Germany passes new #citizenship law for descendants of Nazi victims

2021/06/28 Leave a comment

Of note:

German lawmakers have approved changes that will make it easier for descendants of those who fled Nazi persecution to obtain citizenship.

Under German law, people stripped of their citizenship on political, racial or religious grounds can have it restored, and so can their descendants.

But legal loopholes had prevented many people from benefiting.

Campaigners say the move allow many to reconnect with their German heritage, particularly in the Jewish community.

“We acknowledge the work that the German people have undertaken to honour the memory of those lost and those who suffered in the [Holocaust],” said Felix Couchman, chair of the Article 116 Exclusions Group, which has been lobbying on the issue for years.

“These measures have been necessary stepping stones to rebuilding trust,” he added.

While Germany’s post-war constitution allows citizenship to be restored, the lack of a legal framework meant many people had their applications rejected.

Some were denied because their ancestors had taken another nationality before their citizenship was revoked.

For others it was because they were born to a German mother, but not a German father. Until a change to the law in 1953, German citizenship could only be passed on paternally.

A legal decree was passed in 2019 to help close these loopholes. Now that it has passed the lower house of Germany’s Bundestag, with a large majority, prospective applicants will have a firmer legal footing for their appeal.

The law does also cover those who were directly deprived of their citizenship but, given the passage of time, descendants will be the main beneficiaries.

The new law also bars the naturalisation of people convicted of racist, anti-Semitic or xenophobic acts.

“This is not just about putting things right, it is about apologising in profound shame,” said Interior Minister Horst Seehofer in March, when the government passed the draft law.

“It is a huge fortune for our country if people want to become German, despite the fact that we took everything from their ancestors.”

The move comes as neighbouring Poland comes under the spotlight for a draft law which critics say would make it harder for Jews to recover property seized by Nazi occupiers during World War Two.

The bill, passed by Poland’s lower parliamentary house on Thursday, has been condemned by the US and Israel.

Source: Germany passes new citizenship law for descendants of Nazi victims

Filed under Citizenship, Holocaust, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Norman: I am a Canadian citizen. Why can’t my son be a Canadian citizen, too?

2021/06/26 Leave a comment

The first generation limit was introduced given the complexity of administering the previous previsions requiring transmission of citizenship, as well as the Lebanese evacuation of 2006 where many Canadian citizens were found to have little or no connection to Canada yet expected Canadian taxpayers to pay for their evacuation.

Norman clearly has deep and meaningful connections to Canada. However, the same is not true for many other expatriates as I analysed a number of years ago when looking at expatriate voting rights: What should expatriates’ voting rights be? – Policy Options).

But Norman overstates the case given that her child, an American citizen, enjoys visa-free travel to and from Canada, and is more likely to be able to benefit from the various temporary and permanent resident pathways than others given language skills and familiarity with North American habits and culture.

And the raising of citizenship revocation is a red herring as the provision has been repealed and is irrelevant in any case to the generation limit.

Recently, I finally began the process of preparing my infant son’s Canadian citizenship application ahead of his first birthday. We are hoping to finally travel from the United States to see his Canadian grandmother for the first time later this summer, and I thought that having Canadian identification for both of us would ensure an easier border crossing amid COVID-19 restrictions. Only in preparing the application did I learn that I will not be able to pass my Canadian citizenship to him.

My mother was born in Canada, as was her mother, but I was born in the United States. As a baby she made sure to promptly apply by mail for my Canadian citizenship, and I still have a national identity card with my pudgy nine-month-old face on it. At the time, my Canadian citizenship – earned via descent – was not yet of a lesser quality.

When I was a child, my mother took steps to cultivate my love and pride for Canada. We spent summers in Canada with my grandparents, aunts, uncles and cousins. We saw the view from the CN Tower in Toronto, we took a train through the Rockies from Calgary to Vancouver, and we saw orcas swimming in the Georgia Strait. My mother rightfully taught us to frown upon anything but pure maple syrup, and I faithfully learned the words to O Canada. By my high-school years, I embraced my Canadian identity fiercely, proudly reminding friends that I was Canadian as well as American at every opportunity. I studied French in high school rather than the more obvious choice of Spanish given our location in southern California, and after my first year of university I spent a summer working in British Columbia, absolutely enamoured with the province’s natural beauty.

But it wasn’t until I was 23 that I fully embraced my Canadian citizenship. When it came time to apply for a master’s degree, I was accepted to study public policy at the University of Toronto, a city that I fell in love with. I was able to see my family in Ontario on weekends and holidays, and when I finished my degree, my citizenship allowed me to easily stay and work in Toronto for several research institutes and civil society organizations.

Eventually, I came back to the U.S. for my Ph.D., having been told I would have an easier time returning to Canada to find work after graduation with an American doctorate. Conversely, while I was able to secure a two-year postdoctoral fellowship at the University of British Columbia, the only long-term jobs I was offered were in the United States. And by virtue of remaining in the United States for employment – and by giving birth to my son here – I am unable to pass on my Canadian citizenship to him.

In 2009 the Harper government passed an amendment that prevented Canadian citizens who were themselves not born in Canada from passing on their citizenship to children also not born in Canada. This was part of a larger trajectory of limiting access to naturalized citizenship and privileging Canadians without dual citizenship. In 2015, Bill C-24 came into effect under the Harper government. The most controversial aspect of this act was that it allowed the government to potentially strip dual-citizen Canadians of their nationality should they be found guilty of terrorism, fraud, treason or serving in a foreign army – among other reasons – but the act did not apply the same standards to citizens born in Canada. As such, rights groups such as Amnesty International argued that the act discriminates against foreign-born Canadians and creates a hierarchical model of Canadian citizenship. Predictably, the act has and will continue to disproportionately affect brown and black naturalized Canadians who – whether by necessity or choice – live outside of Canada for educational or employment opportunities or because of family obligations at the time their children are born.

Supporters of the Harper government’s move toward a narrower naturalization and dual citizenship law focused on the idea that the citizenship should not be seen as a commodity. Chris Alexander, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration at the time Bill C-24 was proposed, proclaimed in 2014, “Canadians value their citizenship. They understand it applies to us who live here and who are connected to Canada. It’s not for sale, it’s not free and it’s not without any obligations.”

For my son, this issue is not about the “value” of Canadian citizenship. And as far as passports go, he is equally as privileged with an American passport as he would be with a Canadian one. What I mourn is the lack of a connection to Canada that citizenship by descent entails. We will visit his grandmother in B.C., and I will introduce him to his family in Ontario. I’ll even find ways of passing on cultural cues and traditions, but he will never have the promise or ease of living and working in Canada himself and fostering his own connections to the country, as I did.

I may currently live in the U.S., but I file Canadian taxes, I visit regularly – pandemic aside – and I maintain strong connections with my Canadian family, friends and colleagues. Interestingly, during the House of Commons committee debates prior to the adoption of the 2009 amendment, the committee considered allowing the transmission of citizenship by descent to children born abroad to a Canadian parent, provided that the Canadian parent resided in Canada for a period of time before the child was born. Instead, the government argued that doing so would be too complicated and opted for “one simple transparent rule” that removed the possibility of citizenship by descent for the second generation.

Original:

Even though I would have personally benefited from a modification that allowed naturalized Canadian parents who had lived in Canada to pass on their citizenship, this would not have resolved the underlying flaw of the 2009 amendment. The bottom-line is that allowing some Canadian citizens – those born in Canada – the ability to transmit their nationality while denying others – Canadians by descent and naturalized Canadians – from doing so creates an unequal, hierarchical model that ultimately tarnishes what it means to be Canadian.

Corrected copy: (to her credit, Norman made the change when I pointed it out)

Even though I would have personally benefited from a modification that allowed Canadians by descent who had lived in Canada to pass on their citizenship, this would not have resolved the underlying flaw of the 2009 amendment. The bottom-line is that allowing some Canadian citizens – those born in Canada – the ability to transmit their nationality while denying others – Canadians by descent – from doing so creates an unequal, hierarchical model that ultimately tarnishes what it means to be Canadian.

My inability to pass along my citizenship is a loss for my son and a loss for Canada, especially at a time when the birth rate is at a record low and the government is scrambling to find ways of increasing immigration. Citizenship has the potential to act as an instrument of inclusion rather than exclusion. With all the government’s fanfare about the strength of multiculturalism, it certainty seems like an apt time to revisit the trajectory of using citizenship to exclude, rather than expanding and celebrating dual nationals who want to share their Canadian citizenship with their children.

Kelsey P. Norman is a Fellow for the Middle East and Director of the Women’s Rights, Human Rights & Refugees program at the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University. She is the author of Reluctant Reception: Migration, Refugees and Governance in the Middle East and North Africa.

Source: I am a Canadian citizen. Why can’t my son be a Canadian citizen, too?

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with ,

KUTTY: Islamophobia an ever-present danger in Canada

2021/06/26 Leave a comment

Of note, Kutty’s valid critique of Fatah’s column (There is no Islamophobia in Canada), including the examples of the “blame the victim” as applied to Jews, women, and Blacks. However, by focussing only on the violent extremists of Daesh, he understates the impact of non-violent extremist attitudes within different religious groups:

Reading Tarek Fatah’s recent diatribe, There is no Islamophobia in Canada, was a surreal experience.

A few adjectives quickly came to mind but, “subtle,” “nuanced,” “thoughtful,” and “honest” were not among them.

“Superficial,” “reductionist,” “misleading,” and “incendiary” came to the fore.

The thrust of the piece was that Muslims are to blame for a peaceful multigenerational Muslim family mowed down with a truck and killed while out for a Sunday stroll.

The rationale behind this “blame the victim” argument is that hatred of, or violence against, Muslims is pervasive because of Muslims.

If Muslims are encountering challenges “everywhere,” the argument goes, then it must be the Muslim faith or behaviour that is provoking this hatred.

To appreciate the mendacity of this argument, substitute any other targeted group or community.

Anti-Semitism growing? It must be something about the Jews.

Is sexual assault rampant? It’s because of how women dress and behave.

The police profile Blacks? It’s their fault as well.

Those arguments do not pass the smell test, and neither does the argument about Muslims and Islamophobia.

Islamophobia exists and is on the increase because demonizing, dehumanizing, and otherizing Muslims is acceptable and can be disseminated with impunity, as in the article in question.

Is there Islamophobia in Canada? The perpetrator of the London, Ontario killings allegedly targeted the family specifically for their faith.

The Quebec City shooter was enthralled with Islamophobic figures like Le Pen and Trump.

In the lead-up to the London murders, Muslim women reported a spike in attacks against them, and less than a year ago, the caretaker of a Toronto mosque was killed by a man whose social media featured Neo-Nazi posts as reported by the Sun.

Islamophobic violence has now taken the lives of at least 11 Canadian Muslims in the last four years.

Yet, according to Fatah, there is no Islamophobia in Canada.

The article pathetically attempts to “show” that the Qur’an teaches Muslims hate by selectively citing, out of context, an interpretation of verses from the Qur’an.

Yet, the Afzaals were known in their community as devout Muslims.

They were mosque-goers, almost never missing a prayer in congregation.

At their funeral, the Imam shared that the family were Syeds — descendants of Prophet Muhammad.

Their life was an embodiment of their faith. And what did that embodiment of faith look like?

According to the London Free Press, Salman Afzaal was a “caring physiotherapist” who worked at several nursing homes.

The administrator of Ritz Lutheran Villa described him as “deeply committed to his elderly patients” and “kind and caring … well respected and always had a smile and positive outlook.”

Madiha, studying for her PhD in Engineering at Western, was loved and respected by her colleagues.

As a professor of Islamic law, I am stumped searching for the hate incitement Fatah claims.

On the contrary, the Qur’an, like any text, is subject to interpretation.

It continues to inspire the vast majority of its readers to do good in the world and to search for peace.

That was the experience of Muhammad Ali and Kareem Abdul Jabbar; Cat Stevens and Arnoud van Doorn; Sinead O’Connor and Dave Chappelle.

Thousands of people continue to come into Islam precisely because they feel that sense of peace on reading the Qur’an.

Conversely, like extremists of other ideologies, Daesh recruits are ignorant haters who abuse Islam for their own political and nefarious purposes.

But none of this matters to Fatah, who has rarely penned a positive word about the Canadian Muslim community since his opportunist flip.

His subsequent track record is one of misrepresentation, selective quoting, and over-generalizations and only justifies and incites hate against Muslims.

It is bigotry. For the Sun to publish it is, at best callous and at worst reckless.

Source: KUTTY: Islamophobia an ever-present danger in Canada

Filed under Islamophobia, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Fadden: Canada needs a national inquiry into its handling of COVID-19

2021/06/26 Leave a comment

Fully agree this is needed. And hopefully, the results and recommendations will lead to action, in the short and medium term, unlike the forgetfulness following the SARS enquiries:

As COVID-19 case counts continue to decline and Canada looks optimistically ahead to our future after pandemic restrictions are lifted, it may be time to also start looking back – specifically, at how this country handled the pandemic and how we should organize ourselves to deal with the next major disruptive event. The only way this can be done comprehensively and objectively is through the establishment of a public inquiry with national scope and freedom from political interference.

Two points can be made in favour of such an inquiry. The first is that it is indisputable that the pandemic could have been better handled. We were not properly prepared and many of the decisions taken from the very beginning were the wrong ones, or were at least not explained nearly as clearly as they might have been. The expiry of much of our national stockpile of personal protective equipment and the confusing initial advice on the wearing of masks are just two examples. A careful examination of the reasons for these types of mistakes could help us avoid repeating them in the future.

The second point underlying the need for an inquiry is the worldwide consensus that serious disruptive events will continue to occur and are likely to grow in intensity and variety. Other pandemics, flooding, fires or migration are the most obvious and likely. To fail to better prepare for such events will border on criminal, and proper planning requires a clear understanding of how the management of past events can be improved upon.

There are a number of ways to review our management of the current pandemic, but nothing short of a nationally oriented public inquiry established by – but not beholden to – the federal government will do. Internal reviews by the public service would be too narrow and they would be undertaken by the very institutions whose activities and advice need to be reviewed. Review by Parliament would fall prey to the excessive partisanship that seems to govern relations within our various legislatures. Auditors general will have a contribution to make to our understanding of what happened, but they are limited to their respective jurisdictions and have little if any ability to consider activity in the private sector and in civil society.

The COVID-19 crisis is unquestionably a national and international challenge that paid little attention to borders, and as such the inquiry must be structured to allow for a review of all aspects of how Canada fared. Three issues should be of particular focus.

The first is the need to consider to what extent Canada should ensure that certain essential goods be available, no matter what. This is not a matter for governments alone; it requires the participation of the business sector and the provinces.

The second issue is one of personal freedoms. We live in a country of rights and responsibilities, and that balance always needs to be carefully calibrated. The question of whether an individual’s right to refuse public health advice supersedes government efforts to ensure the greater good needs at least some measure of resolution.

The third issue involves the roles and responsibilities of the numerous levels of government within Canada, as well as the roles of other countries and of international institutions. The management of interprovincial and international borders is perhaps the most obvious example of something in this area that needs to be probed. The broad distribution of responsibility and action to deal with COVID-19 may or may not have been essentially correct. Either way, it needs an objective review to determine if any adjustments are necessary for the future.

A process like this could also help us recognize and fortify our strong points. The objective of an inquiry is not to assume bad faith or assign blame, but rather to look into what was done and how, with a view to proposing corrective action. Any inquiry must recognize what went well. In this respect, the relatively positive response of the public to instructions and the general level of co-operation between the federal and provincial governments (as evidenced by many First Minister virtual meetings) need mention.

Given the number of deaths Canada has seen throughout this pandemic, the enormous social and economic adjustments Canadians have made, and the unprecedented cost to taxpayers, this country needs a credible, practical and comprehensive look at how we can be better prepared for the next pandemic. A public inquiry established by the federal government, but independent of it, is the only practical vehicle to accomplish this. It needs to be set up before the next election to prevent its work from becoming a matter of partisan debate. Now is not too soon to get started.

Richard Fadden is a former national security adviser to the prime minister. He was director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service from 2009 to 2013 and served as deputy minister of national defence from 2013 to 2015.

Source: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canada-needs-a-national-inquiry-into-its-handling-of-covid-19/

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Beaman: The problem with Canada’s delusions of inclusivity and multiculturalism

2021/06/26 2 Comments

While I agree with Beaman on the need to “to contextualise them [anti-Muslim hate] within broader patterns of inequality, discrimination and violence against a wide range of groups, including Indigenous people, Black people and other people of colour.” To which I would add, antisemitism, anti-LGBTQ, women, along with the intersectional dimensions.

And I would argue that the situation is not as bleak as described, and that there has been progress over the years, albeit slow:

On Sunday 6 June, while out for an evening stroll in London, Ontario, the Afzaal family, Salman Afzaal (aged 46), his wife Madiha Salman (44), their 15-year-old daughter Yumna, nine-year-old son Fayez and Mr. Afzaal’s 74-year-old mother Talat were run over by a 20-year-old male driving a pickup truck.

The whole family was killed except for Fayez. The driver has been chargedwith terrorism and four counts of first-degree murder. Police have saidthat the attack is likely deliberate and the family were targeted because they were Muslim.

This attack is not an isolated incident in Canada.

Last year, on the evening of 12 September, 58-year-old Mohamed-Aslim Zafis was stabbed to death outside the International Muslim Organization mosque in Toronto. On 29 January 2017, a shooting at the Islamic Cultural Centre of Quebec City left six men dead. After the province of Quebec passed Bill 21 in 2019, banning the wearing of religious symbols by public school teachers and civil servants, among others, incidents of harassment and discrimination against Muslim women increased.

Despite a pervasive image of Canada and Canadians as inclusive, diverse and multicultural, there is an alternative Canadian reality that includes violence, hatred and discrimination against minority groups, including Muslims.

Multiculturalism is enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as is religious freedom and protection from discrimination based on religion and ethnicity. Thus, there are structural legal protections in place that help promote inclusion and diversity, which are currently at the core of Canadian domestic and foreign policy.

‘Currently’ because only a few years ago the federal government under then prime minister Stephen Harper went to court in an attempt to banZunera Ishaq from wearing her niqab during the ceremony to become a Canadian citizen (the government lost).

The same Conservative government promised during the 2015 election to establish a “barbaric cultural practices” hotline. The question is why, despite the Charter and strong programmes of multiculturalism, inclusion and diversity, does Islamophobia in Canada persist and even seem to be growing? The short answer is that the social imaginary, or the way people think about the collective ‘us’, has not been redefined in inclusive ways.

Who is ‘us’?

In her response to the murders of 51 Muslims during Friday prayers at two mosques in Christchurch, New Zealand on 15 March 2019, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern noted that many of those who were affected “may even be refugees here. They have chosen to make New Zealand their home, and it is their home. They are us.”

Hateful acts impact those immediately involved, their communities and all of us

Ardern’s comment gets to the heart of the matter: Who is ‘us’? In addition to legal and policy promises of inclusion, acknowledgement of diversity and recognition of multiculturalism, an inclusive conceptualisation of ‘us’ in civil society is essential.

In contrast, there is ample evidence that a significant number of Canadians hold a narrower view of who belongs to ‘us’. A 2017 poll into religious trends in the country revealed that Islam is viewed unfavourably by almost half of all Canadians (46%), and that less than 35% of respondents (32% in Quebec, 34% in the rest of Canada) view Islam favourably.

In 2017, when Bill M-103, a non-binding motion to “condemn Islamophobia and all forms of systemic racism and religious discrimination”, was introduced to parliament by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid, a poll found that a third of Canadians believed that the bill was a “threat to Canadians’ freedom of speech”.

Some 42% of respondents said they would vote against the bill, while 55% believed that anti-Muslim attitudes and discrimination were “overblown” by politicians and the media. The motion was passed by a significant margin, 201-91.

Real equality

In my recent book ‘The Transition of Religion to Culture in Law and Public Discourse’, I explore through legal cases the transformation of majoritarian Christian religious practices and symbols into ‘culture’ in Canada, France and the United States.

For example, the use of prayers and religious symbols such as crosses and crucifixes in government and public spaces are generally seen as being integral to ‘our’ culture and heritage. Narratives of ‘universality’ (‘this is important or relevant to all of us’), minimization of harm (‘this doesn’t really hurt anyone’), and invocation of ‘our values’ are all part of the process by which religion is reconfigured as culture.

I argue in the book that this phenomenon is a strategy aimed at preserving a narrow conceptualisation of ‘us’ that excludes minority groups, who are ‘imagined’ out of Canada’s history and culture. The defence of potentially alienating practices and symbols traps us in a hierarchical holding pattern.

If we Canadians are to live well together, these must be renegotiated in a manner that recognises all parties to the conversation as equals, and in some instances as being in need of redress for past wrongs. And ‘they’ must be included in the social imaginary of ‘us’.

“Islamophobia will continue to exist until Canada dismantles its other oppressive systems. While there is still anti-Blackness, there will still be Islamophobia. While there is still anti-Indigenous racism, there will still be Islamophobia. Under white supremacy, there will always be Islamophobia,”said Maryam Azzam, a Muslim student at Ryerson (‘X’) University in Toronto. She was speaking after the attack on the Afzaal family.

While it is important to name Islamophobia and anti-Muslim racism as distinct phenomena, it is also important to contextualise them within broader patterns of inequality, discrimination and violence against a wide range of groups, including Indigenous people, Black people and other people of colour.

Hateful acts impact those immediately involved, their communities and all of us. They result in fear, powerlessness and alienation. They undermine civil society, create hierarchies of belonging (‘us’ versus ‘them’) and impact the exercise of freedoms.

It is vital that in the new diversity that is emerging in Canada and in a complex future, equality must be conceptualised not only as a legal principle, but as something that people enact in day to day life – as ‘deep equality’. This is not mere tolerance or accommodation, but a robust understanding of the inherent dignity and worth of each of us in the project of living well together.

Source: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/global-extremes/the-problem-with-canadas-delusions-of-inclusivity-and-multiculturalism/

Filed under Islamophobia, Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with

How to Get Hassle-Free Canadian Birthright Citizenship

2021/06/26 2 Comments

The latest example I have seen of marketing birth tourism services in Canada:

Getting Canadian citizenship for children brings many benefits. From avoiding international tuition fees when a child gets to university age, to easing immigration concerns, Canadian birthright can be advantageous. The opportunity to live and work in the Canadian economy is also something that could be an ideal solution once children reach adulthood and want to make the most of their skills. Accessing one of the world’s most advanced healthcare systems when needed will also provide sound peace of mind.

Despite the benefits of doing so, many people are put off attempting to get Canadian birthright citizenship for their children for fear of acting illegally, or just because of bureaucratic red tape involved. The reality is that with the right help, it is completely legal to do so, and experts can navigate the process on an individual’s behalf.

“Birthright Citizenship Canada are experts in our field, and we do everything we can to make the process as smooth as possible”, a spokesman for the Concord, ON-based childbirth support organization commented. “By commissioning us to work on your family’s project you will know that everything is taken care of. This includes the paperwork, travel arrangements to and from Canada, and all the legal and medical help that will be required along the way”.

“One of the main aspects that discourages people from seeking to obtain birthright citizenship for their children is the processes involved. Obtaining documents such as temporary residence visas can be a daunting prospect for people not familiar with Canadian procedures. Our team are skilled in such matters, and can allow you to concentrate on enjoying your new arrival.”

The Canadian Citizenship Act made it legal to get citizenship for a baby born in Canada to foreign parents. In fact in simple terms, the act states that citizenship is available to all children born within the country. Even still, the perception of complexity and bureaucracy discourages many people.

“To ease peoples’ concerns about complexity and legalities, we combine everything into ‘birth packages’. These bundle in everything from transport and accommodation arrangements to healthcare and paperwork. Our experts handle multiple files on a daily basis. As a result, they know how to get things done, and where the potential bottlenecks are. Not only that, but they take the time to communicate with the customer at every step of the way.”

Birthright Citizenship Canada’s role involves being the go-between to navigate different stakeholders from the start of the process. Only when the family leaves the country again with a Canadian citizenship passport does the project conclude.

“Our job is all about removing pain points and hassle”, the spokesman continued. “We even do our best to save our customers some money where we possibly can. For example, we advise people to have pre-natal testing carried out prior to traveling to Canada. Doing this in their country of origin is almost always cheaper, and this way it is already organized before touching down in Canada. We also have different packages available depending on peoples’ budgets and requirements.”

About Birthright Citizenship Canada

Birthright Citizenship Canada are experts in childbirth support. The Toronto-based consultants specialize in obtaining citizenship for non-residents’ children born on Canadian territory. By offering packaged services covering legal, medical and administrative requirements, Birthright Citizenship Canada aim to take the stress and hassle out of the process. This allows people to focus on the birth of their child.

Media Contact
Company Name: Birthright Citizenship Canada
Contact Person: Media Relations
Email: Send Email
Phone: +1-647-646-5437
Address:7250 Keele Street, Unit 425
City: Toronto
State: Ontario L4K 1Z8
Country: Canada
Website: https://birthrightcanada.com/

Source: How to Get Hassle-Free Canadian Birthright Citizenship

Filed under Birth Tourism, Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Sappani: Politicians should be guided by victims of terrorism, not their killers

2021/06/25 Leave a comment

Of note, some valid points regarding political considerations:

Four Muslim names spanning three generations slain by an act of terror in London, Ont., now also belong to those we memorialize on the National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism this June 23. Sixteen years since it was first enacted, the list of victims continues to grow longer. Surprisingly, this is happening in one of the safest countries in the world, despite Air India Flight 182’s bombing in 1985 and the 2014 attack on Parliament Hill.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s statement on this occasion takes note of the horrific events in 1985, yet the measure of actions taken to confront extremism remains a project of politics, not national security.

The 1985 terrorist attack on Air India, killing 280 Canadian citizens, should have catalyzed the creation of a top-tier security system. The attack constituted the biggest aviation terror event until 9/11, and today, 38 years after the tragedy and more than a decade after the John Major report, Canada still seems incapable of confronting extremism.

Hard questions have to be asked.  What has been learned since 1985? Do security professionals have the mandate to do their jobs, or do politics prevail over the security of Canadians?

A 2018 CSIS report explicitly described Sikh radicalism, Islamic radicalism, and far-right fanaticism, as among the top five terror threats to Canada. The report created an uproar in certain segments of the Indo-Canadian diaspora, resulting in it being watered down – not due to new facts or errors, but under political pressure from vote banks decrying discrimination. Indeed, Canadian politicians interfering with national security reports is the natural product of decades of growing identity politics.

Despite the Air India bombing, the Canadian terrorists behind the attack continue to be hailed as heroes at parades in Canada, widely attended by elected Canadian representatives. Canadian politicians also happily attend events glorifying the banned LTTE terrorist group pandering for votes in Tamil communities.

Identity-based vote banks play a significant role in partisan politics. Politicians prioritize their own ambitions over the values of our nation and at the expense of fallen victims, elevating these brokers of extremist ideologies. A select few of our national leaders refuse to compromise on these values, like Bob Rae during the 2006 Liberal leadership race. Yet they too, often, learn the hard lessons of the extent to which extremist agendas dominate Canadian politics.

At times, pandering to diverging extremes produces dark comedy. All of Canada’s national leaders rightfully condemned Islamophobia after the London terror attack, while contradicting themselves by refusing to condemn the naked Islamophobia of Quebec’s Bill C-21.

NDP leader Jagmeet Singh is a case in point. In delivering a thundering speech – in English – on Canada as a “racist country,” he failed to deliver the same sentiment – in French – to the Quebec legislature. He is unfortunately also known for his controversies in describing Khalistani separatism.

The Conservatives are also experiencing their own issues, having rejected MP Derek Sloan for associating with far-right extremists. One can also point to Alberta MP Garnett Genuis, who is the party’s self-appointed champion of Punjab – read: Khalistan – independence.

Even today, the majority of politicians in Greater Vancouver and Toronto will not openly condemn banned terrorist organizations in Canada, fearing reprisals from extremist vote banks. Extremists groups have learned to exploit membership-driven nomination processes, even as our security agencies fail to confront these metastasizing threats.

On this 16th National Day of Remembrance for Victims of Terrorism, it is not the victims whose memory are guiding our national debate, but the agendas of the extremists who killed them. The victims themselves are often immigrants, from the Air India bombing to our murdered Muslim family, leaving one us to wonder why these murders slip so easily from national memory.

In elections to come, politicians would be wise to discover courage in going beyond the platitudes of unprincipled pandering and explicitly refuse to platform extremism. It would be refreshing to see Canadian leaders whose political outreach is more informed by terrorism’s victims, than those who celebrate their murderers.

Source: Politicians should be guided by victims of terrorism, not their killers

Filed under Multiculturalism, Radicalization Tagged with , , , ,

Ivison: O’Toole’s pro-Canada speech may resonate with voters tired of apologies

2021/06/25 Leave a comment

Ivison’s take. We shall see.

Of course, it was Conservative governments that started the trend, Mulroney’s apology to Japanese Canadians (and “drive-by” apology to Italian Canadians), and Harper government apologies to Chinese Canadians and a “drive-by” apology to Sikh Canadians, and the most significant, the apology to Indigenous peoples for residential schools. The Liberal government just extended the practice (in contrast to earlier Liberal governments).

The Australian equivalent to “sack-cloth and ashes” is the “black armband” portrayal of history.

That being said, there is a balance between recognizing and acknowledging the negative aspects of our history and present without acknowledging the positive ones:

Erin O’Toole’s leadership pledge to “take back Canada” was viciously lampooned. “Indigenous folks, did you hear Erin O’Toole wants to give you your land back,” quipped one social media satirist.

The slogan may have helped O’Toole get elected leader but its Trumpian undercurrent ensured it was retired after he decided to present a more moderate image to Canadians.

Source: O’Toole’s pro-Canada speech may resonate with voters tired of apologies

Filed under Aboriginal, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Australia: Citizenship application costs set to soar

2021/06/25 Leave a comment

High Canadian fees being used (along with UK and USA) to help justify increase:

Australian citizenship application fees are being jacked up to recoup more of the processing costs.

The standard fee for Australian citizenship by conferral will soar from $285 to $490, an increase of 72 per cent.

People applying for citizenship by descent or under other situations will also pay significantly more.

So will those seeking to renounce, resume or apply for evidence of Australian citizenship.

Immigration Minister Alex Hawke insists the July 1 price hike will better reflect the cost of handling increasingly complex applications, which take longer to process.

Mr Hawke said it was the first change to citizenship application fees since 2016.

“Based on existing fees, the government is only recovering approximately 50 per cent of the costs of processing citizenship applications,” he said on Thursday.

“The cost of citizenship applications remains comparable with other countries.”

Mr Hawke said the cost of citizenship would still be lower than the UK, Canada and US.

The decision is guaranteed to raise eyebrows given the impact of coronavirus border closures, which have driven a wrecking ball through migration into Australia.

Source: Citizenship application costs set to soar

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Ethnic makeup of Buckingham Palace workforce not ‘what we would like,’ says senior source

2021/06/25 Leave a comment

Smaller gap than I would have guessed but perhaps London would be a better benchmark than the UK as a whole (40 percent ethnic minorities):

Buckingham Palace has for the first time released figures on the ethnic makeup of its staff, following the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s allegations of racism in the Royal Family.

The Royal Household said Thursday that 8.5 per cent of its staff come from ethnic minorities, compared with a target of 10 per cent by next year. The latest census data shows that ethnic minorities account for about 13 per cent of the U.K. population. The staffing figures were released as part of an annual report on royal finances.

A senior palace source said publishing the figures was an effort to ensure greater accountability because there would be “no place to hide” if diversity goals aren’t met. The source acknowledged that much more needed to be done.

Source: Ethnic makeup of Buckingham Palace workforce not ‘what we would like,’ says senior source

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →