ICYMI – Bricker and Ibbitson: There are divisions in every part of the country. Is Canada at the breaking point?

2025/10/29 Leave a comment

Valid critique:

…Both Conservative and Liberal governments contributed to some of the challenges facing Canada today. But it was Mr. Trudeau who oversaw the greatest policy failure of modern times, by letting the immigration system spin entirely out of control.

As with so many aspects of the Trudeau legacy, the intentions were honourable: to grow Canada’s population and secure its future through increased immigration. There were arguments for and against the decision to almost double the intake of permanent residents to 500,000 a year. But there was no excuse for letting the number of temporary foreign workers and international students skyrocket, along with the number of people seeking asylum. Suddenly there were three million non-permanent residents in Canada, competing with younger native-born workers for jobs and housing. For the first time in a quarter century, polls showed that most Canadians believed Canada brought in too many immigrants.

Public support for immigration and multiculturalism has been Canada’s great competitive advantage, creating a diverse yet peaceful society of old and new Canadians living and working together in harmony. But by flooding the country with newcomers, the Trudeau government broke the consensus in favour of high levels of immigration and undermined our unique social contract. The damage to the country’s harmony and its future prospects could be incalculable….

Source: There are divisions in every part of the country. Is Canada at the breaking point?

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

Islamic preacher barred from entering Canada for speaking tour, months after being banned from U.K.

2025/10/28 Leave a comment

Seems like the right call. Question about a religious exemption for hate speech as proposed by the Bloc much more thorny as one looks at the potential impact across many religions and sects:

…Mr. Blanchet said his party plans to table an amendment to the government’s Combatting Hate bill to stop religion from being used as a defence for hate speech. 

The proposed change to the Criminal Code would abolish a defence allowing a person who incites hatred to escape prosecution if their words are based on religious beliefs or a religious text.

Canadian Identity Minister Steven Guilbeault replied that the Liberals shared the Bloc’s aim to combat hatred and would welcome amendments to the bill.

“We will hear from experts, subject-matter experts, and are willing to work with the Bloc Québécois, with all parties in this House to ensure that hate speech is not in Canada,” he replied. 

Jeremy Bellefeuille, spokesperson for Justice Minister Sean Fraser, said in a text message that the minister “is open to hearing expert testimony in committee.”…

Source: Islamic preacher barred from entering Canada for speaking tour, months after being banned from U.K.

Filed under Multiculturalism, Religion, Hate crimes Tagged with , , ,

A definition of racism that targets Jews is racist

2025/10/28 Leave a comment

Arguing against adding anti-Palestinian attitudes to examples and definitions of racism. As I have argued earlier, anti-Palestinian attitudes can be either ethnic (Arab) or religious (Christian or Muslim).

Hard to think of a comparable situation with respect to other groups (e.g.,anti-Uighur, anti-Khalistan) where the particular is not covered by current ethnic and religious discrimination and hate crimes:

Providing Canadians with tools to root out hate against any group is vital to our democracy. But it is unconscionable that these tools are designed or become weapons to promote hate against another group. The Arab Canadian Lawyers Association’s (ACLA) definition of “Anti-Palestinian Racism” (APR), now gaining traction in Canadian institutions, does precisely that, turning a language meant to defend dignity into a framework that treats Jewish identity as inherently racist.

Discrimination against Palestinians, like against any group, is unacceptable. Fortunately, Canada has strong legal mechanisms in place to address such cases, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and provincial human rights codes. These instruments prohibit discrimination based on place of origin, race, ethnicity, and religion. As the Ontario Human Rights Commission affirmed in an opinion, these existing protections are sufficient to address acts of prejudice against Palestinians.

But APR is not designed merely to fill a legal gap. Instead, it is a political instrument, one that forces a specific historical and ideological narrative that denies Jewish ties to the land of Israel. The definition requires all Canadians to support a Palestinian state from the river to the sea, which means the annihilation of Israel. It also suggests that disagreement with Palestinian political claims or narratives about Israel’s creation, or those which support Zionism, is inherently racist. APR doesn’t simply combat hate; it seeks to delegitimize the belief shared by 94 percent of Jewish Canadians who support the existence of a Jewish state in Israel. This view is shared by millions of other Canadians of all faiths and ethnicities because we acknowledge the right of self-determination for ourselves and others, including for Jews.

This is where the danger lies. APR imposes a rigid orthodoxy on a complex and contested historical and political conflict. In doing so, it undermines the very foundations of our Canadian liberal democracy: open dialogue, freedom of expression, and academic freedom. APR also risks criminalizing legitimate debate and dissent, particularly on university campuses, where open exchange of ideas is essential. Evidence of the danger of APR is already visible. For example, at Carleton University, a recently released report titled “The Palestine Exception” charged professors who teach a course that takes students to Israel to study religions and cultures in the region with engaging in APR.

The effects of APR are chilling. Canadians who support Israel’s right to exist are routinely being marginalized, accused of racism, and excluded. Even Prime Minister Carney, who reaffirmed Canada’s policy of supporting a two-state solution, would be deemed a racist. Many Canadians support a two-state solution and the aspirations of the Palestinian people. Supporting Palestinian rights does not require denying the right of Jews to national self-determination or casting Zionism as a form of bigotry. Yet APR reduces this complex reality to a zero-sum game in which supporting one group requires condemning the other.

The federal government is now being urged to enshrine APR, including by Canada’s Special Representative on Islamophobia, into its anti-racism strategy. This would be a dangerous mistake. By endorsing a definition that equates Jewish identity with racism, Canada would undermine its existing anti-discrimination regime, politicize legal norms, and embolden those who seek to suppress rather than engage in open debate. This definition is not aligned with Canada’s inclusive, democratic values.

It is also remarkable that APR’s proponents reject Canada’s adopted definition of antisemitism, that of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). IHRA affirms that criticism of Israel of the same type levelled against any other country is not antisemitic, while APR permits no criticism of Palestinian narratives without being labelled racist—yet another example of double standards applied to the detriment of the Jewish community.

If we want to build a truly inclusive Canada, we must resist simplistic labels that divide rather than unite. Canadians should be free to express support for Palestinian self-determination—as long as such advocacy does not glorify terrorism or vilify Jews. Equally, Zionists and Israelis must be allowed to express support for Jewish self-determination without being cast as racists.

APR is a step away from inclusion. It is a step toward silencing, polarization, and legal confusion. Canada needs practical tools to combat hate. We should not adopt a concept that is being used to demonize one group under the guise of protecting another. The road to justice is not paved with redefinition and ideological rigidity, but with mutual respect, legal clarity, and an unwavering commitment to the rights and dignity of all. Let’s not abandon those principles with a definition that will further fuel polarization and hate in Canadian society.

Source: A definition of racism that targets Jews is racist

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Parkin: The limited prospects for a “rebel alliance”

2025/10/28 Leave a comment

More interesting analysis by Parkin and Environics, written in response to the Globe editorial. Main takeaway, problem appears to be more on the Alberta side in terms of resentment:

The Globe and Mail published a special editorial this Sunday on the alliance between the Quebec and Alberta governments in support of greater respect and autonomy for their provinces. You can read it here. 

I am going to weigh in. What’s the point of having a Substack if you can’t drop everything you had planned for the morning in order to share some charts?

The editorial, on the whole, is not wrong. Quebecers and Albertans share many frustrations. Our survey confirms they are the two provinces where support for more provincial powers is highest. But there are two specific nuances that are worth noting, since they arguably constrain the prospects for any Quebec-Alberta “rebel alliance.”

The first is one of the findings that jumped out early on in the Confederation of Tomorrow survey project. Quebecers who are critical of federalism are more likely than those who are not to support an asymmetrical distribution of powers (the option in the survey is: “the federal government should offer more powers to those provinces that want them, so that the federal system can respond to the different needs that some provinces may have”). But this is not the case in Alberta, where more insist on the equality of provinces: there is no greater openness to asymmetry among disgruntled Albertans. While many Quebecers and Albertans will find common ground in feeling disrespected within Canada, their solutions are not the same: the asymmetry that represents a step forward for autonomist Quebecers actually represents a step backwards for autonomist Albertans….

The second finding comes from a question added to the survey more recently, about the perceived contribution that the people in each of the country’s major regions make to Canada.

Relatively few Quebecers (12% overall) say that western Canadians contribute less than their fair share to Canada, and the proportion that holds this view is only slightly higher (16%) among Quebecers who don’t feel their province is treated with respect. 

Far more Albertans (54%) say that Quebecers contribute less than their fair share to Canada, and this rises to a striking 81 percent among Albertans who don’t feel their province is treated with respect….

In short, whatever it is that annoys some Quebecers about federalism, it’s not their sense of what’s going on in the west. But one of the things that annoys some Albertans about federalism is precisely their sense of what’s going on in Quebec.

Resentment of Quebec (among other things) continues to fuel western alienation. The potential for a meaningful Quebec-Alberta alliance that leads us to a reformed federation, along the lines discussed in The Globe and Mail’s editorial, will be limited until Albertan leaders try to address and even defuse that resentment. 

Source: The limited prospects for a “rebel alliance”

Filed under Politics Tagged with , , ,

Liberals, NDP bid to undo Harper-era rule on citizenship for Lost Canadians

2025/10/27 Leave a comment

The Liberals and NDP, along with government officials, are right to raise concerns regarding the amended Bill’s requirement for knowledge and language assessment along with security and criminality checks as these would likely not survive legal challenges.

However, there is no such impediment to the amendment requiring the residency requirement of 1,095 days within a five year period prior to the birth of a child. Nor is there any such impediment for requiring annual reports on the number of Canadians claiming their citizenship under the Bill’s provisions:

The Liberals and NDP are pushing for a citizenship bill to move forward without Conservative changes that would require security screening and language checks before children born abroad to foreign-born Canadians could qualify for a passport. 

Earlier this month, Conservatives, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, voted through a raft of changes to the government’s proposed legislation, known as Bill C-3. 

The bill aims to reverse a change by Stephen Harper’s Conservative government in 2009 that stripped people born into this situation, who are often known as Lost Canadians, of their automatic right to citizenship.

But the Conservative amendments to the Liberal bill – expected to go to a vote on Monday – would make people aged 18 to 54 clear several hurdles in order to inherit Canadian citizenship, putting them on roughly even ground with immigrants seeking citizenship. 

They would have to pass an English or French language test, be subject to security screening to check for criminal activity, and pass a citizenship test demonstrating knowledge of Canadian history.

Bill C-3 requires Canadian parents born abroad to demonstrate a substantial connection to Canada before they can pass on citizenship to a child born outside the country. They would need to spend a cumulative 1,095 days – the equivalent of three years – in Canada before the birth or adoption of the child seeking citizenship. 

The Conservative changes would require the 1,095 days to be consecutively spent in Canada within five years, and not made up of a few weeks, months or days over many years. …

Source: Liberals, NDP bid to undo Harper-era rule on citizenship for Lost Canadians

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with , , , , , ,

PSPP veut faire l’indépendance avec les immigrants

2025/10/27 Leave a comment

Of note:

Le premier ministre Jacques Parizeau a « à l’évidence » erré le soir du 30 octobre 1995 en « jetant le blâme » sur l’« argent et des votes ethniques » pour la défaite du camp du Oui au référendum sur l’indépendance du Québec, convient le chef du Parti québécois (PQ), Paul St-Pierre Plamondon. Et une troisième tentative d’accession à la souveraineté devra se faire avec la population immigrante, pas sans, a-t-il soutenu en entrevue éditoriale avec Le Devoir vendredi.

Invité dans nos bureaux à l’occasion du 30e anniversaire du scrutin référendaire de 1995, celui qu’on surnomme « PSPP » a avoué ressentir un malaise par rapport à l’expression employée par son prédécesseur après la victoire du Non avec 50,58 % des suffrages : « C’est vrai, c’est vrai qu’on a été battus, au fond par quoi ? Par l’argent, puis des votes ethniques, essentiellement », avait laissé tomber un Jacques Parizeau en colère.

Pour répondre à la question lui demandant si M. Parizeau avait eu un bon réflexe ce soir-là, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, aujourd’hui âgé de 48 ans, n’y est pas allé par quatre chemins. « À l’évidence, non », a-t-il lancé. « Blâmer, après le résultat, un groupe en démocratie, c’est très glissant. Parce que le processus démocratique, c’est essentiellement accepter que tout le monde va voter, puis qu’il y a un résultat, puis qu’on est lié par ce résultat-là. » Il a précisé ne pas avoir « de souvenir » de ce qu’il pensait des propos chocs de M. Parizeau à l’époque, du haut de ses 18 ans.

Il a également désavoué les propos tenus par l’ancien chef du Oui, lors du conseil national du PQ de janvier 1993, selon lesquels « les Québécois peuvent atteindre l’objectif qu’ils se sont fixé, même si c’est presque exclusivement des Québécois de souche qui votent pour ».

« Non, je ne… Jamais… Je veux dire, moi, je suis chef depuis cinq ans, je suis le dixième chef de cette formation-là », a-t-il indiqué, dans une démonstration d’indépendance. « Je ne serais pas d’accord avec Pierre-Marc Johnson et sa doctrine, à l’époque, à l’intérieur du Canada », a-t-il ajouté.

« Depuis cinq ans, nous, on fait campagne auprès de tous les Québécois, et on pense que c’est une combinaison de la contribution de toutes les régions, de tous les groupes d’âge, de tous les groupes de la société québécoise qui va mener à une victoire ultime du Oui », a-t-il poursuivi.

Une indépendance « pour tous »

Le chef du PQ s’est d’ailleurs défendu vendredi de se mettre les personnes immigrantes à dos par ses propos et propositions sur l’immigration et la laïcité. Il assure faire «campagne pour tout le monde».

« Le Parti québécois prône une baisse des seuils d’immigration fondée sur plusieurs études qui font le lien entre des seuils trop élevés et les phénomènes de crise du logement, de détérioration du français et de difficulté à livrer les services. C’est notre position, et on n’a rien dit d’autre », a fait valoir M. St-Pierre Plamondon, écorchant au passage des personnalités comme l’ex-maire de Québec Régis Labeaume et des députés de Québec solidaire.

Source: PSPP veut faire l’indépendance avec les immigrants

Prime Minister Jacques Parizeau “obviously” wandered on the evening of October 30, 1995 by “blaming” on “money and ethnic votes” for the defeat of the Yes camp in the referendum on Quebec’s independence, agrees the leader of the Parti québécois (PQ), Paul St-Pierre Plamondon. And a third attempt to access sovereignty will have to be made with the immigrant population, not without it, he said in an editorial interview with Le Devoir on Friday.

Invited to our offices on the occasion of the 30th anniversary of the 1995 referendum vote, the one nicknamed “PSPP” confessed to feeling uncomfortable with the expression used by his predecessor after the victory of the No with 50.58% of the votes: “It’s true, it’s true that we were beaten, basically what? By money, then ethnic votes, essentially, “had dropped an angry Jacques Parizeau.

To answer the question asking him if Mr. Parizeau had had a good reflex that evening, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, now 48 years old, did not go there by four paths. “Obviously, no,” he said. “Blaming, after the result, a group in a democracy is very slippery. Because the democratic process is essentially accepting that everyone will vote, then that there is a result, then that we are bound by that result. He said he had “no memory” of what he thought of Mr. Parizeau’s shocking remarks at the time, from the height of his 18 years.

He also disowned the remarks made by the former leader of the Oui, during the national council of the PQ in January 1993, according to which “Quebecers can achieve the goal they have set themselves, even if it is almost exclusively native Quebecers who vote for it”.

“No, I don’t… Never… I mean, I’ve been a leader for five years, I’m the tenth leader of this formation,” he said, in a demonstration of independence. “I would not agree with Pierre-Marc Johnson and his doctrine at the time within Canada,” he added.

“For five years, we have been campaigning with all Quebecers, and we think that it is a combination of the contribution of all regions, all age groups, all groups of Quebec society that will lead to an ultimate victory of the Oui,” he continued.

Independence “for all”

The leader of the PQ also defended himself on Friday from turning immigrants against him with his remarks and proposals on immigration and secularism. He assures that he is doing “campaigning for everyone”.

“The Parti Québécois advocates a lowering of immigration thresholds based on several studies that link too high thresholds to the phenomena of housing crisis, deterioration of French and difficulty in delivering services. This is our position, and we have not said anything else, “said Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon, skinning personalities such as the former mayor of Quebec Régis Labeaume and the deputies of Québec solidaire.

Filed under Interculturalisme Tagged with , , ,

Canada’s overhaul of immigration must include a dedicated program for high-skilled workers 

2025/10/27 Leave a comment

Dose of reality:

…Some business leaders are dubious that the U.S. overhaul of the H-1B visa program is creating an opportunity for Canada.

“The United States uses immigration and visa policies to strengthen its economic and work-force advantage,” said Jim Balsillie, the former chair and co-chief executive of Research In Motion, which is now known as BlackBerry.

Mr. Balsillie, speaking at The Globe and Mail’s Building Canada’s Workforce event on Wednesday afternoon, noted that Mr. Trump’s “strategic use of visas” includes the TN category for trade professionals and the O-1 tier for individuals with extraordinary abilities and achievements.

“I can make a case that the recent H-1B changes actually hurt Canada because TN and O-1 visas are more attractive for many reasons,” he said.

He argued that America’s H-1B changes could exacerbate Canada’s brain drain if the U.S. looks north to fill the gap by seeking new talent in sectors such as artificial intelligence, life sciences and quantum computing.

Here’s another hard truth. If high-skilled immigrants treat our country as a way station to the U.S., it’s our own fault.

Ottawa has known for years that preferred candidates are getting lost in the immigration queue because they are competing with international students for a limited number of permanent-resident spots, said Stephen Green, managing partner at immigration law firm Green and Spiegel LLP.

As he points out, those foreign students have a Canadian education but minimal work experience. Trouble is, our immigration system skews heavily toward younger people….

Source: Canada’s overhaul of immigration must include a dedicated program for high-skilled workers

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

To combat hate in Canada, South Asians will have to move past their own divisions

2025/10/27 Leave a comment

Good reminder that multiculturalism is not just about the white/non-white but within and among visible minority groups, and not just South Asians:

…It’s time that we as a diaspora have a hard conversation about how we can talk to people from different religions and backgrounds without seeing only our differences. By talking, we can break away from the ill-informed caricatures so many of us have created of one another in our heads. But for a community that prides itself on maintaining traditions, this conversation is the most difficult thing to start. Indeed, any mention of change in front of extended family instantly gets me dismissed as the “Westernized child” who’s strayed far from home.

South Asia is far from a monolith. We have dozens of different and beautiful subcultures ingrained into our land. But rather than share the best parts, we too often choose to focus on what we see as the worst. Coming to Canada gave us all a chance to start over; instead, too many of us are throwing that away to perpetuate generational wounds. That only benefits those who already hate us.

South Asian Canadians don’t have to forget our history. But we do have to work together to move past it so that it doesn’t define our life here – if not for us now, then for future generations.

Khushy Vashisht is a Toronto-based freelance journalist.

Source: To combat hate in Canada, South Asians will have to move past their own divisions

Filed under bias, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Dupuy – La langue inclusive : lorsque des mythes font leur entrée dans les politiques publiques

2025/10/27 Leave a comment

The he/she/they debates in French:

En interdisant l’usage de certaines formes d’écriture inclusive en français, le gouvernement québécois s’inscrit dans une longue tradition d’aménagement linguistique, mais au risque de restreindre l’expression même des identités qu’il prétend protéger.

Au mois de septembre, le ministre de la Langue française, Jean-François Roberge, a annoncé le dépôt d’un décret visant à interdire l’utilisation de certaines formes de langue inclusive comme « iels », « toustes » et les doublets abrégés, comme « étudiant.e.s ». Cette mesure s’applique à l’Administration publique québécoise, aux municipalités, aux centres de services scolaires, au réseau de la santé et s’appliquera éventuellementaux cégeps et aux universités.

Une histoire qui se répète

De l’autre côté de l’Atlantique, cette décision donne un air de déjà vu. En 2017, le premier ministre français Édouard Philippe signait une circulaire invitant à ne pas utiliser la langue inclusive dans l’Administration publique française et en 2021, le ministre de l’Éducation nationale, Jean-Michel Blanquer, a publié un règlement interdisant l’utilisation de la langue inclusive dans le milieu de l’éducation. Parmi les motifs évoqués : les difficultés de lecture que les formes inclusives engendrent.

Alors que le gouvernement français se prononçait sur l’usage de l’écriture inclusive, aucune étude empirique n’avait encore mesuré l’effet des formes inclusives en français chez les personnes dyslexiques (plus particulièrement les formes abrégées comme « locuteur·ices »). Des personnes concernées y voyaient d’ailleurs une instrumentalisation des personnes en situation de handicap….

Source: La langue inclusive : lorsque des mythes font leur entrée dans les politiques publiques

By prohibiting the use of certain forms of inclusive writing in French, the Quebec government is part of a long tradition of linguistic development, but at the risk of restricting the very expression of the identities it claims to protect.

In September, the Minister of the French Language, Jean-François Roberge, announced the filing of a decree to prohibit the use of certain forms of inclusive language such as “iels”, “toustes” and abbreviated doublets, such as “students”. This measure applies to the Quebec Public Administration, municipalities, school service centers, the health network and will eventually apply to CEGEPs and universities.

A story that repeats itself

On the other side of the Atlantic, this decision gives an air of déjà vu. In 2017, French Prime Minister Édouard Philippe signed a circular inviting the use of inclusive language in the French Public Administration and in 2021, the Minister of National Education, Jean-Michel Blanquer, published a regulation prohibiting the use of inclusive language in the educational environment. Among the reasons mentioned: the reading difficulties that inclusive forms generate.

While the French government was ruling on the use of inclusive writing, no empirical study had yet measured the effect of inclusive forms in French on dyslexic people (more particularly forms abbreviated as “speakers”). Those concerned also saw it as an instrumentalization of people with disabilities….

Filed under Language Tagged with , ,

What happened to ‘click once for Canadian citizenship’? The government has (quietly) thought twice

2025/10/24 Leave a comment

Nice to see that all the efforts from many to stop this hair-brained initiative paved off (quoted):

The Immigration Department has quietly shelved a controversial plan that would have allowed new citizens to take their citizenship oath on their own with a click on the keyboard.

“There is no self-administration of the oath in Canada,” the department said in an email in response to a Star inquiry for an update about the plan. “Implementation of the self-administration of the oath is not actively being pursued at this time.” 

In February 2023, the federal government published the proposed change in the Canada Gazette as part of the modernization and digitalization of immigration and citizenship processing.

The self-attestation option was meant to reduce citizenship processing time and cost, and make it more accessible, because ceremonies are generally scheduled on weekdays during working hours. It was supposed to be launched in June that year. Unlike in a virtual citizenship ceremony, there would be no presiding official.

However, a chorus of prominent Canadian leaders, including former governor general Adrienne Clarkson, former Liberal immigration minister Sergio Marchi and former Calgary mayor Naheed Nenshi, came out to voice their opposition. Critics feared this would further dilute the meaning of Canadian citizenship.

“It’s a fundamental downgrading of understanding of what Canadian citizenship is about and how meaningful it can be,” said Andrew Griffith, a former director general for the federal Immigration Department, who had organized a petition to Parliament opposing what he calls “citizenship on a click.”

“It’s not a driver’s licence. It’s actually something that has some meaning. It gives very significant rights to people, so it shouldn’t be taken lightly.”

While Griffith welcomed the news, he is troubled that the government did not officially note in the Gazette that it had dropped the plan or at least publicly stated a change in policy. The Gazette is the official government publication to inform the public about new and proposed regulations, statues, orders-in-council and appointments. 

“There’s always that risk particularly at a time when the government’s trying to find money, that somebody might revisit it, we’ve got the authority here, we can do that,” said Griffith.

“At least have a press release saying that, ‘After thinking about it carefully, given the importance of the incident, blah, blah blah, we’ve decided against this approach.’”

During the pandemic, citizenship processing time doubled from the prior 12-month service standard, prompting immigration officials to bring in virtual citizenship ceremonies in April 2020. Since then, more than 20,600 virtual ceremonies have been held before a citizenship judge or a presiding official online; processing time is down to 13 months. 

Last year, 2,045 virtual and 1,417 in-person citizenship ceremonies were held. From January to August this year, there were a total of 2,382 citizenship ceremonies, including 1,162 virtual and 1,220 in-person events.

In its email to the Star, the Immigration Department said officials conducted an analysis after public consultation on the self-administration of the oath. It took into consideration the “client experience journey,” measures related to the integrity of the process and “commitment that citizenship ceremonies remain an important part of Canadian tradition.”

“The Government of Canada is committed to continue delivering meaningful, celebratory and inclusive in-person and virtual ceremonies while offering clients a choice” between taking their oath in person or virtually, it said.

The department said it has been moving toward a more “integrated and modernized” working environment to help speed up application processing. Expanding citizenship ceremonies, tests and interviews to an online format was part of its goal of bringing efficiencies and simplifying the citizenship program and process, it added.

The department also said it is “actively” working on updating its citizenship guide, a project that started shortly after the Liberals returned to power in late 2015 when Justin Trudeau became the prime minister. Liberal Mark Carney has been prime minister since March.

The current citizenship guide, last revised in 2012, still uses some outdated information about the country and is short on the Indigenous history and the information about residential schools that were promised. The guide is studied by citizenship applicants, who must pass a knowledge exam as part of the requirement to become naturalized citizens.

Officials said they have engaged a wide range of partners to ensure the revised study guide represents all Canadians and people living in Canada as best as possible, including Indigenous Peoples, minority populations, women, francophone and Canadians with disabilities.

“These extensive consultations will ensure that the guide is historically accurate, more balanced and inclusive of the people that make up this country and its history,” the department said, adding that it has not set a launch date for the new guide.

Currently, the Canadian citizenship application fee is $649.75 for adults over 18 years old and $100 for minors.

Source: What happened to ‘click once for Canadian citizenship’? The government has (quietly) thought twice

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , , , , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →