ICYMI – Denley: Shifting gender pronouns, racial terminology aren’t doing much to unite Canadians

Interesting results from the ACS poll, suggesting that academic and bureaucratic terminology may not be resonating with people (not a surprise).
Personally, find terminology debates and discussions far less interesting than looking at what disaggregated data (categories) can tell us regarding socioeconomic outcomes of particular groups, recognizing variation within groups as well as between them.
The particular not necessity be at the expense of the commonality, but it is important to have both. Not for “defining” people but understanding them: 
Anyone who follows traditional or social media can be forgiven for thinking that Canadians are divided as never before. Perhaps the better term is “categorized.” There is enormous enthusiasm in government and academe to define people by race, gender and sexual preference.
It has become the norm in the media to refer to people as “racialized” and bend over backwards to make sure that everyone’s personal pronouns are respected. The latter leads to the grammatically puzzling situation where an individual whose name we know is referred to as “them.”

Source: Denley: Shifting gender pronouns, racial terminology aren’t doing much to unite Canadians

ICYMI: Australia lifts permanent immigration by 35,000 to 195,000

Of note:

The Australian government announced on Friday it will increase its permanent immigration intake by 35,000 to 195,000 in the current fiscal year as the nation grapples with skills and labor shortages.

Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil announced the increase for the year ending June 30, 2023, during a two-day summit of 140 representatives of governments, trade unions, businesses and industry to address skills shortages exacerbated by the pandemic.

O’Neill said Australian nurses have been working double and triple shifts for the past two years, flights were being canceled because of a lack of ground staff and fruit was being left to rot on trees because there was no one to pick it.

“Our focus is always Australian jobs first, and that’s why so much of the summit has focused on training and on the participation of women and other marginalized groups,” O’Neil said.

“But the impact of COVID has been so severe that even if we exhaust every other possibility, we will still be many thousands of workers short, at least in the short term,” she added.

O’Neil said many of the “best and brightest minds” were choosing to migrate to Canada, Germany and Britain instead of Australia.

She described Australia’s immigration program as “fiendishly complex” with more than 70 unique visa programs.

Australia would establish a panel to rebuild its immigration program in the national interest, she said.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced on Thursday, the first day of the Jobs and Skills Summit, that 180,000 free places would be offed in vocational education schools next year at a cost of 1.1 billion Australian dollars ($748,000) to reduce the nation’s skills shortage.

Australia imposed some of the strictest international travel restrictions of an democratic country for 20 months early in the pandemic and gradually reopened to skilled workers from December last year.

Source: Australia lifts permanent immigration by 35,000 to 195,000

Lalande: Is #immigration at risk? Canadian attitudes could shift without proper planning

Broadening of the Century Initiative messaging to more explicitly address and mitigate externalities (as described in their scorecard), and a focus on “growing well” rather than just on demography and growth:

Welcoming and accepting successive waves of immigration has been one of Canada’s global advantages. Historically Canadians have recognized that immigration helps us innovate, grows our economy, keeps our public services solvent, develops cultural connections and business relationships with communities all over the world, and contributes to meeting our labour and skills needs – something that requires urgent attention right now.

Whatever their other points of disagreement, Canadians have welcomed immigrants and acknowledged the contributions they make to our economy and our social fabric.

While not yet at the stage it may be at in some other countries, that consensus may fraying and at risk of coming apart.   When Canadians are facing real day-to-day challenges in the forms of rising inflation and interest rates, housing unaffordability, labour shortages in healthcare and crumbling physical infrastructure, it can be difficult to see how welcoming more people in the country could help.

That unraveling is ever faster as divisive political discourse spreads and grows louder. There is deep anger we see reflected online in a rapid increase of hateful, racist and nationalistic comments.  Through my work at Century Initiative, I have experienced this vitriol directly, and I know many of you have too.

In the interest of our economic future we need to act now. Immigration is crucial to our development as a society, an economy and a nation.  We need more immigration and more supports for immigrants. We must continue to be the best country in the world in welcoming immigrants.

At the same time, we need to have an honest conversation about ensuring the benefits of immigration cascade to Canadians already living here – and mitigating any possible negative impacts of a growing population. Those discussions must be civil and focused on finding solutions.

At Century Initiative, we speak a lot about ‘growing well’. This means that not only do we need a growing population, but we need the policies, the public institutions and the physical infrastructure that will allow us to achieve sustainable population growth AND a prosperous country for all of us – old and new.

We need to make sure immigrants can contribute economically to their highest potential – by recognizing their credentials and by ensuring immigrant settlement agencies can support entrepreneurs and small businesspeople.

It also means recognizing the link between population growth and our ability to meet our health care, infrastructure and other needs. For example, with relatively low unemployment, population growth at its lowest in more than 100 years and growing demand for labour, we simply do not have the skilled workforce we need to build houses, highways and other infrastructure or staff our hospitals and other high demand jobs.

Take, for instance, our housing needs. The Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation recently estimated restoring housing affordability, will mean building nearly six million new housing units between now and 2030. At present, we are nowhere near being able to meet that target, for a variety of reasons, including the fact that we do not have the labour required to build what needs building.

Similarly, our shortage of healthcare professionals is leading to a crisis in a pandemic-battered public healthcare system. Our strained public services – even with respect to things as simple as passports – are creaking under soaring demand.

These are grave structural problems. Immigration can help address them.  Thankfully, no prominent politician has suggested limiting or eliminating immigration.  Let’s make sure it never happens.

The Canadian immigration model is a light unto the world. It’s our secret weapon – allowing our trading and innovating nation to become home to the world’s best, brightest and most ambitious.

But it is also fragile.

If we are going to grow, we need to grow well. And growing well means fixing the structural problems which make growth painful for ordinary Canadians – so that immigration can be part of a long-term solution for sustainable public services, a growing economy, and a prosperous country.

Source: Is immigration at risk? Canadian attitudes could shift without proper planning

Non-Francophone immigration a threat to ‘tightly woven’ Quebec cohesion: Legault

Not a dog-whistle, a megaphone, but unlikely to change the results:

Non-Francophone immigration is a threat to cohesion in Quebec, incumbent premier François Legault said Sunday.

The leader of the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) party had just delivered a speech to a few hundred supporters at the Le Dauphin hotel in Drummondville.

He addressed the importance of protecting the cohesion of the “tightly woven” Quebec nation, at the heart of which “there is our language, French.”

“Sometimes, this cohesion is shaken,” he said.

“The premier of Quebec, the only head of state in North America who represents a majority of Francophones, has a duty to stop the decline of French in Quebec,” he continued.

Asked in a press scrum who represented a threat to national cohesion, Legault pointed to the parties “who want to welcome 70,000, 80,000 newcomers a year.”

“It’s like math. If we want to stop the decline, for a certain period of time, we have to better integrate newcomers into French.”

François Legault’s CAQ has a goal of welcoming 50,000 immigrants annually, 80 per cent of whom would speak French upon arrival.

The Parti Québécois (PQ) would lower those thresholds to 35,000, while the Quebec Liberal Party would keep them at 70,000 and Quebec solidaire (QS) would raise them to 80,000.

Last Wednesday, Legault created a controversy when he spoke of Quebec values such as pacifism and respect, and equated immigration with violence and extremism.

He later said he was sorry if his remarks were confusing.

‘CLUMSY AND HURTFUL’

Quebec solidaire spokesperson Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois called Legault’s words on immigration “clumsy” and “hurtful” on Sunday.

“I’m tired of François Legault always talking about immigration as a problem, as a threat, as something that weakens us as a nation,” he said.

His remarks were also criticized by Liberal leader Dominique Anglade.

“The Ukrainians who flee the bombs, the Italians, the Greeks, the Mexicans, the Portuguese, the Vietnamese, (…) is it a threat to our nation?” she questioned.

“It is your speech François Legault that threatens social cohesion,” she said.

PQ leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon also criticized Legault for making “divisive statements” that were “not very responsible.”

“When we talk about threats, fear, we will play in an emotional register to try to make people forget that the CAQ is complicit and largely responsible for the decline of French,” he accused.

“The record of François Legault is that he will have welcomed 120,000 immigrants who do not speak French in his mandate,” St-Pierre Plamondon added.

RELIGIOUS SYMBOLS

On Sunday, Legault disagreed with the incumbent MNA for Sherbrooke, Christine Labrie, who said that banning the veil was a form of oppression.

QS promises to end the ban on religious symbols for government employees in positions of authority, such as teachers.

“We should, if we talk about teachers, think about children,” replied François Legault. “I think that a six-year-old girl who has a teacher with a religious sign has the right to a certain neutrality.”

“If you look at it from the point of view of the person who gives the service, well, it is a constraint, but if you look at it from the point of view of the person who receives the service, I think that in Quebec, we are a secular society,” he continued.

“I find it unfortunate that QS wants to question this, like the Liberal party.”

Source: Non-Francophone immigration a threat to ‘tightly woven’ Quebec cohesion: Legault

‘People look at you and they feel hope’: New CEO to lead Calgary Catholic Immigration Society

Passing of the torch. Always enjoyed my (limited) encounters with Fariborz:
After leading one of the country’s largest immigration organizations for 28 years, Fariborz Birjandian is stepping into an advisory role to welcome the next CEO of the Calgary Catholic Immigration Society.
Like Birjandian, the incoming CEO, Gordana Radan, was a refugee to Canada who started working with CCIS shortly after arriving in Calgary and experiencing the organization’s services firsthand. Radan came to Canada as a refugee from the former Yugoslavia in 1995. Her first home in Calgary was at CCIS’ Margaret Chisholm Resettlement Centre.

Source: ‘People look at you and they feel hope’: New CEO to lead Calgary Catholic Immigration Society

Swedish election puts anti-immigration Sweden Democrats centre stage

To watch:

Sweden’s right bloc appeared in pole position on Monday to form a government for the first time in nearly a decade, helped by a wave of voter anger over gang violence which could give an anti-immigration populist party a share in power for the first time.

Sunday’s national election remained too close to call on Monday with about 5% of electoral districts yet to be counted, but early results gave right-wing parties 175 of the 349 seats in the Riksdag, one more than the left bloc.

Overseas postal ballots were still to be counted and while they have historically tended to favour the right, this means a full preliminary result is not due until Wednesday. All votes are then counted again to provide a final tally.

If the results are confirmed, Sweden, which has long prided itself on being a bastion of tolerance, will become less open to immigrants even as the Russian invasion of Ukraine forces people to flee and climate change is pushing many to leave Africa.

Political observers say Moderate leader Ulf Kristersson is likely to become prime minister in a minority government supported by the anti-immigration Sweden Democrats who are poised to become the largest party on the right and will have a big say on the new administration’s programme.

“The Sweden Democrats have had a fantastic election,” the party’s leader Jimmie Akesson said on Twitter.

“(We) hope the gap between the blocs remains through the Wednesday count. If so, we are ready to constructively participate in a change of power and a new start for Sweden,” he said.

What’s unlikely to change is Sweden’s path towards NATO membership, which has broad support in the wake of Russia’s actions in Ukraine, as well as the country’s plans to boost defence spending.

Social Democrat Prime Minister Magdalena Andersson, who has yet to concede the election, pledged in March to increase the military budget to 2% of gross domestic product following what Moscow calls its “special operation” in Ukraine.

Preliminary results have shown the Sweden Democrats with 20.6% of the vote, up from 17.5% at the last election.

The party, which has white supremacists among their founders, is expected to stay formally in opposition, with many voters and politicians across the political spectrum uncomfortable with seeing it in government. However, their impact will still be felt.

“It is the Sweden Democrats who have driven the right-wing bloc along, both in terms of shaping the political content and in attracting voters to the constellation,” the independent liberal newspaper Goteborgsposten wrote.

“For Sweden, a new political era awaits.”

GAINING STATURE

When Kristersson took over as leader of the Moderates in 2017, the Sweden Democrats were shunned by the right and left. But he has gradually deepened cross-party ties since a 2018 election loss and the Sweden Democrats are increasingly seen as part of the mainstream right having moderated some policies such as dropping plans to leave the European Union. read more

Kristersson will now likely struggle to formulate his economic agenda as inflation runs at a three-decade high and energy costs soar, with the Sweden Democrats opposed to his flagship policy of benefit cuts.

“Intense negotiations are expected and it might take time to form a new government. Fiscal policy will likely remain expansionary regardless of which side wins,” Nordea Markets said in a note to clients.

Campaigning had seen parties battle to be the toughest on gang crime, after a steady rise in shootings that has unnerved voters, while surging inflation and the energy crisis have increasingly taken centre-stage.

While law and order issues are home turf for the right, gathering economic clouds as households and companies face sky-high power prices had been seen boosting Andersson, viewed as a safe pair of hands and more popular than her party. read more

She was finance minister for many years before becoming Sweden’s first female prime minister a year ago. Kristersson had cast himself as the only candidate who could unite the right and unseat her.

“In a fragmented, multiparty system, finding a stable, governing coalition is becoming increasingly difficult,” said Johannes Berg, research director for politics, democracy and civil society at the Institute for Social Research in Oslo.

“If the result we have now – a one-seat majority for the right – ends up being the final result, that is going to be a huge challenge for the Moderates to hold together.”

Source: Swedish election puts anti-immigration Sweden Democrats centre stage

ICYMI: Ottawa capped immigration program for Afghans who worked with Canada since its launch

Bad marks for transparency but at least adjusted upwards:

When the federal government launched an immigration program for Afghans who worked with Canada’s military or government in Afghanistan, it capped the number of people it was willing to receive at a maximum of 2,500, though did not make that figure public for more than a year.

The cap for the special immigration measures (SIM) program was then gradually increased over several months.

The evolving caps were made public for the first time on Aug. 27 – more than a year after the program began – when the government published the temporary policies behind the program, which provide its legal foundation. The disclosure also shows that the program’s penultimate policy ended in January, at the latest, but a new one didn’t come into effect until June – a gap that two lawyers called “inexplicable.”

Maureen Silcoff and Sujit Choudhry, who have been retained by around 30 Afghan nationals to explore their legal options for securing entry to Canada, also criticized the federal government for capping the program, and for failing to publicize the caps and expiry dates spelled out in the policies from the beginning.

“These measures mean that from its inception, the government created an artificial cap that would inevitably leave Afghans behind to face possible death, because of their significant and enduring connection to Canada,” Ms. Silcoff said.

Opposition MPs and advocates have criticized the federal government for poor communication, long delays and seemingly arbitrary decision making within the SIM program. More than a year after Afghanistan fell to Taliban control, they say many Afghans who worked for Canada are still unsure whether they will eventually receive a shot at safe passage to Canada or be left behind. In the meantime, many are in hiding – in danger of being targeted by the Taliban.

While Canada’s military mission in Afghanistan ended in 2014, the SIM program also applies to Afghans who worked with Canada in the years since, such as at the Canadian embassy in Kabul.

The first time the federal government publicly referenced a limit to the SIM program was on April 25, when Immigration Minister Sean Fraser told the House special committee on Afghanistan that the government planned to welcome 18,000 Afghans through the program. In June, Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) confirmed the vast majority of those 18,000 slots were spoken for, prompting widespread calls for the Liberal government to do away with the cap.

The official caps detailed in the government’s policies are not as simple as the 18,000-person plan, however. The first policy, dated July 22, 2021, as well as three updated versions, dated Aug. 9, Aug. 22, and Nov. 10, 2021, were all set to expire when IRCC received applications for a certain number of people – or on Jan. 31, 2022, whichever came first.

The first policy would end “on January 31, 2022, or once applications for 2,500 individuals have been received for resettlement to Canada, whichever comes first.” The subsequent three iterations upped the cap on applications to 5,700, then 9,500, then 14,000.

By the Aug. 22 version, the policy also made clear that the cap included both “principal applicants,” as well as “their family members and or other members of the household.”

Jeffrey MacDonald, an IRCC spokesperson, said in an e-mail the multiple policies for the SIM program reflect the federal government’s “ongoing and increasing” response to the situation in Afghanistan. (Mr. Fraser was not made available for an interview.)

The government’s current policy, dated June 8, 2022, sets out additional slots. It ends when applications for 5,000 people have been “accepted into processing” by IRCC or on March 31, 2023, whichever comes first, “with the view to fulfill the commitment of 18,000 admissions.”

With the Nov. 10, 2021 policy ending on Jan. 31, at the latest, and a new one not coming into effect until June 8, Ms. Silcoff and Mr. Choudhry questioned what took place during this gap. Mr. Choudhry said they found it “utterly inexplicable” that the program’s legal framework was allowed to expire at all – let alone for four months.

Mr. MacDonald did not dispute that there was a policy gap, but said “at no time did we stop processing applications we had received.” When The Globe and Mail followed up to ask whether IRCC issued any new invitations to apply during the four-month period, IRCC did not directly answer.

Instead, a second IRCC spokesperson, Rémi Larivière, said, “the processing of SIMs applications that were submitted prior to January 31, 2022 continued throughout the February – June period.”

Mr. MacDonald also did not directly answer whether the government has produced an estimate of the total number of Afghans it anticipated would qualify for the SIM program. He said the ability of the government and its security screening partners to process and vet applications was a factor in establishing the caps.

Mr. Choudhry said the evolving caps reveal them as arbitrary.

“It just suggests that the government was making up policy on the fly,” he said. “I refuse to believe that after 20 years in Afghanistan, we do not have a reliable estimate of how many individuals would qualify.”

According to IRCC, as of Sept. 7, the department has received 15,340 applications to the SIM program, resulting in 10,880 approvals, with 7,735 Afghans arriving in Canada.

The federal government has acknowledged the danger Afghans are in while they await answers, stating in the June 8 policy that Afghans who worked for Canada are at increased risk of being targeted for “attacks and assassination campaigns” because of that work.

Last week, the United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Afghanistan, Richard Bennett, submitted his first report, detailing numerous concerns since the Taliban took control, including a “staggering regression” of women’s and girls’ rights and “reports of ongoing extrajudicial and reprisal killings” by the Taliban.

Source: Ottawa capped immigration program for Afghans who worked with Canada since its launch

Fanshawe’s ‘sales pitch’ to international students misses mark: Consultant

Blaney is raising legitimate issues. In effect, we have an education immigration stream, one that has both legitimate and questionable elements:

A licensed London immigration consultant is sounding the alarm about a practice he says lures some international students to Canada thinking they will gain permanent residency and jobs, before learning they lack the language skills necessary to succeed.

“This is not about education; this is definitely about immigration for the vast majority of recruits for (international students) at Fanshawe College, that’s how it’s being sold by their agents overseas,” says Earl Blaney of the Canada Network, adding the practice occurs in other Ontario colleges as well.

Blaney says his contract with Fanshawe College was not renewed after he expressed concerns about the waiver of English language competency for international admissions from some countries such as the Philippines, where he also has an office, he said.

“The bottom line is, Fanshawe is dangling jobs and citizenship,” he said. “My concern with that is there is neither.

“There is no data to suggest Fanshawe is successfully moving students forward to either.”

Blaney said he deals with many international students, but the majority of his clients are Filipino.

While English is one of two official languages in the Southeast Asian country, he said competency in the language “is not uniform there.”

“I see students daily who come to my office who are absolutely struggling,” he said. “They are very stressed and realize (studying in Canada) is going to be way more difficult, if not impossible.

“Family fortunes have been mortgaged on this sales pitch. I think it’s worth talking about.”

Fanshawe responded  by saying all students applying to Fanshawe from countries whose official language isn’t English must pass an English proficiency test, or provide proof of having the required grade in high school English.

International students come from 119 countries and total graduate employment rates are 83.1 per cent, the college said. Fanshawe did not provide employment rates for international students only.

“It is essential that students have an adequate knowledge of written and spoken English appropriate for the program to which they have applied,” Fanshawe said in a written statement. “Applicants for whom English is a second language must submit evidence of their ability in the English language as part of the application procedure.”

International enrolment at Fanshawe College has surged by 26 per cent this fall, with 4,200 students coming from places such as India, Nepal, Nigeria, China, Colombia, South Korea and Vietnam.

Wendy Curtis, dean of international students, said last month new students are a way “to support the labour market.”

“Our domestic student population has shrunk. Based on demographics, it’s expected to return to higher levels in a couple of years,” she said.  “That’s a key reason why we’re accepting more international students than historically. We have capacity to do that.”

Under a study permit, international students can come to Canada to learn and apply for a work permit that may lead to permanent residency.

“They make great future citizens and employees,” Curtis said.

But Blaney said “at maximum, our system can absorb only 30 per cent of these international students.”

“The vast majority of expansion has come at the community college level,” he said.

“That’s because it’s affordable,” he said.

The average cost for an international student’s annual tuition is around $16,000, whereas a year at a Canadian university can be two to three times that, he said.

A recent report, entitled Course Correction:  How International students can help solve Canada’s labour crisis, delves into how Canada can do better to meet the needs of its evolving labour market.

“For many, a Canadian education may not yield the desired return on investment,” the report said.

According to the report, Canada is the third largest destination for international students, after the U.S. and Australia.

They make up 20 per cent of all students enrolled in Canadian post-secondary institutions.

Many international students may “not understand the challenges of dealing with Canada’s high cost of living, labour market, or complicated work permits system,” it said.

“Canada needs college-educated students to address labour shortages across the economy,” the report says. “But some students in short-cycle programs have a longer route to the labour market and permanent residency, and some may not have a path at all.”

Colleges Ontario declined to comment stating in an email: “We have nothing to do with the individual operation of each college.”

The Ministry of Colleges and Universities was unable to respond to a request for comment due to time constraints.

Source: Fanshawe’s ‘sales pitch’ to international students misses mark: Consultant

Legault prêt à marchander avec Ottawa au sujet de l’immigration

Possibility of discussion compared to some of his earlier positions:

Le chef de la Coalition avenir Québec, François Legault, est prêt à renoncer à sa demande de posséder les « pleins pouvoirs en immigration » si le gouvernement fédéral s’engage à sélectionner davantage de personnes maîtrisant la langue française.

M. Legault donne désormais le choix à Ottawa « soit de nous donner les pouvoirs [de sélection des immigrants économiques qui lui restent], c’est ce qu’on préfère, soit d’être plus exigeant sur la connaissance du français ».

En effet, il pourrait se satisfaire d’un engagement de la part du gouvernement fédéral à retenir une plus grande proportion de candidats à l’immigration québécoise qui connaissent le français parmi ceux qui sont inscrits à son programme de regroupement familial ou encore à son programme de travailleurs étrangers temporaires.

La CAQ propose d’accueillir un maximum de 50 000 immigrants par année, dont un maximum de 10 000 immigrants non francophones, à défaut de quoi le Québec se heurterait à des difficultés d’intégration. « 80 % [de francophones], c’est un bel objectif », a fait remarquer M. Legault lors d’un nouvel arrêt de son autobus de campagne à Drummondville, dimanche.

Cohésion nationale

Autrement, la « cohésion nationale » pourrait s’effilocher, selon lui. « On a un devoir de protéger cette cohésion nationale. Puis, au coeur de cette cohésion, de cette nation, il y a notre langue, le français. Puis, le premier ministre du Québec, qui est le seul chef d’État en Amérique du Nord qui représente une majorité de francophones, a un devoir : arrêter ce déclin du français au Québec », a soutenu le chef caquiste devant des dizaines de sympathisants rassemblés à Drummondville dimanche après-midi.

Plus tard, M. Legault a laissé entendre que les cibles d’immigration préconisées par Québec solidaire (entre 60 000 et 80 000 immigrants par année) et le Parti libéral du Québec (70 000 immigrants par année) mineraient la « cohésion » de la nation québécoise si elles étaient suivies. « C’est sûr que les partis qui veulent aller à 70 000 ou 80 000, par année, de nouveaux arrivants, c’est comme mathématique… Si on veut arrêter le déclin pendant un certain temps, il faut mieux intégrer les nouveaux arrivants au français », a-t-il affirmé dans une mêlée de presse. « C’est important pour garder cette cohésion nationale de défendre le français », a-t-il aussi dit, parlant même d’« urgence ». « Il y a des clans, il y a des camps, il y a des factions, pas juste au Québec. On voit ça aux États-Unis. On voit ça en France. Et, il faut toujours être prudent de garder cette cohésion de notre nation. »

Dans sa plateforme électorale, la CAQ dit vouloir poursuivre la « grande relance linguistique » amorcée par l’adoption de la Loi sur la langue officielle et commune du Québec, le français (PL 96) au printemps dernier.

Pour y arriver, le parti politique de François Legault réclame les « pleins pouvoirs en immigration », ce à quoi le premier ministre fédéral, Justin Trudeau, a opposé une fin de non-recevoir.

Il compte aussi « entreprendre une révision en profondeur de l’ensemble des programmes d’enseignement du français » aux jeunes et aux Québécois d’expression anglaise, en plus de favoriser la création de « séries stimulantes, 100 % en français, bien ancrées dans la réalité québécoise, et ce, dans un environnement sécuritaire, sans publicité ».

Aux commandes de l’État québécois depuis près de quatre ans, François Legault dit avoir « le goût de continuer de servir le Québec, au meilleur de [ses] capacités ». « Je ne suis pas parfait, on commence à le savoir ! Je fais des erreurs. Parfois, je réponds à des questions auxquelles je ne devrais pas répondre », a-t-il mentionné, dans un clin d’oeil aux propos qu’il a tenus la semaine dernière sur les risques posés par une immigration soutenue sur les valeurs québécoises de « laïcité » et de « pacifisme ». « Quand je fais des erreurs, je les corrige », a-t-il poursuivi.

Source: Legault prêt à marchander avec Ottawa au sujet de l’immigration

An anti-Semitism expert says that progressives ‘have the right to exclude Zionists’

Stern, one of the authors of the IHRA definition of antisemitism, has been consistent on the use and abuse of the definition:

A leading expert on anti-Semitism has said that university campus groups “have the right to exclude Zionists.” Writing in the Times of Israel, Kenneth Stern argued that, although it may be “hurtful” and counterproductive, the right of progressive groups to exclude advocates of the occupation state must be respected. Stern is the US attorney who took the lead in drafting the highly controversial International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism.

His intervention follows the growing debate around the exclusion of Zionist students from progressive spaces. Founded on the ethno-nationalist ideals of Zionism, Israel has long been viewed in progressive circles as a racist country that advocates settler colonialism and ethnic cleansing. This view has become more widespread in recent times after major human rights groups accused Israel of committing the crime of apartheid.

With Zionism increasingly being viewed as a racist, imperialist ideology, groups advocating for equality, human rights, the rights of minorities and progressive values, in general, are more frequently excluding supporters of Israel from their spaces. This has happened despite protests that Zionism and affinity with the apartheid state are intrinsic parts of Jewish identity. Critics, however, have long questioned this argument and rejected the claim that a political ideology should be treated as a “protective category” in the same way as gender, religion and race are.

The recent row over the IHRA definition is largely a demand by pro-Israel groups for wider society to support their claim that Zionism and support for the state of Israel be accepted as such a category. It is a form of exceptionalist pleading which is rejected wholesale when other groups in society make similar demands. For instance, the political ideology of “Islamism” or the desire to create an “Islamic State” are not only violently opposed and condemned, but any Muslim who insists that their political views and religion be granted special protection is also dismissed out of hand, and rightly so.

A similar example would be if India’s far-right BJP government under Prime Minister Narendra Modi and advocates of Hindutva, said that it is racist and anti-Hindu to question their demand to create an exclusively Hindu state. As is becoming increasingly clear, in their quest to refashion India as a Hindu state, Hindutva extremists have placed themselves on a collision course with the country’s secular constitution. No amount of special pleading that India is the only Hindu state in the world should make any difference, but the goal is still no less than the reformation of India as an ethno-religious state affording special rights and privileges to Hindus within a multi-tier system of citizenship. The model state that such Hindus aspire to replicate is Israel. The parallel between the two ideologies is a powerful illustration of the special status granted to Zionism.

Israel and its supporters are granted a privilege that is not extended to any other political community. Public bodies and private institutions across the Western world have not only agreed to their demand, but have also adopted the supposedly “working definition” of anti-Semitism produced by the IHRA that conflates legitimate criticism of Israel and Zionism with anti-Jew racism.

Although Stern does not compare Zionism and its equivalent ideologies around the world, he insists on treating Israel and its founding ideology in the same way as any other political ideology and its followers. The right to criticise freely without being labelled a racist should be preserved, he maintains. He admits that Zionism itself is a contested term but, nevertheless, the feelings about what Zionism means personally for some Jews should not be an excuse to crack down on freedom of speech by labelling people “anti-Semites” for criticising Israel’s founding ideology.

Commenting on the different perceptions of Zionism and the reasons why progressives exclude supporters of Israel, Stern said: “Some progressive students may understand Zionism as a term for Israel’s treatment of Palestinians; others may understand Zionism as most Jewish students do – the right of Jews to self-determination in their historic homeland.”

He explained that a significant and growing number of Jews are “agnostic” about Zionism or are anti-Zionist, which appears to suggest that Zionism and affinity with Israel is not as important to Jewish identity as pro-Israel groups claim.

“Anti-Zionist students may feel that letting a Zionist work among them is the equivalent of overlooking whether someone is a Nazi,” said Stern, “just as some Jewish organisations might feel that letting Jews in who support the Boycott/Divestment/Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel is overlooking anti-Semitism.” He disagrees with both assertions, but people on campus must be allowed to define their politics.

Wrestling with the central question of the piece in the Times of Israel — whether it is anti-Semitic to exclude Zionists from progressive spaces — Stern defends the right of progressive groups to be selective. “If a group decides that in order to be a member, one has to have a particular view of Israel and Zionism, the right to make that decision must be respected. Those not invited in, even though exclusion hurts, can find other ways to express themselves, including by creating new groups and coalitions.”

Stern has been critical of the way that the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism has been employed by pro-Israel groups against critics of the apartheid state. His latest intervention is another defence of freedom of association and speech against what many say is a crackdown on pro-Palestine voices and the dangers of conflating anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism.

“Jewish groups have used the definition as a weapon to say anti-Zionist expressions are inherently anti-Semitic and must be suppressed,” wrote Stern in the Times of Israel two years ago. Concerns raised by him then highlight the claim that the fight against anti-Semitism, as American Jewish commentator Peter Beinart believes, has “lost its way“.

Source: An anti-Semitism expert says that progressives ‘have the right to exclude Zionists’