The monarchy hurts Canada’s standing in the world. It’s time to let go – Heinbecker

Paul Heinbecker on the monarchy. His vignette about their role in promoting British interests, not those of Commonwealth countries, is priceless – and all too accurate:

The royal family themselves are under no illusion about who they are – British; where they live – Britain; and what they represent – the United Kingdom. When I was posted to Bonn in the nineties, Queen Elizabeth paid an official visit to Berlin largely to promote British industry. Ambassadors from Commonwealth countries were convened to Berlin, at their countries’ expense, to greet the Queen (in reality a photo-op). Because there were Canadian firms in Germany that could have used some high-level support, and because my credentials said that it was in her name and on her behalf that I was accredited as the Ambassador of Canada to Germany, I decided to test what the Monarchists’ assertions – that she is our Queen, too – meant in practice.

Not much, as it turned out. I asked an aide at the photo-op whether while promoting UK business her majesty might put in a good word for Canadian business too. It was evident from his reaction that such an idea was as unwelcome as it was novel. Years later, Kate and William, following their rapturous welcome in Canada, headed to Hollywood where they promoted British artists. Plus ça change…

How do we remove this asterisk when we have manacled ourselves to the Crown by a constitution that requires the agreement of all of the legislatures of the provinces and both houses of the Parliament to change? We can start by again treating the Governor General as the de facto head of state in all ways that the constitution does not actually preclude. The incumbent, like his predecessors, is a successful, distinguished, bilingual Canadian who personifies the values and aspirations of Canadians better than any royal ever could. He should represent Canada on all occasions of state at home and abroad, for example on D-Day anniversaries. All “honours” would be imparted in the GG’s name. Further, we should change the Oath of Citizenship to require new Canadians to swear allegiance not to “to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors…” but just to Canada, and to the Canadian Constitution and rule of law.

When the day comes that Canadians are ready to change the Constitution in order to reform the Senate, we should also de-link from the monarchy and select our own Head of State. We could do so, for example, by empowering the 1050 elected members of the federal parliament and legislative assemblies across the country to elect a Governor-General from the membership of the Order of Canada. All powers vested in the monarch would be transferred to the Governor-General whose title could remain the same in deference to our history. In the meantime, we should prepare for that joyous day by retiring the portraits of the royal family from our foreign ministry and offices abroad and curtailing royal visits to Canada. And we should elect a government willing to make these changes.

The monarchy hurts Canada’s standing in the world. It’s time to let go – The Globe and Mail.

Zarqa Nawaz: My hijab rebellion

A funny excerpt from her book (she was one of the starts in Little Mosque in the Prairie):

I had turned my faith into endless rules. They had given me structure. They had helped me torture my parents. And now they were being thrown back at me.

My father had heard enough. “My daughter is right. We have to be more flexible when it comes to faith. We can’t be extremists when it comes to Islam.”

And in one fell swoop, my father dismissed the meeting and said I could go to summer camp as long as I wanted. His relationship with Uncle Mahmood soured. But as far as my father was concerned, Uncle Mahmood was a crazed religious nutjob. Halal meat was as big an issue for my father as it was for Uncle Mahmood, but he ruled in my favour because he knew how much I loved summer camp.

In that moment, I decided not to take Islam so literally. Religion had been my weapon of choice to break my parents’ hearts. But then it came back and almost broke my heart. Maybe God had sent me a sign through those Chicken McNuggets — my parents were good Muslims and it wouldn’t kill me to become a little more like them. After all, even though I had a strange haircut and paraded around in my hijab like I was the pope, my father still stuck up for me because I was his little girl.

Zarqa Nawaz: My hijab rebellion

Chart of the Day: Citizenship Fraud

Citizenship Fraud.037

 

Thanks to a Concordia student working on citizenship issues who brought an ATIP to my attention.

Based upon 3,194 investigations, as of March 31, 2012. Based upon the 5 year average number of new citizens, just under 2 percent fraud that we know about. Most of the fraud is related to misrepresentation of residency (one of the positive changes in C-24 is clarifying that residency means physical presence, not just a Canadian legal address).

Note that these figures refer to investigations, not convictions. Do not have any numbers on these but likely much smaller.

Interesting concentration from the Middle East, particularly Lebanon. Likely also reflects those living in the Gulf where having Canadian citizenship means a Canadian pay and benefits package, rather than that of other nationalities who are often paid significantly less.

Bilingualism boosts the brain at all ages

Bilingualism as the Canadian competitive advantage (not just French/English bilingualism):

For the brain, the combination of those tasks is complex and taxes the energy resources, said Ellen Bialystok, who runs a cognitive research lab at York. She first observed how bilingual children perform better in the 1980s.

“What a bilingual always has to do is draw attention to the right language, and keep that other active language out of the way. Now the system that selects, inhibits, and switches is the executive function system. That means that every time a bilingual opens their mouth, they’re using their executive function system. Its getting practised, it’s getting fortified, and its becoming more efficient,” Bialystok said.

Aside from the social and cultural benefits of bilingualism, there’s also a payoff later in life as memory begins to fail in everyone. Those who are bilingual build up networks in the brain’s frontal system. Located behind the forehead, the system is the last to develop in childhood and the first to decline in the final stage of our lives, Bialystok said.

Bilingualism boosts the brain at all ages – Health – CBC News.

European court upholds French ban on face veils

Gives European governments wide latitude, arguably overly so:

The courts Grand Chamber rejected the arguments of the French woman in her mid-20s, a practicing Muslim not identified by name. She said she doesn’t hide her face at all times, but when she does it is to be at peace with her faith, her culture and convictions. She stressed in her complaint that no one, including her husband, forced her to conceal her face – something of particular concern to French authorities.

The court ruled that the laws bid to promote harmony in a diverse population is legitimate and doesn’t breach the European Convention on Human Rights.

Critics of the ban, including human rights defenders, contend the law targets Muslims and stigmatizes Islam. France has the largest Muslim population in Western Europe, estimated at five million, making the issue particularly sensitive.

Under the law, women who cover their faces can be fined up to 150 euros $205 or be obliged to attend a citizenship class, or both.

When enacted, the law was seen as a security measure, with veiled women considered fundamentalists and potential candidates for extremist views. Another concern was respect for the French model of integration in which people of different origins are expected to assimilate.

The court concluded the ban is a “choice of society,” giving France a wide margin of appreciation – all the more so because there is no common ground in Europe on the issue. Only a minority of countries ban face veils.

AP News : European court upholds French ban on face veils.

UK: Multiculturalism in reverse as teenagers buck the trend towards integration

Surprising UK study:

Decades of efforts to promote multiculturalism have gone into reverse, major new research showing teenagers are no more likely to mix with people from other racial backgrounds than those 40 years older suggests.

The study, which analyses the social lives of almost 4,300 people from 13 to 80, shows that a clear trend towards each successive generation becoming more integrated than the one before breaks down when it comes to under-18s.

Despite growing up in more diverse society than ever before at a time when mass migration has transformed the make-up of Britain, today’s teenagers have almost 30 per cent fewer friends from other ethnic backgrounds than people in their 20s and early 30s. ….

The fact that those between the ages of 18 and 34 are significantly more integrated than other age groups suggests that universities and colleges offer a more natural way of mixing people than schools or other social settings.

“This isn’t a report about telling people off,” he [Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the Royal Society of Arts, who chaired the commission] said.

“Lots of research shows that it is perfectly natural for birds of a feather to flock together.

“But what we would also say is that because we believe integration is a good thing and because Britain is becoming more diverse by ethnicity, age, income and social class we need to look at what steps we might take to overcome that natural tendency.

“None of the commissioners is going to be advocating wholesale social engineering or naming and shaming people but we think that there are things that can be done, things which people would be happy to do which would just give them that little nudge.

“The fact that it looks like colleges and universities are places that encourage integration better than schools is an indication that maybe there are things that we could so.”

Maybe it is a teenager thing given that the older cohort, whether in colleges and universities as mentioned, or in the workplace, seems to be mixing reasonably well.

Multiculturalism in reverse as teenagers buck the trend towards integration – Telegraph.

ICYMI: Immigration experts say Bill C-24 discriminatory and weakens citizenship

Star overview on the impact of the changes in C-24 Citizenship Act changes from the perspective of the major critics of C-24. Would have been better to include some of the supporters as well for balance (e.g., Collacott, Saperia, Siddiqui):

He [Alexander] seems to relish the idea of rewriting what it is to be Canadian and to hold citizenship. “If there was a time when new Canadians made the mistake that we only had a peacekeeping tradition or our rights and freedoms began with the Charter, then I’m glad our reforms are broadening their perspective.”

Neither he nor the Conservative Party seem worried about the ongoing debate Bill C-24 has triggered across the nation. “This act reminds us where we come from and why citizenship has value,” said the minister. “When we take on the obligations of citizens we’re following in the footsteps of millions of people who came here and made outstanding contributions over centuries. And we are celebrating that diversity, solidifying the order and rule of law we have here; we’re committing ourselves to participate as citizens in the life of a very vibrant democracy.”

Immigration experts say Bill C-24 discriminatory and weakens citizenship | Toronto Star.

Bill C-24 is wrong: There is only one kind of Canadian citizen – Globe Editorial

Globe’s Canada Day editorial:

Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander has defended his bill by arguing citizenship is a privilege, not a right. He is wrong. It may come with responsibilities, but it is a right. And once legitimately acquired, by birth or naturalization, it cannot be taken away. Bill C-24 gives the government the kind of sweeping power that is common in dictatorships, not in a democracy built upon the rule of law, where all citizens are equal. The changes to the Citizenship Act erode those basic principles, creating a two-tier citizenship that dilutes what it means to be Canadian.

Bill C-24 is wrong: There is only one kind of Canadian citizen – The Globe and Mail.

Rick Salutin in the Star:

Why did they do it? Here’s my guess: It’s not enough for them to merely run Canada. They want to define it, and they don’t want any backchat. Some people need to be right, not just powerful. So they’ve turned citizenship into a privilege, not a right, and since someone has to grant a privilege, it’ll be them.

But here’s my biggest problem. I don’t think loyalty — in any particular version — should have a thing to do with citizenship. The democratic core of citizenship is you get to challenge the values of the moment and can’t be shut up. It’s a license to disagree and debate which direction your nation takes, no matter what the majority thinks. Is that unpatriotic? It depends on how you see things. For many patriots, not going along has been the essence of patriotism. I’d say put people in jail for life if you insist — but don’t touch their citizenship.

Hello, you must be going: government waters down Canadian citizenship: Salutin

Canadian expatriates should never lose the right to vote

The problem with Semra Sevi’s argumentation like that of others is that it relies on anecdotes and generalizations:

Canadians abroad are connected to global networks that Canada can benefit from. Instead of using derogative labels like “Canadians of convenience” or “Foreigners holding Canadian passports,” Canada needs to take a proactive approach to engage Canadians living abroad. People have many different reasons for moving away, and to label them as less Canadian for doing so is troublesome. There are many cases of Canadians studying in the United States who find work in the United Kingdom before coming back to Canada a decade later yet under the current system they would be disenfranchised after five years. Many of these Canadians working abroad do so for Canadian companies, yet these businesses are not facing the same dilemma as Canadians abroad.

Immigrants who decide to leave Canada for whatever reason and return to their native countries are not less Canadian as their compatriots who live in Canada. They may not be residing in the country but they are nevertheless subject to Canadian law and foreign policy decisions. Many of them actively retain connections to Canada. Questions like are expatriates “real” Canadians, is unconstitutional and un-Canadian in themselves. Canadians living abroad are significant global assets who deserve the same rights as those living in Canada. The world is as interconnected as ever, and is only becoming more so. Isolating citizens based on their current geographic placement, which is based on many factors, runs counter to the way the world operates in the twenty-first century.

The reality if varies by community, it varies by individual, and it varies by country of residence. My anecdotal experience with Canadian expatriates when I worked in the foreign service was mixed; some maintained a strong ongoing connection, others did not.

We do not have enough survey and other information to know, beyond the usual anecdotes, how many expatriates have a meaningful ongoing connection to Canada.

Generally speaking, the longer the time outside of Canada, the looser the bond as family, work and local connections become more meaningful.

I suspect if we applied the US approach of taxation based on citizenship, some of the enthusiasm for unlimited voting rights (no representation without taxation) would decrease.

Canadian expatriates should never lose the right to vote – The Globe and Mail.

U of T prof still waiting for citizenship after three years | Toronto Star

An example of some of the problems in the citizenship program. C-24 streamlining will address some of these, but we will only know in 2016 when the backlog has been cleared and, more significantly, additional incremental funding ends:

Lemmens submitted his application to become a Canadian citizen in February 2011 after living and working in Canada since 1991. The native Belgian had come to Canada as a student. After completing his doctorate in 1997, he began teaching health law and bioethics at the University of Toronto — first through a joint appointment at the law faculty and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, and in 1999 just at the law faculty. Married to a Canadian, he had permanent resident status and didn’t immediately apply for Canadian citizenship.

He looked into it a couple of times but didn’t meet the residency requirement because he had been out of the country twice — once for a research leave and once for a sabbatical year. He was told he could be out of the country for only a maximum of 400 days out of four years. So he waited and counted.

When he finally applied for citizenship, he thought it would be a simple matter. But the process was difficult.

After preparing his initial application and writing his citizenship exam, he was required to fill out a very detailed questionnaire for which he had to piece together not only the exact dates he was out of Canada, but also where he stayed and the reason for his absences. He also was required to produce documentation showing home and family ties as well as employment and contributions to Canadian society.

This request surprised him.He has yet to be told why he was required to fill out an additional questionnaire or why his application has taken so long.He believes it may have something to do with the fact he was missing some entry stamps when he returned to Canada from journeys abroad. ….

Lemmens believes the government has purposely made the application process complicated and bureaucratic to discourage people from applying for Canadian citizenship.

“It’s really irritating and makes me think, if my file appears difficult to evaluate, how tough must it be for people from ‘suspect’ countries, or people who don’t necessarily have the same stable employment.”

U of T prof still waiting for citizenship after three years | Toronto Star.