Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force

Not sure how his boycott improves representation. Risks being “cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face” rather than having a meaningful impact:

Our community deserves stronger representation at the table. Who better to help develop guardrails for racial bias in AI than those who have already felt its sting?

The Black community understands viscerally what is at stake when algorithms decide how long you spend in jail, whether you get a job interview, a loan or suffer a false arrest. Our lived experiences and expertise would only strengthen (not weaken) Canada’s AI strategy, making it more robust and more just for everyone.

Yet, the message from those in charge has been clear: they don’t really want us to participate in developing AI strategy.

That is why I decided to take a stand: As a Black scholar whose decade of research has identified the real harm AI poses to the Black community, and one who believes in the genuine participation of this community in addressing that harm, I could not in good conscience take any step directly or indirectly that would lend moral legitimacy to the current composition of Canada’s AI task force.

Therefore, I refrained from making any submission during its consultation process, which ended Oct. 31.

When Black voices are meaningfully included, I and others in the Black community will be happy to contribute.

Gideon Christian is an associate professor and university research chair in AI and law at the University of Calgary. His research focuses on racial bias in AI technologies.

Source: Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force

And a letter from Liberal MP Greg Fergus, Boycotting the AI task force is counterproductive:

I was disappointed to see Gideon Christian’s recent Policy Options article “Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force.”

I am a Member of Parliament. I hear from young people every day about their concerns regarding their place in the future of this country, and the incessant barriers they face in trying to forge their path in it. We all share an essential role in fighting and championing for our youth. We must strive to dismantle these barriers.

I am certain Professor Christian, based on his extensive career, has seen firsthand how the young, diverse, brilliant minds of our future make us stronger. They push us to innovate, to be better. We are building a world for them to inherit, one bolstered by technological growth. They deserve a seat at the table.

The appointment of a young Black scholar to the task force, regardless of the timing, gives her a valuable opportunity to contribute. I find it deeply unfortunate that Professor Christian would reduce her appointment to a symbolic gesture or optics, or that he would imply that she is lacking in qualification.

Rather than disputing her appointment, why would he not choose to act as a mentor instead? He chooses to boycott. This is not a choice I would make. I hope he will change his mind.

We need to be fighting for unity and co-operation where all are included, not tearing each other down. As an older Black Canadian, I am particularly pleased to see this emerging young Black leader access tables of influence.

I truly think we stand to gain by making places for the leaders of tomorrow. I believe we will soon see what can be accomplished by this taskforce and the great work done by young Canadians.

Together, we can build a future worthy of our youth.

Canadian Immigration Tracker: Third quarter 2025 update

Regular quarterly update across immigration programs: Permanent Residents, Temporary Residents (workers, students and visas, asylum seekers) and Citizenship. Trend across all programs shows year-over-year and two-year decline.

Lederman: The backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ Nakba exhibit is preposterous

Indeed:

…But it is ludicrous to suggest that historical events not be explored – that perhaps they should even be suppressed – by a national museum devoted to human rights, in order to counter this disturbing rise. One should not have anything to do with the other. If someone walks away from a Nakba exhibit wanting to bully (or worse) some Jews, the problem is not with the museum – which, not incidentally, includes a comprehensive permanent gallery about the Holocaust.

“Sharing the stories or experiences of one group doesn’t somehow take away the experiences of another,” as the museum’s director and CEO Isha Khan told me. In an interview, Ms. Khan said the concerns are being heard and she stressed that the exhibition is still in development. “We take our responsibility very seriously. And this exhibition is being given the same care and thoughtful concern that any exhibit would,” she said. 

“I know that these are polarized times,” she continued. “Our job is to cut through that … and to inspire reflection, bring people together in dialogue. We hope this will do that.”

With the current state of discourse, the history of the Middle East has been dumbed down to the point of absurdity to fit social media posts and a prevailing narrative. There is more reason than ever for a museum to offer enlightenment.

Source: The backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ Nakba exhibit is preposterous

Predictably enough, the National Post has the contrary position, weak IMO: Terry Newman: Actually, the backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ ‘Nakba’ exhibit is justified

Here’s how much the cuts to Canada’s international students have hurt Ontario colleges and universities

Starting to get a better sense of the numbers and how governments created this problem through a mixture of underfunding of post-secondary education and over-reliance on international students:

Ontario colleges and universities have been hit with more than $4.6 billion in lost revenues amid the drastic cuts to international students, new post-secondary figures obtained by the Star show.

And with Ottawa just announcing even fewer foreign students for 2026, for universities alone the impact is expected to increase from the $2.1 billion blow they are already dealing with.

The new numbers have the province’s universities now warning they “cannot cut their way out of these growing fiscal challenges.”

…Universities have already cut $550 million in the last few years, mainly through program loss, fewer services and staff cuts, and many schools are staring down deficits this school year. 

Colleges have cut $1.8 billion in the 2024-25 and 2025-26 school years, by cutting up to 10,000 jobs, and 600 programs as well as shuttering a number of campuses. …

Source: Here’s how much the cuts to Canada’s international students have hurt Ontario colleges and universities

Thousands of former international students’ visas will expire soon. What happens next is murky

Would be nice if we had reliable exit data to know:

Tens of thousands of international students who were granted postgraduate work permits will see their visas expire this year, casting doubt on their futures in Canada and leading economists to wonder if some will stay in the country as undocumented residents.

There were 31,610 people with valid postgraduate work permits in the country as of Sept. 30, and those visas will expire by Dec. 31, according to data from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) provided to The Globe and Mail.

Those numbers have recently come under scrutiny by economists and immigration experts because it’s unclear how many temporary residents remain in the country after their visas expire, adding to the undocumented population….

In a statement to The Globe, the federal Immigration Department said it did not have an estimate of the number of people in Canada on expired postgraduate work permits. 

“Once someone receives a permit, they must abide by the condition of their permit, including the legal requirement to leave Canada at the end of the authorized period of stay,” the IRCC said in the e-mailed statement. 

Last year, the Canada Border Services Agency deported approximately 18,000 people, but the agency does not publicly break that number down by type of study or work permit. 

The latest IRCC data show that the number of expiring postgraduate work permits is down sharply from the same period last year, when approximately 70,000 were due to expire. …

Source: Thousands of former international students’ visas will expire soon. What happens next is murky

USA: New Immigration Policy Likely To Block Many Family Immigrants

Of course, that is the point:

The Trump administration has proposed a new immigration policy likely to block many family-based immigrants from coming to America. The policy would label more family immigrants a “public charge,” allowing officials to prevent their entry. However, new research undermines the policy push, finding that a recent Federal Register notice ignores crucial empirical evidence: Individuals entering as family immigrants start with lower initial earnings but quickly adapt by trying new jobs and investing in skills and education that lead to rapid earnings growth. They are also unlikely to receive public assistance income.

Individuals who immigrate with family members or join them in the United States have been a central feature of immigration throughout American history. After Intel’s Andy Grove immigrated to America as a refugee following the Hungarian Revolution, he immediately pursued ways to sponsor his parents, who joined him in the United States. Years earlier, in 1885, a 16-year-old Friedrich Trump, Donald Trump’s grandfather, immigrated to America to join his sister Katherine, who “had immigrated to New York a year earlier,” according to Trump biographer Gwenda Blair.In 1930, Mary Anne MacLeod immigrated to America from Scotland as an unskilled 18-year-old to live with her married sister in Queens. Six years later, she met Fred Trump at a party, they married and had children, one of whom was Donald Trump. “Donald Trump is a product of (family) ‘chain migration,’” according to Columbia University historian Mae M. Ngai.

…DHS concedes in the Federal Register notice that new immigrants are not eligible for federal means-tested public benefits for at least five years after entering the United States. (The rules differ for refugees and asylees.) DHS also notes that sponsors of family immigrants sign legally binding affidavits of support. If considered, the affidavits of support should mitigate concerns that individuals may become a public charge since sponsors can reimburse benefit costs.

DHS does not express or cite concern that removing a structured review of applicants detailed by regulation in favor of subjective determinations by consular officers and others will, based on previous estimates, result in hundreds of thousands of immigrants annually being denied entry. The proposed rule does not consider it a cost that the DHS action will prevent many Americans from living in the United States with a spouse, child or other close relative, which will be the primary impact of the new policy.

The Federal Register notice cannot detail any quantitative benefits from the new policy, stating “DHS anticipates this proposed rule will produce benefits but is limited to providing a qualitative analysis.” The “qualitative” benefits DHS anticipates will not go to Americans or the U.S. economy, but to government personnel who will not be “unnecessarily” limited in their “ability to make public charge inadmissibility determinations.”

In recent weeks, the State Department issued a notice to consular officers to direct them to deny visas to people with obesity, diabetes or other health issues if they could be considered potential public charges. “A diplomat who received last week’s cable, and also spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media, said State Department leadership has been very active in finding new ways to deny foreigners entry into the U.S. or just slow down the system,” reported the Washington Post (November 13, 2025)….

Source: New Immigration Policy Likely To Block Many Family Immigrants

Deportations to be reported to Parliament each month under Conservative changes to border bill 

Hard to argue against more data but the Government and NDP rejected a similar amendment in the case of C-3 (citizenship). But yes, quarterly and annual reports are more informative in terms of trends but given that all IRCC immigration-related data sets are released monthly on open data, same should apply here and on open data, not reports to parliament:

Ottawa would have to report to Parliament every month on the number of foreign nationals who have been deported, including those with criminal convictions, under changes to the government’s border bill pushed through by the Conservatives

A slew of amendments to Bill C-12, including boosts to immigrationenforcement, passed in a marathon meeting of the Commons public safety meeting on Tuesday evening, where MPs scrutinized the bill until midnight. 

The committee voted for detailed monthly reports to Parliament on the number of deportations, including on where people came from and their age and gender, despite objections from a senior border official who argued that quarterly or annual reports would paint a clearer picture.

The amendment, proposed by the Conservatives, follows a report earlier this year that hundreds of convicted criminals facing deportation have gone missing. …

Source: Deportations to be reported to Parliament each month under Conservative changes to border bill

Thomas King: All my life, I believed I was Indigenous. Now, I must reckon with the inconvenient truth

Does raise the question whether a fixation on “bloodline” to identify “pretensions” rather than considering their work, perspective and perceived identity would not be a more comprehensive approach given that many of us have mixed ancestry and identity:

…And then there will be the harder question, the question that will be on many people’s lips as they read this: Did you know that you weren’t Cherokee all along and simply perpetrate and maintain a fraud throughout your professional life for fame and profit? 

While the answers to the other questions are problematic, the answer to this last one is a simple, hard, no. 

Not that this will keep people from believing what they will. Human nature loves blood in the water.

TAAF suggested that I might want to offer up an apology for my life, but an apology assumes a crime, an offence, a misdeed. And I don’t think that’s appropriate. Throughout my career – activist, academic, administrator, writer – I’ve conducted myself in the belief that I was mixed-blood Cherokee. 

However, having seen the genealogical evidence, should I choose to continue on in that vein from this point forward, then an accusation of fraud would have merit.

Mind you, going forward is going to be difficult, if not impossible. Will I try to step sideways into the sphere of the Tony Hillermans, the Evan S. Connells, the William Eastlakes, non-Natives who wrote about Natives? The Helen Hunt Jacksons and the Dee Browns of the world?

Or will I just pack my tent and slip away?

First, I have to survive the firestorm that’s coming. The anger. The disbelief. The feelings of betrayal. The media that will reduce a painful and complex matter to a series of misleading chyrons and simplistic sound bites. Individuals who will retell the story ad nauseam until all the tones have been washed away….

I’d like to think that, at the very least, I will be able to find a way to continue to support Indigenous causes and Indigenous artists, though I’m not sure the causes and artists will want to stand too close to such a smouldering wreck. 

Most likely I’ll do what I’ve always done. Tell stories. Write stories. I’ve always found sanctuary in the spoken word, safe haven in a well-turned paragraph. Or maybe I’ll heed my own counsel, try channelling the sign-off for the old Dead Dog Café radio show. 

Stay calm, be brave, wait for the signs.

All things considered, it’s probably as good a piece of advice as I’m going to find.

Source: Thomas King: All my life, I believed I was Indigenous. Now, I must reckon with the inconvenient truth

Globe editorial: Crime and punishment, and deportation

Agreed, important to public support of immigration:

…It is a deeply Canadian impulse to emphasize second chances, rehabilitation, and mercy. Yet does anyone ask whether Canadians would want these offenders as citizens? Hasn’t Parliament already pronounced on that issue?

We would not remove all discretion at this point. It would be harsh treatment in certain cases for permanent residents who have been here decades, or young special-needs people deserving of empathy. But judges need to abide by and enforce the rules Parliament has set out for newcomers and permanent residents, and stop skewing the results.

Source: Crime and punishment, and deportation

Opinion | Carney’s Bill C-12 brings back a dark chapter in Canada’s immigration policy

Representative sample of immigration lawyers’ perspective, overly alarmist IMO in its use of historical examples which have largely been overtaken starting in the 1960s:

…Disturbingly, this aspect of C-12 mirrors historic forms of immigration legislation which systemically violated the human rights of immigrants and refugees on both sides of the border. It is a return to an era of immigration legislation, when, in Canada, highly discretionary powers were used by the Governor-in-Council to impose discriminatory immigration restrictions — also framed as being in the “public interest.” These orders were used to prohibit specific “races,” nationalities, and classes of immigrants, often without parliamentary debate or without having to introduce any amendment to the Immigration Act in place at that time. Some examples of prohibited classes by orders include the 1908 Continuous Journey Regulation — intended to restrict immigration from India and Japan — orders in council restricting Chinese immigration, and the prohibition of immigrants involved in labour strikes, members of the Communist Party, or unemployed persons in 1931.

This dark chapter of Canadian immigration history is generally discussed as a vestige of a bygone era, replaced by an ostensibly modern, merit-based system that protects human rights. But the images of the MV Sun Sea (2010) or the Adriana (2023) boats, filled with migrants abandoned to their fate, are eerily reminiscent of those of the Komagata Maru (1914) and the St-Louis (1939).

The framing of migration as a “border security” issue in Bill C-12 and the broader scapegoating rhetoric targeting immigrants remind us of these past “none is too many” directives, highlighting the fact that immigration policy was of course never simply a bureaucratic process — it has also always been about deciding who, ultimately, is allowed to be recognized as fully human. 

Ironically, it is the very security of those who have found safety in Canada which will be undermined by this bill, allowing for the routine violation of rights protected under the Charter and international law for anyone who is not a citizen. This should concern us all, as it will pave the way for the flagrant rights abuses that we see in the U.S. to take place here: indefinite family separation, skyrocketing deportations and mass violations of due process. In this context, Prime Minister Carney is right to invoke “old relationships.” Except they are far from “over.”

Gwendolyn Muir, Jared Will and Anne-Cécile Khouri-Raphael are lawyers. 

Source: Opinion | Carney’s Bill C-12 brings back a dark chapter in Canada’s immigration policy