaul of citizenship law 

Overall, to use then CIC Minister Kenney’s phrase, the changes are in line his wish to make “citizenship harder to get and easier to lose.”  Yet the changes largely remain competitive with other immigration-based countries like Australia, New Zealand, and the US and thus are unlikely to deter potential immigrants.

What will be interesting, however, are the longer-term effects on the number of permanent residents who become citizens. The current figure is 85%, one of the highest in the world, and one that attests to the overall success of Canadian integration policies and programs. The more rigorous test and language assessment introduced over the last few years resulted in a higher failure rate than earlier (from about 95% to around 85%, but much lower for a number of groups). These additional changes may further decrease the number of permanent residents who become citizens, and weakening the integrative aspect of citizenship.

As always, despite the best efforts of policy makers and political leaders, there will likely be some unforeseen effects that emerge over time.

The broader question, of what is the appropriate balance between making citizenship more meaningful and recognizing the reality of a globalized world, where people can move around more, can maintain their relationship with their country of origin more easily, and generally have more diverse and varied identities, will continue to be a challenge for Canada and other countries

Filed under Citizenship, Citizenship Act Tagged with

John Ivison: Ottawa will lose top human rights crusader when Liberal MP who fought for Mandela retires

2014/02/07 Leave a comment

Nice tribute to Irwin Cotler by John Ivison:

Yet Mr. Cotler has emerged intact and unspoiled by his 15 years in the House of Commons.

In the Tim Hortons in Mount Royal, he confided his motivation – the fundamental teaching handed down by his father, who used to tell him in Hebrew: “Justice, justice shall you pursue. This is the equal of all the other commandments combined.”

His father would surely be proud of the use to which his teaching has been put.

John Ivison: Ottawa will lose top human rights crusader when Liberal MP who fought for Mandela retires | National Post.

Filed under Antisemitism, Government, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →