Jen Gerson: The right to disengage from the Omnicause

Valid commentary on the nature of meaningful citizenship. Certainly, political activism is also meaningful but needs to be sustained, well-thought out, and reasonably consistent between all the various injustices in the world and society:

…Look, I’m not saying that it’s wrong to engage in political and social activism. But I suspect we risk harming young people with still-forming identities when we encourage them to hyper-fixate on problems that they have neither the emotional maturity, life experience or practical skill sets to meaningfully address. 

Further, we’ve all fallen into the habit of reducing the concept of citizenship into a narrow axiom of activism, and stripping that word of the very social context that makes it effective. The purpose of an education can’t be to churn out an army of well-intentioned activists, throwing their bodies and minds at every passing injustice. Rather, we should be trying to create well-rounded citizens; people who meaningfully contribute to their local communities through their families, employment, volunteer work, spiritual lives, and hobbies. If activism of a more radical sort is one pillar of a rich and well-grounded social life, all the better, but to reduce the concept of “civic society” to activism at the expense of all the other pillars not only risks creating unbalanced individuals, it will, paradoxically, make such individuals far less effective at creating the social changes they wish to enact. 

Hence the choir quip. Or field hockey. Or drama. Pick an extra-curricular, really. (And I would, here, encourage all education ministers to appreciate the importance of activities too often and too easily cut in the budget for being considered frivolous or expendable. They’re not.)

Obviously, I’ve been stewing over this idea since the encampments demanding various universities divest from Israel began to pop up on North American campuses. Police also appeared to move rather quickly to arrest protestors who were beginning to set up an encampment on the road in front of Parliament this week. For a moment, I want to reserve my judgment on what appears, to me, to be a clear example of a highly contagious social phenomena. That is, I don’t want to turn this column into an opinion piece about whether or not these protestors are right or wrong about Palestine and Israel. In principle, I don’t really have a problem with protestors setting up encampments to make their point, except insofar as this form of protest has a tendency to create serious safety problems over time, both for the participants, and for the surrounding communities. 

Rather, I’d confine myself to observing that these protests and encampments appear to be only the latest manifestation of a series of highly charged political movements that rapidly attract followers, engage in mass shows of support, and then fizzle out and move on to the next seemingly existential crisis. 

Coastal Gas, MeToo, Black Lives Matter, trans issues, COVID, anti-COVID, Ukraine, now Israel. Others have recently labelled it “The Omnicause.” Social activism that is ever present. Ever urgent. Ever crucial. Put the morality of any specific issue aside for just a moment, and it’s hard to ignore the bandwagoner effect. This is absolutely no different to the kind of energy that gets stirred up when a city’s sports team hits the playoffs. 

I often get the impression not of a real commitment to a cause, but rather a desperate flailing for meaning and society by people who are doped by the certainty of being on the right side of history. Righteousness is a high, man. …

You have the right to deeply interrogate your own beliefs, emotions, and motives, and from that state of introspection, to decide how you wish to spend your limited time and energy. You have a right to confine yourselves to the things that serve you. 

You don’t have to do things that serve your peer group; you don’t have to be or appear to be virtuous; you don’t need to go along to get along, nor to acquire status; and you sure as hell don’t need to let your will be hijacked by social media algorithms that profit by fuelling perpetual social movements and outrage cycles. 

And if that process of conscious examination returns a positive result — “yes, this does actually matter. I do care about it” — then know that you will be radically more effective as an activist or political actor if you can raise awareness or cash or volunteers within established and durable social networks; again, family, school, employment, social hobbies, spiritual community, and the like. It’s great to attend a protest, but real, effective and durable change most often finds itself in these quiet and unglamorous foundations of real civil society. Developing a fulfilling and healthy life isn’t an abrogation of our duty to do good in the world. Rather, I think that it’s by being healthy and engaged people that we start to become the change we wish to see in the world around us. 

Source: Jen Gerson: The right to disengage from the Omnicause

Paul: And Now, a Real World Lesson for Student Activists

Yep. Money quote: “The toughest lesson for this generation may be that while they’ve been raised to believe in their right to change the world, the rest of the world may neither share nor be ready to indulge their particular vision:”

The encampments have been cleared, campuses have emptied; protester and counterprotester alike have moved on to internships, summer gigs and in some cases, the start of their postgraduate careers.

Leaving aside what impact, if any, the protests had on global events, let’s consider the more granular effect the protests will have on the protesters’ job prospects and future careers.

Certainly, that matters, too. After all, this generation is notable for its high levels of ambition and pre-professionalism. They have tuition price tags to justify and loans to repay. A 2023 survey of Princeton seniors found that nearly 60 percent took jobs in finance, consulting, tech and engineering, up from 53 percent in 2016.

A desire to protect future professional plans no doubt factored into the protesters’ cloaking themselves in masks and kaffiyehs. According to a recent report in The Times, “The fear of long-term professional consequences has also been a theme among pro-Palestine protesters since the beginning of the war.”

Activism has played a big part of many of these young people’s lives and academic success. From the children’s books they read (“The Hate U Give,” “I Am Malala”), to the young role models that were honored, (Greta ThunbergDavid Hogg), to the social justice movements that were praised (Black Lives Matter, MeToo, climate justice), Gen Z has been told it’s on them to clean up the Boomers’ mess. Resist!

College application essays regularly ask students to describe their relationship with social justice, their leadership experience and their pet causes. “Where are you on your journey of engaging with or fighting for social justice?” asked one essay prompt Tufts offered applicants in 2022. What are you doing to ensure the planet’s future?

Across the curriculum, from the social sciences to the humanities, courses are steeped in social justice theory and calls to action. Cornell’s library publishes a study guide to a 1969 building occupation in which students armed themselves. Harvard offers asocial justice graduate certificate. “Universities spent years saying that activism is not just welcome but encouraged on their campuses,” Tyler Austin Harper noted recently in The Atlantic. “Students took them at their word.”

Imagine the surprise of one freshman who was expelled at Vanderbilt after students forced their way into an administrative building. As he told The Associated Press, protesting in high school was what helped get him into college in the first place — he wrote his admissions essay on organizing walkouts, and got a scholarship for activists and organizers.

Things could still work out well for many of these kids. Some professions — academia, politics, community organizing, nonprofit work — are well served by a résumé brimming with activism. But a lot has changed socially and economically since Boomer activists marched from the streets to the workplace, many of them building solid middle-class lives as teachers, creatives and professionals, without crushing anxiety about student debt. In a demanding and rapidly changing economy, today’s students yearn for the security of high-paying employment.

Not all employers will look kindly on an encampment stint. When a group of Harvard student organizations signed an open letter blaming Israel for Hamas’s Oct. 7 attacks, the billionaire Bill Ackman requested on X that Harvard release the names of the students involved “so as to insure (sic) that none of us inadvertently hire any of their members.” Soon after, a conservative watchdog group posted names and photos of the students on a truck circling Harvard Square.

Calling students out for their political beliefs is admittedly creepy. But Palestinian protests lacked the moral clarity of the anti-apartheid demonstrations. Along with protesters demanding that Israel stop killing civilians in Gaza, others stirred fears of antisemitism by justifying the Oct. 7 massacre, tearing down posters of kidnapped Israelis, shoving “Zionists” out of encampments and calling for “globalizing the intifada” and making Palestine “free from the river to the sea.”

In November, two dozen leading law firms wrote to top law schools implying that students who participated in what they called antisemitic activities, including calling for “the elimination of the State of Israel,” would not be hired. More than 100 firms have since signed on. One of those law firms, Davis Polk, rescinded job offersto students whose organizations had signed the letter Ackman criticized. Davis Polk said those sentiments were contrary to the firm’s values. Another major firm withdrew an offer to a student at New York University who also blamed Israel for the Oct. 7 attack. In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley School of Law urged employers not hirethose of his students he said were antisemitic.

Two partners at corporate law firms, who asked to speak anonymously since other partners didn’t want them to talk to the media, told me that participating in this year’s protests, especially if it involves an arrest, could easily foreclose opportunities at their firm. At one of those firms, hiring managers scan applicants’ social media histories for problems. (Well before Oct. 7, students had keyed into this possibility, scrubbing campus activism from their résumés.)

Also, employers generally want to hire people who can get along and fit into their company culture, rather than trying to agitate for change. They don’t want politics disrupting the workplace.

“There is no right answer,” Steve Cohen, a partner at the boutique litigation firm, Pollock Cohen, said when I asked if protesting might count against an applicant. “But if I sense they are not tolerant of opinions that differ from their own, it’s not going to be a good fit.” (That matches my experience with Cohen, who had worked on the Reagan presidential campaign and hired me, a die-hard liberal, as an editorial assistant back in 1994.)

Corporate America is fundamentally risk-averse. As The Wall Street Journal reported, companies are drawing “a red line on office activists.” Numerous employers, including Amazon, arecracking down on political activism in the workplace, The Journal reported. Google recently fired 28 people.

For decades, employers used elite colleges as a kind human resources proxy to vet potential candidates and make their jobs easier by doing a first cut. Given that those same elite schools were hotbeds of activism this year, that calculus may no longer prove as reliable. Forbes reported that employers are beginning to sour on the Ivy League. “The perception of what those graduates bring has changed. And I think it’s more related to what they’re actually teaching and what they walk away with,” a Kansas City-based architectural firm told Forbes.

The American university has long been seen as a refuge from the real world, a sealed community unto its own. The outsize protests this past year showed that in a social media-infused, cable-news-covered world, the barrier has become more porous. What flies on campus doesn’t necessarily pass in the real world.

The toughest lesson for this generation may be that while they’ve been raised to believe in their right to change the world, the rest of the world may neither share nor be ready to indulge their particular vision.

Source: And Now, a Real World Lesson for Student Activists

Locked out by Canada’s family reunification program: These immigrants can’t even get into the queue to sponsor parents and grandparents

No easy way to manage given that demand always exceeds levels (various governments have tried different approaches) and P&Gs exacerbate aging demographics:

…Canada has a lottery system that rations a limited number of sponsorship spots for parents and grandparents. Canadian citizens and permanent residents must submit an expression of interest to enter the pool each year; only those who are randomly drawn are “invited” to apply. Officials will then screen them for eligibility based on criteria such as a sponsor’s income level. 

However, during the pandemic, the Immigration Department delayed the opening of the program in 2020 for other priorities amid lockdowns and border closures. Despite promising to reopen the program the following year, it has remained closed to new expressions of interest.

Potential sponsors were outraged earlier this month when the Immigration Department again announced it was sticking to the same 2020 candidate pool.

“Starting May 21, we will invite 35,700 potential sponsors from the pool of remaining interest to sponsor forms submitted in 2020 to sponsor parents and grandparents,” the department said in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

“We will send out invitations over the course of approximately two weeks. If you submitted an interest to sponsor form in 2020, please check the email address you used at that time.”…

Source: Locked out by Canada’s family reunification program: These immigrants can’t even get into the queue to sponsor parents and grandparents

Opinion: We are Anishinaabe Zionists. Hateful anti-Israel camps disrespect our lands

Of note:

…As Anishinaabe, we are troubled by the expressions of hatred against Jews and Zionists, and the disappointing ignorance, fuelled by misinformation coming from universities. Ignorance about the indigeneity of the Jewish people in the region that is Israel. Ignorance about the values that Israel, as a democracy, stands for — as imperfect as it is. Ignorance about the rights and responsibilities Israel has as a nation state and member of the United Nations. Ignorance about Zionism — its compatibility with Palestinian self-determination, a two-state solution, and the fact that the vast majority of Jewish people identify with Israel. Ignorance about the current reconciliation efforts of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Canadians. Ignorance about our shared history and the intentions of our original relationship. And how quickly the sadistic savagery of Hamas’ invasion of Israel and its promises to repeat October 7 again and again and again are forgotten.

Erroneous false narratives are coming out of universities about current reconciliation efforts led by Indigenous peoples to justify divisive hateful conduct that overwhelmingly targets and isolates Jewish and Zionist Canadians. The use of sacred ceremonies such as the lighting of a Sacred Fire, smudging, drumming, and others, by activists in encampments on university campuses are not appropriate. It is cultural appropriation and historical distortion of the worst kind.

Some have suggested correlations between Hamas and Israel in the Middle East and the reconciliation work led by First Nations here in Canada in the West. We hear the words “colonizer,” “settler” and “decolonize” to justify terror, violence, kidnapping, rape and targeted civilian massacres. These words are used to assert revolutionary violence “by any means necessary” and that “all forms of resistance” are justified. We unequivocally reject these assertions and any allyship with those who hold such views.

Indigenous and non-Indigenous people found ways and continue to find ways to peacefully resolve their differences mostly through dialogue grounded in The Seven Sacred Teachings. But little respectful dialogue is heard. Instead, we see hate, antisemitism, and weak leadership on university campuses. Pro-Palestinian supporters violate the Treaties with Indigenous peoples and The Seven Sacred Teachings. Allegedly they seek to resolve a crisis in the Middle East by means that disregard Indigenous peoples, the Treaties, our Sacred Teachings, and our relationship with Canada. Equally dreadful are the measures that target Jewish and Zionist students and faculty — people who are welcome on our Treaty Lands and are deserving of the rights and freedoms enjoyed by all Canadians.

Our Land, the Treaties, our values, and our hospitality are being abused. Leaders of universities, government, and law enforcement — all considered to be Treaty Partners — are allowing this to happen. University codes of conduct and Canadian laws are not being enforced. It appears that all protest activity is treated as “free speech” by those who carry responsibility for the public. The focus is on whether the “speech” is free and protected, rather than on whether the conduct or speech aligns with the Treaties or The Seven Sacred Teachings.

We, as Anishinaabe Zionists, are made to feel unwelcome on our Treaty Lands by treaty scofflaws and encampment occupiers, who self describe as part of the current colonial regime that marginalizes and oppresses Indigenous peoples — us. Perhaps, they should begin an examination of the illogic of their own activities on our ancestral Treaty Lands.

A modern-day Chief Pontiac is needed who respects all and fears none.

Our Treaty partners must enforce the law and codes of conduct on campuses and communities across the country. Codes of conduct consistent with the Treaties and The Seven Sacred Teachings should be developed. The International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance working definition of antisemitism must be applied by all who fall within areas of federal oversight, influence, and authority. Indigenous people should be consulted with about how Treaty Lands will be used. Universities must stop the false narratives. Facts, reality, truth — not fiction, feelings and ideology — should be taught.

The preceding is Harry Laforme’s and Karen Restoule’s written submission to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights’ Study of Antisemitism.

LaForme is a member of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation (MCFN), a retired appellate court judge and practicing lawyer. Restoule is a member of the Dokis First Nation. With a law degree from the University of Ottawa, Restoule specializes in public affairs and is currently a vice president with Crestview Strategy. Ms. Restoule is also an honourary witness to Israeli suffering arising out of the Hamas October 7 attack.  

Source: Opinion: We are Anishinaabe Zionists. Hateful anti-Israel camps disrespect our lands

Yakabuski | L’ombre de Gaza

More on the politics – Liberals as road kill (middle of the road trying to satisfy two different constituencies):

…Chez les électeurs musulmans, les libéraux sont à la traîne de dix points derrière le Nouveau Parti démocratique, toujours selon Angus Reid, avec l’appui de 31 % des électeurs de cette communauté, contre 41 % pour le NPD. Parmi tous les groupes religieux sondés par Angus Reid, il s’agit du plus fort appui pour le parti de Jagmeet Singh. C’est deux fois plus que les intentions de vote qu’il récolte à l’échelle nationale. Les néodémocrates étaient à l’origine d’une motion débattue à la Chambre des communes en mars qui demandait au gouvernement fédéral de reconnaître immédiatement l’État de Palestine. Les libéraux avaient réussi à faire amender la motion en appelant plutôt à la poursuite des travaux « en vue de l’établissement de l’État de Palestine dans le cadre d’une solution négociée à deux États ». M. Singh a sommé le gouvernement Trudeau d’appuyer M. Khan et sa demande de mandat d’arrêt contre M. Nétanyahou.

Le Canada comptait plus de 1,8 million de musulmans, contre 335 000 juifs, lors du dernier recensement en 2021. Selon une analyse de l’ancien haut fonctionnaire fédéral Andrew Griffith, 109 circonscriptions canadiennes comptent entre 5 % et 20 % de résidents musulmans ; et il y en a six où les musulmans comptent entre 20 % et 50 % de la population. Le poids politique des électeurs musulmans dépasse maintenant celui des électeurs juifs. Preuve du pétrin politique dans lequel ils se trouvent plongés depuis le 7 octobre, les libéraux de Justin Trudeau n’ont plus la cote ni chez les premiers ni chez les seconds.

Source: Chronique | L’ombre de Gaza

Tasha Kheiriddin: Young people are taught to hate Canada. Mandatory service could fix that

Inspired by Sunak? How realistic is this given federal government implementation challenges? And is the situation that dire anyway? Silos unfortunately are hard to dismantle in an era of social media and algorithms that accentuate division.

Agree that much of today’s content is unbalanced, as much of earlier content was as well. But emphasis on the negative parts of our history needs to be balanced by recognition of progress, along with an appreciation of context.

After all, today’s “woke warriors” will likely find their positions viewed differently over time:

…Just a basic Canadian? What is that, anyway?

What indeed. It is time that we actively revive our sense of patriotism and national pride. That we honour the values that make us great, that have drawn millions of people to our shores.

And it is urgent, on so many fronts. The world is once again a hostile place. Our allies are under attack, from Eastern Europe to the Middle East to the Asia-Pacific. We are deluding ourselves if we don’t think that somewhere down the line, we are going to have to fight for our country too.

Maybe if young people got a taste of what it is to serve their country, they would want to defend it. Maybe if they volunteered in the armed forces, in charities, in public service, they would want to build our country, instead of tearing it down. But it’s up to us, to take the lead and make it happen.

Source: Tasha Kheiriddin: Young people are taught to hate Canada. Mandatory service could fix that

Keller: The latest unintended consequence of Liberal immigration policy

The latest from Keller, raising legitimate fears on the possible impact on public support for immigration. No win for the government as any measures they take will be opposed by activists on the left and conservatives on the right:

….The Liberals are under pressure from left-wing groups to offer many of them citizenship. But doing so would set a precedent, and open a Pandora’s Box of consequences.

It would encourage aspiring immigrants who do not qualify for the limited number of permanent residency spots to simply ignore the expiry of their work or student visas and remain in the country, pending amnesty. Ditto failed refugee claimants. Ditto people who overstay a tourist visa.

It would reinforce the growing impression, which student and worker recruiters around the world are selling, that crossing the Canadian border, by whatever means, is a smooth road to Canadian citizenship.

But for the Trudeau government, the most compelling reason to tread carefully in this area may be political. Canadian citizenship as a reward for flouting immigration law is going to tick off a lot of Canadians. I suspect the most hardboiled and unapologetic will be those people who queued up, followed the rules and entered during daylight hours: immigrants.

Source: The latest unintended consequence of Liberal immigration policy

Dave Snow: The groundbreaking Cass Review on transgender care is shifting the debate abroad. Yet it was barely reported by Canadian media  

While I don’t follow this issue closely, this analysis is nevertheless revealing on how the review and related issues are portrayed, particularly by the CBC:

Few Canadian policy issues are as polarizing as youth gender transition. Yet according to my analysis below, most Canadian media spent last month paying little to no attention to one of the most consequential reports on the topic…

Canadian media coverage of the Cass Review

As a major medical report on an issue where there is considerable Canadian political debate, one would have expected the Cass Review to garner considerable Canadian media attention.

To determine how the issue was covered in Canada, I conducted a content analysis of online articles from five mainstream media outlets (The Globe and MailNational PostToronto Star, CBC, and CTV) from the three-week period following the Cass Review’s publication (April 10 – April 30, 2024). These five outlets published a total of 15 stories that mentioned the Cass Review. Given that three stories (all from the National Post) only briefly mentioned it in passing, and one Associated Press story was published in two outlets, this meant a total of 11 unique stories in which the Cass Review featured prominently.

Coverage was dominated by the National Post, which featured seven articles on the Cass Review over an 11-day period between April 10 and April 20. By contrast, there were only two stories featuring the Cass Review in the Toronto Star, and only one each in CBC, CTV, and the Globe. Apart from the one AP story, every article applied the Cass Review to the Canadian context, with six mentioning Alberta’s proposed gender policies. The stories were split between hard news (six) and opinion pieces (five).

Given the National Post’s longstanding focus on youth gender transition, it is not surprising that it gave the Cass Review the most coverage. The other four outlets did not give it as much attention. The only hard news piece in the Toronto Star was a wire story written by the U.S.-based Associated Press. CTV’s one mention of Cass appeared in a piece about Alberta’s proposed gender policies and was only the result of Premier Smith raising it during an interview with the outlet. Meanwhile, the lone CBC article on the review was more of a condemnation than a news report (see below). The Globe and Maildid not feature Cass in a single hard news article, though the report was mentioned in an investigative opinion piece about gender transition in Canada written 16 days after the review was published. In total, only three of the six hard news pieces quoted from the Cass Review extensively, including two lengthy pieces from National Post reporter Sharon Kirkey and one Associated Press piece (published in both the Star and Post).

While there were only five opinion pieces published about the Cass Review, they shared several notable characteristics. All five opinion pieces—three from the National Post and one each in the Toronto Star and The Globe and Mail—portrayed the review positively, including descriptions such as “landmark” and“an exhaustive and rigorous report.” All five were broadly supportive of exercising greater caution around the use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for youth. The Post’s Adam Zivo called such restrictions “a wise approach that Canada should follow,” while the Globe’s Robyn Urback cited multiple studies “exploring the potential long-term effects of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones on bone densityfertilitysexual function, and cognitive development” (links in original). Moreover, the five opinion writers demonstrated considerable knowledge of the review itself, with Cass quoted or paraphrased a total of 1611eightfour, and three times, respectively.

By contrast, the CBC’s one news story, published five days after the Cass Review, only quoted it twice. The 1,750-word article, “What Canadian doctors say about new U.K. review questioning puberty blockers for transgender youth,” spent more time criticizing the report than describing it. The story did not quote any proponents of the Cass Review, but it did contain over a dozen quotes from three organizations and three Canadian doctors who were supportive of the gender-affirming model. Two of those doctors criticized the Cass Review directly: one wondered if it was “coming from a place of bias” and “trying to create fear around gender-affirming care,” while another called it “politically motivated.”

One sentence in particular, written by the journalist, is indicative of the CBC’s framing: “The Cass Review, while aiming to be an independent assessment, has been criticized as flawed and anti-trans by trans activists in the U.K., and was described as a product of the U.K.’s hostile environment for trans people in the International Journal of Transgender Health” (links in original). The CBC journalist did not specify the difference between an “independent assessment” and “aiming” to be independent.

However, the International Journal of Transgender Health piece cited by  the CBC journalist refers to the Cass Review as an example of “Cis-supremacy in the UK’s approach to healthcare for trans children.” It was written by a researcher who specializes in “trans inclusion and Applied Trans Studies” and currently holds a grant for “Building Lived Experience Accountability into Culturally Competent Health and Well-being Assessment for Trans Youth Social Justice.” The CBC did not address whether that piece, which was published nearly a month before the Cass Review’s final report came out, was similarly “aiming” to be independent in its assessment of Cass.

This CBC article has garnered considerable attention. It was criticized by American journalist Jesse Singal as “critically dangerous science miscommunication,” while Hub contributor Peter Menzies described it as “so bereft of balance that one could only conclude it [CBC] had abandoned any pretence of principled journalism in favour of playing the role of ally.” But, to regular observers of the CBC, this story was entirely in keeping with its ongoing approach to covering youth gender transition.

People involved in a march against the teaching of so-called “gender ideology” in schools, stand in front of the New Brunswick legislature as they yell across the street at pro-transgender rights counter-protesters in Fredericton, Wednesday, Sept. 20, 2023. Stephen MacGillivray/The Canadian Press. 

Canadian coverage of other LGBTQ topics

Given that major Canadian outlets paid limited attention to the Cass Review, apart from the National Post, observers may wonder if this simply reflected a media tendency to ignore LGBTQ issues.

To test for this, I also conducted a search of stories containing terms like “LGBTQ,” “transgender,” and “gender identity” at each of the five outlets during the same period (April 10-30). I then analyzed stories in which LGBTQ issues were the main topic.

Between April 10-30, in addition to the 11 stories about Cass described above, there were 25  stories on the topic of Canadian LGBTQ issues: 14 at the CBC, six at CTV, three at the Globe and Mail, and one each at the Toronto Starand National Post (this includes one identical Canadian Press wire story published by the Globe, Star, and CTV).

However, not one of these additional Canadian stories mentioned the Cass Review. Some of this was understandable, as most CBC and CTV articles, for example, were local stories covering topics such as a proposed LGBTQ community centre in Montreal, legal battles over New Brunswick’s pronoun policy, and a summer camp for LGBTQ children in Newfoundland and Labrador.

However, in addition to these 25 Canadian-focused LGBTQ stories, the five outlets also published  66 internationally-focused LGBTQ stories. None of these mentioned the Cass Review. All were written by foreign wire services.

Thirty stories were published by the National Post, 27 by the Toronto Star, five by CTV, four by he Globe and Mail, and none by the CBC. Nearly 80 percent (52/66) were focused on American politics, but the 14 other stories covered topics such as Swedish and German laws making changing your gender easier, the passage of an anti-LGBTQ law in Iraq, and a Hong Kong trans activistgetting a male ID card.

Canadian news outlets’ lack of attention to the Cass Review cannot be explained by a lack of interest in international news on LGBTQ issues. The Toronto Star published 28 hard news stories about international LGBTQ issues during this period, but only one mentioned the Cass review. Likewise, the Globe and Mail and CTV published four and five international news stories on LGBTQ issues respectively, none of which mentioned the Cass Review.

 Consequences for Canada

Three broad conclusions can be drawn from the Canadian media’s coverage of the Cass Review. First, apart from the National Post, hard news coverage of the groundbreaking report was limited. Moreover, this minimal coverage cannot be explained by a lack of interest in LGBTQ issues, as these outlets published many Canadian and international LGBTQ-focused stories about topics far less prominent. Perhaps it is unsurprising that a conservative outlet was more likely to report on a major study that appeared to vindicate arguments associated with conservative political positions. Yet the lack of reporting by other news outlets brings to mind a quote from American journalist Nellie Bowles about the 2020 riots around policing and African Americans in Kenosha, Wisconsin: “How the mainstream media controlled the narrative was by not covering it.”

Second, despite this minimal reporting in Canada, the Cass Review seems to have shifted the parameters of the debate over youth gender transition. The way that it has been covered in international media suggests it will now be far more difficult to paint those who favour a more cautious approach to social transition, puberty blockers, and cross-sex hormones as “transphobic.” Although Canadian hard news coverage of Cass was limited, Canadian opinion pieces demonstrate a similar shift. All five opinion pieces (including one from the Toronto Star) covered the Cass Review favourably. All raised criticisms about the prevalence of the gender-affirming model across Canada. In the recent past, the Globe and Star have not been shy about publishing opinionpieces lauding the gender-affirming model. But no such opinion pieces were published in response to the Cass Review.

Finally, as the debate around youth gender medicine shifts, the CBC appears to have dug in its heels in support of the gender-affirming model. In previous research for The Hub, I documented how the national public broadcaster chose allyship over objectivity in its coverage of youth gender transition. That trend has clearly continued. The CBC has often been criticized in general for progressive bias, but it is difficult to recall another policy issue for which the CBC’s lack of balance has been so strident and so sustained. As scientific and policy debates around youth gender transition evolve, this issue will provide a litmus test for whether CBC can provide objective coverage on contentious social and medical topics. For now, the public broadcaster is failing that test.

Source: Dave Snow: The groundbreaking Cass Review on transgender care is shifting the debate abroad. Yet it was barely reported by Canadian media

Éditorial | La CAQ en quête de renforts

Le Devoir’s take of Canada-Quebec discussions on immigration and the related political considerations:

Le disque caquiste sur la trame de l’immigration temporaire et de la capacité d’accueil du Québec a si souvent tourné que François Legault se cherche de nouveaux auditeurs, contraint d’admettre qu’il n’a toujours pas réussi à influencer son principal interlocuteur fédéral. En implorant maintenant les Québécois de l’épauler enfin dans cette mission de persuasion contre Ottawa, le premier ministre du Québec devrait prendre garde de ne pas frôler ainsi dangereusement l’aveu d’échec.

La redondance était telle que les courriéristes parlementaires qui s’étaient déplacés au conseil général de la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ), cette fin de semaine, ne se sont même pas donné la peine, ou presque, de faire état de cette énième sortie de François Legault contre le refus d’Ottawa de freiner l’arrivée croissante d’immigrants temporaires en sol québécois.

« Le problème, c’est leur nombre », a-t-il répété. Lequel « affecte les services que l’on donne à l’ensemble des Québécois » et « met de la pression sur la langue française ». « L’heure est grave pour notre nation », a-t-il renchéri, en se dédouanant par la même occasion des manques de services en santé et en éducation ou de l’offre insuffisante de logements.

« C’est le gouvernement fédéral qui a créé ce problème. C’est à lui de le régler rapidement », a-t-il plutôt ordonné. « Mais pour y arriver, j’ai besoin de l’appui des Québécois. Il faut que les Québécois convainquent le gouvernement fédéral d’agir rapidement », a-t-il supplié, dans son discours de clôture du rassemblement partisan.

Le jovialisme exposé par le premier ministre du Québec à l’issue de sa rencontre avec son homologue fédéral ce printemps était donc de toute évidence utopique. Là où François Legault avait choisi de voir de l’« ouverture » de la part de Justin Trudeau ne se cachait finalement qu’une banale et spécieuse politesse, à en croire le dépit qu’il affiche aujourd’hui.

L’octroi de visas n’a pas encore été resserré, malgré la demande du gouvernement québécois. L’exigence possible d’une maîtrise du français pour les travailleurs temporaires arrivant par le biais du Programme de mobilité internationale, qui relève d’Ottawa, n’avancerait pas non plus selon le camp québécois. Sa demande de remboursement de 1 milliard de dollars pour l’accueil de demandeurs d’asile risque quant à elle de n’être qu’en partie enfin accueillie.

Ne s’en remettre qu’à l’espoir d’un rapport de force avec le gouvernement fédéral, avec l’aide de la population québécoise cette fois-ci puisque celle d’une majorité parlementaire n’a pas suffi, semble mince comme stratégie. Rien n’indique que Justin Trudeau et ses ministres tendront soudainement l’oreille aux défis pourtant réels vécus sur le terrain au Québec. Leur obstination chronique indique tout le contraire. Or, le coffre à outils qu’avait laissé miroiter ce printemps le gouvernement caquiste pour forcer la main d’Ottawa semble finalement dégarni.

Quant à l’idée d’un référendum sectoriel, qu’il avait lui-même ravivée, François Legault rétorque que l’issue en est déjà connue, puisque la moitié des Québécois et les deux tiers des électeurs décidés ont confié à la firme Léger souhaiter le rapatriement des pouvoirs en immigration. Évacuer désormais cette possibilité lui évite surtout l’obligation de résultat, hasardeuse, qui s’ensuivrait.

Son gouvernement a donc préféré lancer de nouvelles propositions dans un tout autre champ d’action : la tenue d’une commission parlementaire spéciale et transpartisane sur les effets des écrans et des réseaux sociaux sur les jeunes Québécois. Si cette étude va de l’avant, il ne faudra pas moins en surveiller les recommandations, et surtout la probabilité qu’elles soient respectées, puisque les initiatives qui ont à l’étranger tenté tant bien que mal d’encadrer l’utilisation de plateformes Web ou de réseaux sociaux ont, en règle générale, échoué.

Alors que tous les yeux étaient rivés sur l’autre conseil national de la fin de semaine, celui de Québec solidaire (QS) à Jonquière, les caquistes auront été soulagés d’y voir émerger un possible début de trêve. Cette accalmie dans la guerre intestine qui guettait QS leur permet d’espérer que le débat politique perdurera également sur un axe idéologique politique plutôt qu’un retour à l’axe strictement indépendantiste, ce qui aurait menacé d’écarteler leur coalition. François Legault préférera de loin se colletailler avec l’adversaire de gauche solidaire.

Ce qui n’évacuera pas pour autant l’indéniable popularité bien installée du Parti québécois et de Paul St-Pierre Plamondon. Si la population ne répond pas à l’ultime appel de François Legault, et si le gouvernement de Justin Trudeau persiste à lui faire la sourde oreille, la CAQ aura-t-elle autre chose à proposer pour faire aboutir ses demandes en immigration ? Si la Coalition avenir Québec est alors forcée de s’avouer à court de solutions face au mur fédéraliste, c’est le Parti québécois, nourri de nouvelles munitions, qui s’en réjouira.

Source: Éditorial | La CAQ en quête de renforts

Mason and MacKenzie: Now is not the time to lose faith in immigration because Canada cannot prosper without it

Platitudes rather than substance. And what do the authors mean by “throw off the institutional shackles that resist change?”

Countries worldwide have long envied Canada’s ability to attract and integrate immigrants. Yet just as our aging demography is beginning to bite, we risk losing the long-standing public consensus that immigration is good for Canada.

To boot, our GDP per capita is declining at a faster rate than that of many other advanced countries. Productivity is abysmal and Canadians are looking for solutions. 

Though Canadian support for continued growth in immigration numbers is dropping, the need for new immigrants to address our demography cannot be wished away. With more Canadians leaving the workforce than entering it each year and our total fertility rate dropping to a historic low of 1.33 in 2023, immigration is the only way to maintain the living standards and levels of services we have come to expect.

If we were to freeze Canada’s population, we would go from around 30 people over 65 per 100 working-age Canadians to over 60 per 100 in the year 2071 — an unfathomable increase in very much loved, but costly, dependants supported by each working Canadian. We must address our demography at the same time as we improve our living standards.

As Carolyn Rogers at the Bank of Canada has cried out, productivity growth is key, where our lagging measures predate current increased immigration levels by a few decades. 

Some lay blame on newcomers for decreasing businesses’ willingness to invest in equipment and technology. Why invest when you can just hire another person? This criticism is short-sighted because to overcome demography we need both more workers and more capital investment. It would be foolish to put the country into population decline. 

Immigrants can help solve the productivity problem over time. A recent Statistics Canada study showed that so-called “two-step” immigrants, who gain education or experience in Canada before becoming permanent residents, broadly earn more (reflecting higher productivity) than permanent residents without Canadian education or experience. Many of our most successful entrepreneurs are immigrants too, for example Tobias Lütke of Shopify.

Immigration is not on its own an economic silver bullet for every problem, but Canada cannot grow without newcomers’ skills and ambition. We should all welcome a renewed dialogue about our national economic, social, and humanitarian goals, since the case for improving our immigration system is strong.

The time is now to ensure the selection of immigrants selected for the economic impact are aligned with labour market needs. In its recent strategic review, Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship Canada committed to hiring a Chief Talent Officer. We are ready to support this work through our connections to employers from coast to coast.

Immigration is of course an interconnected issue, not just an economic one. Newcomers alleviate workforce and demographic pressures but also create their own demand for housing, health care, and transportation. Concentrated in major cities, this demand can expand on the other factors driving the housing crisis — the foundations of which we laid long ago.

The recent cap on international students shows that the government is taking the issue seriously and increasingly considering the multiple factors that lead to success, like housing availability and “wraparound” support for newcomers. This is good. Prospective immigrants must be able to see a complete future here, not just a job. If they do not, more will leave for better opportunities, as Parisa Mahboubi and William Robson from the C.D. Howe Institute recently argued, or forgo coming to Canada entirely. To let this happen would be to squander our global advantage.

Our system has been the envy of the world, but as other countries compete to attract the best, we should update our policy-making to incorporate data from across the economy, with tailored thinking that nimbly responds to labour market demand. It was encouraging to attend the Better Evidence Conference this February and see rooms full of people discussing new ideas for exactly that. Better data will help Canada avoid surprises, match social infrastructure to immigration levels, and respond to changes.

It is vital that Canadians see immigration as part of our future and keep supporting it. Approval is still high, but that will only continue with successful outcomes. To achieve these, it is time to adjust course, adopt more data-driven decision making, and throw off the institutional shackles that resist change within our system.

Gillian Mason is the CEO of the Toronto Region Immigrant Employment Council. Patrick MacKenzie is CEO of the Immigrant Employment Council of British Columbia.

Source: Now is not the time to lose faith in immigration because Canada cannot prosper without it