Citizenship Act will create two classes of Canadians – Macklin, Adams and Omidvar

Audrey Macklin, Michael Adams and Ratna Omidvar on the proposed changes to the Citizenship Act:

Some Canadians commit serious crimes. The foreign-born are no more likely than the Canadian-born to do so (some evidence suggests they are less likely to) but small numbers in each group do break the law. Nor are dual citizens more likely than mono-citizens to commit crimes. Today, citizens (including foreign-born and dual citizens) are equal before the law and are treated the same way as other Canadians if they are accused of a crime. They undergo due process and, if convicted, are punished according to the provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada. If their crimes are committed abroad, the procedures are different but their treatment by the Canadian government is identical.

Adding citizenship revocation as an extra prospective punishment for dual citizens (many of whom, but not all, are foreign-born) is tantamount to creating a second class of citizenship. This is a change that cuts to the core of what it means to be Canadian – and in order to solve what problem?

Canadian citizenship is a solution, not a problem. Canada has traditionally had exceptionally high naturalization rates; nearly nine in 10 immigrants (89 per cent) have become Canadian citizens. This pattern has been praised as a strength of our immigration program: a sign that immigrants are invested in Canada and Canada is invested in the successful integration of its immigrants.

When immigrants become citizens they can vote, stand for office (and win: in 2011, 44 of our sitting MPs were born outside the country), and generally become fully contributing, fully participating members of Canadian society. To turn citizenship from a tool of integration into a reward for good behaviour – to be revoked at the discretion of one minister on grounds of bad behavior and without due process – is to undermine the meaning and value of citizenship for all Canadians.

Citizenship Act will create two classes of Canadians – The Globe and Mail.

Ontario election: Which party’s candidates are the most diverse?

Ontario_election__Which_party’s_candidates_are_the_most_diverse____canada_com

A study of the diversity of candidates in the forthcoming ON election:

Although women were greatly underrepresented, the racial diversity of the candidates better reflected Ontario’s population, though some fell shorter than others. In the 2011 census, approximately 30 per cent of Ontarians were described as visible minorities.

The Liberal party was closest to reflecting the number, with 24 per cent of their candidates being visible minorities. For the NDP, 19 per cent of declared candidates are visible minorities and the PCs trail with about 17 per cent representation.

Diversity was concentrated around the Greater Toronto Area, with nearly all the candidates for ridings in Scarborough and Brampton being people of colour. The Toronto downtown, though, is overwhelmingly white.

The further away from Toronto a riding is, the more likely it is to have all-white candidates. Even the Ottawa area only has three out of 14 candidates who are visible minorities.

One of the success stories of the federal Conservatives lies in recruitment and election of many first and second generation immigrants, including visible minorities (in the 2011 election, CPC visible minority candidates were 10.1 percent of total CPC candidates, see Racial Diversity in the 2011 Federal Election: Visible Minorities for more details):

Ontario election: Which party’s candidates are the most diverse? | canada.com.

‘Check your Privilege’ Debate

A fairly typical rant by Rex Murphy on ‘check your privilege’:

It is a direct effort to impose guilt where gratification should reign. It is to make those who work hard, try to conduct themselves responsibly, who apply themselves to study, feel that none of these attributes, none of their honest effort, has earned them success. Why should all a young person’s effort and sweat, holding on to a moral code, and determined application to make something of their life be turned against them, be denied its efficacy, and everything praiseworthy about a person be dismissed as merely a gift of their ethnicity?

What’s most obnoxious about this trend is its blatant attempt to chase effort, merit, industry and determination off the field entirely. The privilege movement seeks to sully and taint  the commonplace eternal virtues, so that when one of us sees another happy in marriage, perhaps, or successful in business, and maybe temperate and easy in private life , we should all shout in envy and hate. It is bitterly ironic that the anti-racist message has been reduced to this: You have all that you have only because you have white skin.

It is the cheapest form of racism, no subtlety at all … and it finds fullest expression in those academic institutions most attuned to any whiff of prejudice. Only in the very best universities would you ever be able to find so stupid a thought being given such frantic attention. And Orwell’s famous taunt about some ideas being so stupid only an intellectual would support them is sadly truer now, by far, than when he wrote them.

Rex Murphy: Check your bigotry

Which in turn, provoked a good debate, starting with Dawn Black in iPolitics (pay wall):

Asking people to check their privilege isn’t a matter of keeping certain voices out of the conversation – it’s about ensuring that all voices, especially those that have historically been kept silent, have the chance to be heard. It’s not about blaming white people for their achievements – it’s about knowing that we can’t end racism until we understand how and why it continues to exist. It’s not about humiliation – ultimately, it’s about empathy.

Social inequality is, unfortunately, a fact of life. Recognizing that inequality exists – and trying to find ways to eliminate it – is a fundamental part of responsible citizenship. Trying to shut down discussions of privilege won’t make that privilege disappear; it will only make inequality harder to fight.

Check your privilege, Canada:

And echoed by Deborah Douglass in the National Post:

Let’s be clear: To acknowledge the role of privilege does not negate the role of self-determination and personal responsibility. They are understood. Even I cringe at new speech-policing concepts such as trigger warnings, which are used to control speech on university campuses. And those on the losing end of privilege could stand to watch how they couch their argument when calling it out. Often, they, too, possess some form of privilege. I know I do. Sometimes people elevate their victimhood to suggest that’s the extent of their value and comes across as a form of emotional blackmail others cannot access.

The beautiful thing about being part of a democracy is the notion of perfecting it. The least we can do is to open our minds and hearts. That’s a nice way of saying that if you’re white or male or upper-middle class or athletic or skinny or good-looking or privileged in any way, you cannot go on assuming everything that comes to you belongs only to you, and that there’s something wrong with those who aren’t as privileged.

It is said that to whom much is given, much is required. That same famous source also cautions against suffering fools, which means challenging foolish notions and weeding out racism or sexism in all its nuanced and structural forms.

Weeding out racism

One of the issues Minister Kenney and his staff had with multiculturalism policy and G&C proposals was reference to “white power,” an essentially similar concept.

One can view ‘check your privilege’ as another way to slow down one’s thinking and assumptions, to shift from System 1 automatic to System 2 deliberative thinking, to use Kahneman’s phrase, to allow for more open-ended discussion. I think Douglass’ comments have it about right; Rex has remained within his System 1 “mental prison” to use a Gilles Paquet term.

Immigration from Italy to Canada more than doubles since 2005 – Canada News Centre

Interesting, on both substantive and communications grounds. Substantively, likely reflects ongoing Eurozone post-2008 crash economic weaknesses. From a communications perspectives, surprising given that the Conservative party earlier on had largely written off Italian Canadians as Liberals, and the numbers of Italian immigrants are still small – 63rd source country in 2012):

Last year, 823 individuals from Italy became Canadian permanent residents, an increase of nearly 140 percent from 2005. In addition, 421 foreign students from Italy entered Canada in 2013, a 90 percent increase from 2005.

Italian immigration to Canada is once again increasing following a significant period of decline between 1967 and 2005.

The high number of new permanent residents includes newcomers coming to Canada from Italy as economic immigrants, which has almost tripled over the past 10 years. Last year, Canada admitted 500 people from Italy in the economic class, an increase of nearly 200 percent since 2003.

Immigration from Italy to Canada more than doubles since 2005 – Canada News Centre.

Matt Gurney: Quotas have no place in our military

The predictable reaction to the story regarding revising Canadian Forces diversity targets downward (Canadian military hopes to cut hiring targets for women, minorities).

There is merit in the argument that the military recruiting base tends to be more rural and more white. But merit arguments sometimes also disguise unconscious biases and preferences. Having targets (I oppose quotas) ensures focus on what is a likely long-term challenge:

A more diverse military is a desirable goal, of course — albeit one that should be treated as completely secondary to the primary objective of fielding a competent force. And as Canada becomes increasingly diverse, the military naturally will draw recruits from a wider pool of applicants. But as it stands now, many recruits join to escape local economic difficulties in parts of the country that are less multicultural than our large cities, or to honour long family traditions of service. We owe all of them a fair chance and, of course, our thanks.

But we owe the country a properly trained and equipped fighting force, regardless of what it looks like. If someone is willing to put on the uniform and defend Canada and our values abroad, and meets reasonable definitions of fitness and suitability, that’s all that matters. Our soldiers defend the country, not just those who look like them.

Matt Gurney: Quotas have no place in our military | National Post.

Tory MP given federal contracts months before, after failed 2008 election bid

Interesting story. In contrast to multiculturalism and  historical recognition grants and contributions (G&Cs), not delegated to officials, integration programming, largely language training, was delegated. When Minister Kenney became Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, officials had to explain why the sheer volume of G&Cs made Ministerial review impractical.

Minister Kenney had bad experience with the multiculturalism G&Cs as officials remained in denial mode, continuing to favour traditional organizations and approaches, leading the Minister to reject most proposals. Ministerial staffers would routinely Google organizations, to check for consistency between departmental descriptions of individual projects and the overall approach of the organization. It sometimes led to uncomfortable discussions, but his office was applying due diligence, more so than some of the officials (I eventually also would Google before approval).

Given the Minister’s concerns about delegation, a system was put in place to provide a heads-up on planned project approvals, an early detection system to avoid surprises and reduce the likelihood of project approval contrary to the Minister’s wishes. This was partially prompted by the Canadian Arab Federation case (Jason Kenney’s decision to cut funding to the Canadian Arab Federation):

When asked whether Diane Finley, who was the CIC minister at the time, was aware of the contract, spokesman Marcel Poulin said only that “officials award contracts, not ministers.”

That fall, Ms. Young ran in Vancouver South for the Conservatives, losing by just 20 votes to Liberal incumbent Ujjal Dosanjh.

The questions about the first contract didn’t deter Ms. Young’s consulting firm – her office declined to say how many employees the firm had beyond Ms. Young – from seeking a second one just over a year after the election. The November, 2009, pact totalled $452,900 for planning the same conference, this time in early 2010. It included $337,000 for “program delivery” and $115,900 for “administrative” functions. Again, the specific costs are redacted.

A spokeswoman for Jason Kenney, who had succeeded Ms. Finley as CIC minister when the second contract was awarded, said he had “no knowledge of or involvement” with the contracts.

A statement from the department echoed that. “Both contracts were assessed and approved by the appropriate delegated departmental official,” spokeswoman Sonia Lesage said.

Tory MP given federal contracts months before, after failed 2008 election bid – The Globe and Mail.

Alberta Labour Minister blasts feds over foreign workers

Kind of amusing given previous bad blood between the two Ministers (Jason Kenney apologizes to Thomas Lukaszuk for a-hole email gaffe). But substantively, another call for pathways to permanent residency and citizenship:

“We need you here to stay. A revolving door is simply not humane, and economically not sound,” he said.

“In most cases what we need in Canada, and particularly in Alberta, is permanent foreign workers.”

Lukaszuk blasted federal Employment Minister Jason Kenney for suspending the TFW program in the food sector last month to launch a review, after several Canadian businesses were accused of giving TFWs more hours or priority work status.

Alberta Labour Minister blasts feds over foreign workers | Alberta | News | Calg.

Canadian military hopes to cut hiring targets for women, minorities

Sigh….

Currently, the military is expected to aim for these targets: females should make up 25.1 per cent of full-time military personnel and reservists; 11.7 per cent should be visible minorities; and 3.3 per cent should be aboriginals.

Those target numbers are lower than for other federal departments, in recognition of the unique nature of military service.

The Canadian Forces place well compared to many of Canada’s allies, particularly on the percentage of women in uniform. The military has also seen recent progress in the number of visible minorities and aboriginals joining up.

Yet it has never actually met its targets. Women currently account for 15 per cent of personnel in uniform, a number that hasn’t changed in several years, while visible minorities represent 4.2 per cent, and aboriginals 1.9 per cent.

The proposed targets, contained in a briefing note to Canadian Army commander Lt.-Gen. Marquis Hainse from February, are 17.6 per cent for women, 8.2 per cent for visible minorities, and 2.6 per cent for Aboriginal Peoples.

Canadian military officials have previously highlighted the importance of increasing diversity within the Canadian Forces given the country’s changing demographic makeup, which includes more visible minorities and a growing aboriginal population.

“The changing makeup of Canada’s population makes it mission critical that the (Canadian Forces) take proactive measures to be inclusive for men and women of all cultures,” rear-admiral Adam Smith wrote in 2011 when he was chief of military personnel.

Chantal Fraser, a retired lieutenant colonel who spent the last part of her 28-year career looking at employment equity in the military, is worried about the impact reducing the targets would have on the Canadian Forces and their connection to average citizens.

“If we reduce the goals, then they don’t have to strive as hard to reach them,” she said. “And we may end up in a situation where the Canadian military no longer reflects Canadian society. And that’s bad news no matter what country you live in.”

Fraser said the problem isn’t unrealistic targets; it’s that the Canadian Forces aren’t doing enough to recruit women, visible minorities and aboriginal people.

That includes measures to improve the work-life balance for women; focus recruitment efforts on the country’s three biggest cities for visible minorities and on the North for aboriginals; and showcase people from those communities who are already in the military.

Canadian military hopes to cut hiring targets for women, minorities.

A Debate Over A Troublesome Book – Nicholas Wade

More on Nicholas Wade’s A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History by Agustín Fuentes, a professor of anthropology at Notre Dame. The following on human genetics is helpful:

1) Genes matter, but they are only a small part of the whole evolutionary picture and focusing on DNA segments won’t get you very far in understanding human evolution. The roundworm C. elegans has about 20,000 genes and humans have about 23,000 genes—it is pretty obvious that humans are more than 15% more complex than roundworms.

2) When making scientific argument about genetic variation you need to focus on populations–and be clear about your definitions (a common one for “population” is a geographical cluster of people who mate more within the cluster than outside of it). Many people talking about this subject use the words cluster, population, group, race, subrace and ethnicity in a range of ways, with few concrete definitions and occasionally interchangeably.  If you do not define something then you cannot measure it, test for it, or try to construct and refute or support hypotheses for it—in short you can’t do science.

3) Humans all share 100% same genes and 99.9% of the variation in the DNA. So the variation we are interested in is .1% of the entire genome. And yes, understanding that variation is important

4) Most genetic variation is due to gene flow and genetic drift so the further apart two populations are the more likely they are to have more differences

5) Nearly all the genetic variation in our entire species is found in populations just in Africa, with most of the variation found in all populations outside of Africa making up a small subset of that variation.

Margaret Wente to note (What if race is more than a social construct?)!

A Debate Over A Troublesome Book « The Dish.

Creepy Ad Watch – Coke

Lack of judgement and values – Coke normally does better than this:

In March, Coke installed five special phone booths in Dubai labor camps that accepted Coca-Cola bottle caps instead of coins. In exchange for the cap from a bottle of Coke—which costs about fifty-four cents—migrant workers could make a three-minute international call. The ad shows laborers in hard hats and reflective vests lining up to use the machine—and grinning, for the first time in the video, as they wait. “I’ve saved one more cap, so I can talk to my wife again tomorrow,” one man tells the camera. More than forty thousand people made calls using the machines. Then, in April, after the booths had been up for about a month, the company dismantled them

I sent links to the ads to Nicholas McGeehan, a Gulf researcher for Human Rights Watch who has studied labor conditions in Dubai. I was interested in his take on the questions of appropriateness and ethics that some viewers had raised. The videos, he said, were “odious.” For one thing, he said, Coke is not only using these low-income workers to advertise its product, it is also requiring them to buy soft drinks themselves—at nearly a tenth of their typical daily wages, he pointed out—to use the special phone booth. On top of that, he feels that the ads normalize and even glorify the hardship faced by migrant workers—at least some of whom may be working against their will. “If this was two hundred years ago, would it be appropriate for Coke to do adverts in the plantations of the Deep South, showing slaves holding cans of Coke?” he asked. “It is a normalization of a system of structural violence, of a state-sanctioned trafficking system.”

Creepy Ad Watch « The Dish.