Will changes to the Citizenship Act affect the naturalization rate? – Policy Options

My piece in IRPP’s Perspectives on the need for the Senate to consider the decline in the naturalization rate in its review of Bill C-6’s changes to the Citizenship Act.

Source: Will changes to the Citizenship Act affect naturalization rate? – Policy Options

Ontario children’s minister seeks racial data on kids in care

Always good to have better data to ensure improved analysis:

Ontario’s children’s minister says he will direct the province’s 47 children’s aid societies to collect race-based data as part of an effort to reduce the high number of black kids in care.

“I believe in data collection,” Michael Coteau told a conference on Thursday marking the beginning of a province-wide push to change the way children’s aid societies interact with black families.

“It is my intention in the very, very near future to mandate all children’s aid societies to collect race-based, disaggregated data,” he told child welfare officials and black community leaders at the gathering.

Black community leaders have long called for the collection of race-based data, arguing that tackling the overrepresentation of black kids in foster and group homes begins with knowing the extent of the problem. Coteau, who was appointed children’s minister in June, has for the first time committed the government to do so.

The conference was held to discuss a report calling for sweeping anti-racism reforms. It demands that every aspect of child protection in Ontario be transformed by “anti-black racism” structures and practices.

The two-volume report, called “One Vision One Voice: Changing the child welfare system to better serve African Canadians,” was written by a committee of the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies (OACAS) and funded by the Ministry of Children and Youth Services.

It was triggered by an ongoing Star investigation, which revealed that 42 per cent of children in the care of the Children’s Aid Society of Toronto were black, in a city where only 8 per cent of children are black.

Coteau reminded the conference that in 2004 he was part of a team of trustees behind the Toronto District School Board’s decision to collect race-based data on students.

“If you have no data, there’s no problem and there’s no solution,” Coteau said, citing the board’s superintendent of education at the time.

Coteau, also responsible for anti-racism in Ontario, promised that his ministry would go much further than data collection.

“Substantial reform is on the horizon,” he said, referring to major changes expected in Ontario’s privately run child protection system.

He said the Liberal government would soon amend the Child and Family Services Act to modernize children’s aid societies, which last year received $1.5 billion in provincial funding. He promised to make them more accountable and transparent, and to improve the patchwork of services and care they now provide.

“We want high-quality services that reflect Ontario’s diversity, consistently delivered across the province,” he said.

After his speech, Coteau refused to answer questions from the Star. He would not say whether his ministry was prepared to fund recommendations in the report calling for anti-racism reforms.

The OACAS, which represents all but four of the province’s societies, fully backs the recommendations in the anti-racism report, says Mary Ballantyne, the association’s CEO. She stressed the reforms can only be implemented with extra provincial funding.

The call for implementation funds was echoed by Ontario’s human rights commissioner, Renu Mandhane, and the province’s Child Advocate, Irwin Elman.

“We will continue to push the minister,” Elman said in his speech to the conference, adding he told Coteau, “You can’t just walk away now from this report. You need to provide resources.”

Source: Ontario children’s minister seeks racial data on kids in care | Toronto Star

A Wide Gulf Persists Between Black And White Perceptions Of Policing : NPR

Not surprising but nevertheless revealing, both in terms of the differences and the similarities:

A new study highlights differences between the races as they view the recent spate of deadly encounters between blacks and law enforcement.

A survey by the Pew Research Center finds only a third of blacks and nearly three-quarters of whites say police in their communities do an excellent or good job using appropriate force.

From Pew’s report:

“Most whites (75%) say their local police do an excellent or good job when it comes to using the right amount of force for each situation. Only 33% of blacks share this view; 63% say the police do only a fair or poor job in this area. About six-in-ten Hispanics (62%) say their community’s police are doing at least a good job in this area, while 35% say they are doing only a fair or poor job.

When it comes to treating racial or ethnic groups equally, 35% of blacks say the police department in their community does an excellent or good job, compared with 75% of whites. Conversely, about a quarter (23%) of blacks say their police department does only a fair job and about four-in-ten (38%) say they do a poor job. (Among whites, about a quarter – 24% – say their department does only a fair job or a poor job in treating racial and ethnic groups equally.) Roughly six-in-ten Hispanics (58%) say their local police are doing an excellent or good job in this area, while 38% say they are doing only a fair or poor job.”

The two races come to different conclusions about the reason for fatal incidents. About 8-in-10 blacks (79 percent) say the recent deaths are a sign of systemic problems between police and the black community, compared to 54 percent of whites.

The survey was conducted online and by mail with 4,538 U.S. adults between Aug. 16 and Sept. 12. The poll came before protests of a Sept. 16 shooting in Tulsa, Okla., as well as the fatal shooting of a black man in Charlotte, N.C. That shooting on Sept. 20 set off two nights of protests.

Both groups favor the use of body cameras by police to record encounters when dealing with the public. Overall, only about a third of all those surveyed have a “lot of confidence” in their own police department.

How to be Black at work: Andray Domise

Interesting series of anecdotes:

Last week, I spoke to a meeting of the Canadian Association of Urban Financial Professionals, a professional association for Black people working in the financial sector. During the talk, I discussed the importance of representation in the workplace—an all-too familiar conversation for those of us in corporate environments. But I also spoke to my experience as a former financial planner and manager at a time when Black people losing their lives to police violence was becoming the stuff of weekly headlines. After the talk was over, I was approached by several Black business professionals, some of them in senior management and C-level positions, who traded stories about Blackness in the workplace at a time of resistance. The consensus was, despite the money and resources that many companies pour into diversity training, the corporate world doesn’t appear ready for this conversation.

I reached out to other Black professionals to share their stories, and the result, while unsurprising, was disheartening. “It’s very subtle, a lot of it is unspoken stuff,” said David, a sales manager. “In a team huddle environment, you normally talk about current events, just to break the ice. But in one huddle, the subject of police brutality came up, and some members of my team were so uncomfortable with that conversation, they put their heads down.”

 He said he felt isolated. “What I got from it was that people in the room felt uncomfortable, because they didn’t feel the way I did about it. There’s nobody to talk to about it, and there’s definitely no one on my level bringing it up.” Normally, he told me, going to work the day after reading about another Black person executed by police is manageable. But when he saw the video of Philando Castile dying in the passenger seat of his vehicle in Minnesota, it took him a week to regain his focus in the workplace. “You have to protect yourself, and know who really stands with you,” he said. “So I was also trying to gauge how other people felt about it, and whether I’d be able to look at them the same way after that.”

Another woman, Melanie, talked about treading carefully around discussions of Black lives in the workplace, even as other causes are openly embraced. “We need to not feel that we’re making a career-limiting move by talking about these things that affect us. We have Breastober and Movember, but we can’t talk about bias and racism in the workplace, or in our daily lives.” It was an interesting point, given the renewed attention the psychology community is paying to the toll that racism and micro-aggressions have on the psychological health of Black people. She explained that, in a previous position, a superior heard about her Jamaican background. To break the ice, he asked her if she could score weed for him. “We have such a long way to go,” she said. “But there’s no one to talk to about it. A white, male executive might see how his daughter, or his gay son could impacted by discrimination, and say, ‘I don’t want them to go through this,’ and make some changes. But unless some benevolent actor sees how Black people are affected in the workplace, nothing will happen.”

Sometimes, the challenge in the workplace doesn’t come from superiors, but from peers, company partners, and those lower on the pay scale. When I spoke with Vivian, a white-collar manager working with mostly blue-collar employees, she told me colleagues and subordinates would often bring up the protests by the Black Lives Matter Toronto—but only to heap scorn. “There’s just no understanding of why we give a s–t,” she told me. “I’d hear it all around the workplace. ‘Why are these Black Lives Matter people demonstrating here? All of this stuff that’s happening is in the States.’ ” As the only Black woman manager in a building with over 1,400 employees, she told me that she felt walled-off in a workplace where the conversation around Black lives barely registered. “You listen to people’s stories about their cats, and their cottages. And I’m thinking, ‘Yeah? Because I spent the weekend writing articles and speaking on panels about people f–king dying. Tell me more about your cat.’”

Vivian likened the experience in the workplace to her experience as a sex abuse survivor. “For many years, I couldn’t talk about it. I couldn’t disclose. But every day that I had it in me and couldn’t talk about it, or get it out, it felt like another traumatic day.” Vivian explained that, for a long time, the trauma of the incident left her vulnerable to being triggered by seeing or hearing things that reminded her of the abuse, but she couldn’t express to her friends or family what the problem was, for fear of having to defend herself, and relive the trauma. “That’s how it feels, going to work as a Black person in this climate right now,” she said.

Though Black people working in the corporate world are not usually the ones on the front lines of protest, all of us are dealing with the movement in our own way. Some of us donate to Black Lives Matter, some attend community consultations with police and local government, and some offer mentorship and support to our youth. But the dual nature of the workplace environment, where Black people face pressures from the community to create pathways, and from the white-dominated corporate world to maintain the status quo or face career-limiting consequences, leaves many of us without a way to make meaningful change. Perhaps that’s why the central conceit of #Missing24 was so flawed. In the workplace, where we’ve had to outshine our peers in order to simply be included, we can’t afford to go missing. The only way to make our presence felt is by having more of us show up.

Source: How to be Black at work – Macleans.ca

Singapore’s Way to Multiculturalism – Fair Observer

While the ‘social engineering’ of housing policy and practices is likely unique to Singapore, it still is an interesting case study of reducing barriers. But as their society evolves, some of similar questions about identity, citizenship and belonging arise:

A national poll released a few weeks ago found most Singaporeans try to live out multiracial ideals and believe in meritocracy. More than seven in 10 Singaporeans believe personal success is independent of race or ethnicity, according to the survey commissioned by Channel NewsAsia and the Institute of Policy Studies.

That’s a remarkable finding for diverse Singapore, whose population is 74.2% Chinese, 13.3% Malay, 9.2% Indian and 3.3% other. It’s also the most religiously diverse nation in the world, according to a 2014 analysis by the Pew Research Center, its population made up of sizable portions of Buddhists, Christians, Muslims and Hindus.

The poll is especially noteworthy considering how far the country has come in half a century, when its early days as a new nation were beset by ethnic tensions and race riots.

Singapore’s strides toward multiculturalism got a shout-out from President Obama, who played host to visiting Singapore’s Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in August.

“In the United States, we call ourselves a ‘melting pot’ of different races, religions and creeds. In Singapore, it is rojak—different parts united in a harmonious whole,” Obama said. “We’re bound by the belief that no matter who you are, if you work hard and play by the rules, you can make it.” (Rojak is a traditional fruit and vegetable salad dish named after a Malay term for mixture.)

Singapore sets an example for the world on multiculturalism. A founding principal of the country is the integration of its ethnic and racial groups—a decision was made at the outset to treat every race, language and religion as equal. It made an asset of its ethnic and religious diversity, and the result is relative racial harmony.

MELTING POT

How did Singapore do it? One answer is forced housing integration. In Singapore, 85% live in very decent, mostly owner-occupied public housing, and racial quotas mean every block, precinct and enclave fall in line with the national ethnic population percentages mentioned above.

Forcing different peoples to live together as neighbors broke up the ethnic ghettoes and the all-Chinese, all-Malay or all-Indian blocks that could be found at the country’s founding in 1965. The housing policy “was authoritarian, intrusive, and it turns out to be our greatest strength,” Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said.

The Housing Development Board (HDB) public housing high-rises were Singapore’s answer to affordable housing. Most HDB dwellers own their own flat, adding to their sense of responsibility and community pride. The units are heavily subsidized for young couples buying a starter home in one of the world’s most expensive cities. The term HDB carries none of the stigma that, say, the term housing project carries in the US.

The HDB has other positive social impacts. By clustering housing near commercial centers and transit hubs, Singapore makes it easier for its residents to live and work in the same place. The best commute, as a Harvard economist once said, is a lift downstairs.

And Singapore can call itself a “Garden City” for the proportion of land that remains open. The concept of HDBs—of building up, and not out—allows Singapore to preserve much of its green space for recreation, while two-thirds of its land surface is used for rainwater catchment.

Source: Singapore’s Way to Multiculturalism – Fair Observer