Canadians turned off by Donald Trump’s inflammatory policies: poll

Canadians_turned_off_by_Donald_Trump’s_inflammatory_policies__poll___National_PostInteresting but not terribly surprising result that largely correlates with the Conservative Party base, providing a possible explanation for the wedge politics of the previous Conservative government and its election strategy:

Respondents were also questioned about Trump’s call for a ban on all Muslims entering the United State: 67 per cent said they personally disagree, while about 50 per cent “strongly” disagree.

However, the poll notes that still leaves a sizeable minority — a full one in three — who agrees with Trump, 13 per cent “strongly” so.

Women aged 35-54 and men 55 or older were mostly likely to agree with Trump — by 39 per cent and 41 per cent respectively.

Responses varied across the country.

In every case, support for Trump was more apparent in rural settings, and at its lowest in urban centres like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver.

Residents of central Canada and the west coast were most likely to dislike Trump, compared with 46 per cent of Saskatchewan residents who said they agreed with him.

Responses were also dictated by politics: people who voted Conservative in the last federal election were far more likely to support Trump, 55 per cent,

Respondents were also divided on whether or not Trump’s remarks are good or bad for society.

Unsurprisingly, the same minority that agrees with Trump’s police is also likely to say his rhetoric is good for society because it brings to light “timely issues without fear of political correctness, ” while 63 per cent disagreed, saying it “encourages fear and hatred towards Muslims.”

Kurl said that while the poll was clear a majority of Canadians do not support Trump, it is important to note the minority results, too.

“There is a significant number of Canadians who agree with Trump’s statements calling for a complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States,” she said.

“Two in three disagree. The majority disagree. But one in three agree and that is a significant segment of Canadians.”

The poll has a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Source: Canadians turned off by Donald Trump’s inflammatory policies: poll | National Post

Top 10 of 2015 – Issue #5: Governments Increasingly Restrict Citizenship

One of the top international trends in immigration and citizenship policy by the Migration Policy Institute:

The question of who belongs in a nation strikes at the heart of a country’s identity. It is no surprise therefore that governments typically set high requirements governing who can acquire citizenship—and reserve the right to strip it from those who would do the nation harm. In 2015, both citizenship acquisition and revocation came under fire in new ways. Politicians in a number of countries—including the United States—have attempted to restrict who is eligible to become a citizen, while others have expanded the definition of who can be deprived of citizenship

Those restricting eligibility have largely been driven by the aim of excluding descendants of unauthorized immigrants or contested minority groups from citizenship—drawing a bright line around “desired” citizens. The second trend has mainly been driven by fears of international terrorism. Canada, Australia, and a handful of European countries have passed or proposed legislation making it easier to strip suspected terrorists—almost all of whom are Muslim and male—of what should be a nation’s most secure and permanent right. Both trends come with a high penalty: potentially marginalizing immigrant or minority communities, and in some cases rendering individuals stateless (for more on the political rhetoric driving these trends, see Issue #6: Refugee Crisis Deepens Political Polarization in the West).

Source: Top 10 of 2015 – Issue #5: Governments Increasingly Restrict Citizenship | migrationpolicy.org

China’s ‘hidden generation’: plea to give citizenship to stateless children of trafficked North Koreans | South China Morning Post

Under-reported:

Campaigners have urged Beijing to give citizenship to a “hidden generation” of stateless children born to trafficked North Korean women forced into marriage or prostitution in China.

They said an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 children born to North Korean women in China have no nationality and therefore cannot access education, health care and basic rights that most people take for granted.

If their mothers are deported, they are often abandoned by their Chinese fathers, leaving them effectively orphaned, according to the European Alliance for Human Rights in North Korea.

Thousands of North Koreans have fled hunger and oppression in the secretive state since a famine in the mid-1990s. Many are in hiding in neighbouring China, which considers them illegal migrants.

The plight of their children is outlined in a report by the rights group co-authored by Yong Joon Park, a teenager now living in Britain who grew up stateless in China.

They treated him badly. His life was worse than the starving children in North Korea. His mother, Jihyun Park, said traffickers sold her as a wife to a poor Chinese farmer after she fled North Korea in 1998.

When their son was five in 2004 she was reported to the authorities and deported back to North Korea.

There she was sent to a labour camp where she endured “horrific conditions” and prisoners were “worked harder than animals”.

“All I could think of was seeing my son again,” said Park, who eventually managed to escape and return to China.

She found her son, but barely recognised him. His skin was filthy and flaking, and when he was hungry he was sent outside to pick up grains of rice from the ground.

“They treated him badly. His life was worse than the starving children in North Korea,” she said. “The Chinese government does not give children like my son a nationality so they cannot go to school.”

She and her son managed to cross the Chinese border into Mongolia and later moved to Britain and were accepted as refugees.

“When my son arrived in the UK he was nine. It was the first time he had a nationality and the first time he went to school.”

Now 16, he scored straight As in his exams this year and is hoping to go to university to become a lawyer.

Source: China’s ‘hidden generation’: plea to give citizenship to stateless children of trafficked North Koreans | South China Morning Post

Voile intégral: Couillard confiant de pouvoir légiférer malgré l’approche d’Ottawa

Federal citizenship case reflected fact that Minister did not have the authority under the Citizenship Act to prohibit the niqab, not the fundamental question of whether banning the niqab would be in conformity with the Charter.

Quebec law may result in that more fundamental challenge:

Le premier ministre Philippe Couillard a maintenu que les assises juridiques du Québec sont solides pour interdire le port du voile intégral au moment de voter et dans les services publics, malgré la décision d’Ottawa de l’autoriser pendant les cérémonies de citoyenneté et lors de scrutins.

Lors d’une conférence de presse en compagnie du premier ministre Justin Trudeau, vendredi, M. Couillard a reconnu que son gouvernement approche la question du port du voile sous un angle différent de son homologue.

M. Couillard a déclaré que cette différence ne remet pas en question les fondements juridiques sur lesquels Québec s’appuie.

« On est persuadés que l’approche qu’on choisit est tout à fait conforme avec les lois du pays, en incluant les chartes, on est très attentifs à cette question-là », a-t-il dit.

Selon le premier ministre québécois, il n’est pas nécessaire de faire l’unanimité à ce sujet, qui a occupé une place importante dans la dernière campagne fédérale.

« On aborde la question d’angles différents mais avec la même préoccupation, a-t-il dit. Moi-même j’ai fait une campagne complète sur les droits et libertés des gens et c’est un enjeu important pour moi. »

Après avoir été élu il y a près de deux mois, M. Trudeau a retiré l’appel déposé par le gouvernement conservateur devant la Cour suprême du Canada, dans la cause entourant le port du niqab aux cérémonies de citoyenneté.

Par ailleurs, en 2007, les conservateurs s’étaient engagés à interdire le vote à visage couvert, mais ils avaient fait marche arrière en février 2014, au moment de réformer la loi électorale.

Plusieurs citoyens ont choisi de protester contre l’absence de balises en se présentant le visage masqué de diverses façons au moment du scrutin fédéral d’octobre dernier.

Alors que le vote à visage couvert est interdit au Québec depuis huit ans, le gouvernement de M. Couillard a déposé un projet de loi qui fixerait la même obligation lors de la prestation de services publics.

« Le cas du visage voilé va au-delà de cette question, au-delà de la question religieuse, a-t-il dit vendredi. C’est une question d’image de la femme dans une société, du message qu’on envoie aux gens. (…) Pour le Québec et dans l’histoire du Québec dans l’état actuel de nos valeurs communes, je pense que c’est un geste qu’il faut faire et qu’on va poursuivre. »

M. Couillard a affirmé que M. Trudeau et lui sont malgré tout d’accord « sur les grands enjeux, sur les grands principes ».

« Il n’est pas interdit qu’il y ait des éléments où on a des approches différentes, a-t-il dit. Il ne faut pas rechercher l’unanimité et la constance à tout prix. »

M. Trudeau a insisté sur la place du débat sur les symboles religieux dans les dernières campagnes électorales québécoise et fédérale.

« Nous nous situons dans cette lignée de refuser la politique qui divise ou qui vise à faire peur aux gens, a-t-il dit. On a tous deux gagné des élections dans les dernières années en étant raisonnables et ouverts dans le respect des droits. »

Source: Voile intégral: Couillard confiant de pouvoir légiférer malgré l’approche d’Ottawa | Alexandre Robillard | Politique québécoise

Americans Can’t Pass the U.S. Citizenship Test

Not surprising and there would be similar results in Canada, particularly given the Canadian test is more onerous and that immigrants study for the test:

One of the biggest parts of the application process for becoming a U.S. citizen is passing the naturalization test, a prueba covering pivotal history and government facts that only 1-in-3 Americans can pass.

To highlight just how ridiculous this crucial test is, the funny journos at the Flama put together a video of U.S. citizens being asked some of the questions that American hopefuls have to answer correctly.

Questions like “when was the Constitution written,” “how many voting members does the House of Representatives have” and “who said, ‘give me liberty or give me death'” had these americanos scratching their heads. And these are just a handful of the 100 preguntas immigrants can be asked.

One exam-taker came up with a brilliant plan after failing the test miserably: “There should be a good person test to become an American. Like are you human? Do you care about other people? That’s what we need. People shouldn’t have to answer this shit,” he said.

Despite many Americans’ inability to pass the naturalization test, 91 percent of immigrants are successful.

The point of the video, though, couldn’t be any more clearer: Naturalization test answers give little indications as to whether someone would be a so-called “good” citizen, and we probably shouldn’t be forcing immigrants to memorize random U.S. facts that their neighbors won’t even know.

Don’t forget to watch the hilarious video above.

Source: Americans Can’t Pass the U.S. Citizenship Test

New citizenship deprivation [revocation] rules in the wake of Paris attacks

Good update of citizenship revocation measures:

The terrorist attacks that happened in Paris on 13 November 2015 have been followed by a toughening of citizenship rules in a number of countries. This is reflected in both a more cautious approach to naturalisation and in proposals to withdraw or deny citizenship to suspects of terrorism (and occasionally to their families).

Increased security concerns adversely affected the Italian attempts to introduce ius soli temperato (moderated ius soli) for second generation migrants. Moderated ius soli would allow children born to foreign nationals in possession of a European Union Long Term Residence Permit to acquire Italian nationality by registration before the eighteenth birthday.

Yet considerably more countries have proposed, and some have already adopted, provisions on grounds of which suspects of terrorism would be deprived of their citizenship.

Three days after the attacks in Paris, speaking at a joint session of both houses of the French parliament, the country’s President François Hollande  proposed citizenship deprivation for dual nationals who are convicted of terrorism.

On 22 November 2015, the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu put forward a motion to allow the country’s government to withdraw citizenship of those who join the Islamic State.

In early December, the authorities of Dagestan, a Russian federal unit located in the North Caucasus, proposed to the Russian Duma to amend the country’s citizenship law to deprive of citizenship those who ‘left Russia to take part in terrorist activities’.

Similar initiative has also resonated in the Belgian public discourse, where he Flemish nationalist party NVA, argues for amendments to citizenship law to allow the deprivation of nationality to descendants of Belgian citizens (second and third generations) convicted of terrorism. The current citizenship legislation allows withdrawal of citizenship, but only for those who are not born Belgians, or who have acquired citizenship by naturalisation.

Two countries, Australia and Azerbaijan have already amended their legislation in this regard.

Australia has moved to strip dual nationals who ‘have fought in government-designated militant groups or engaged in activities that would support terrorism, such as training, recruitment, or making donations’ already in June 2015 when it adopted the Allegiance to Australia bill. In December 2015, the bill was amended and leads to automatic loss of Australian citizenship for individuals suspected of terrorism who are 14 years or older, even in the absence of conviction. Under the new provisions, citizenship lost on grounds of sections 33AA and 35 cannot be regained. Civil society organisations consider this a controversial and possibly unconstitutional move that creates two classes of citizenship.

The parliament of Azerbaijan amended the country’s s citizenship law on 4 December to withdraw citizenship of those ‘involved in terrorist activity and actions aimed at the violent change of the constitutional system of Azerbaijan’. Under the new rules, such individuals will be automatically deprived of Azerbaijani citizenship.

For more details on the current and past citizenship laws of Italy, France, Belgium and Russia consult our country profile pages.

Source: EUDO CITIZENSHIP

Liberals Urge 33 Of Harper’s Political Appointees To Resign Voluntarily

Interesting that of the 39 letters, 1 is to a citizenship judge (Roy Wong) and four to appointees to the IRB:

Liberal MPs urged dozens of Conservative political appointees Monday to follow the federal government’s request and voluntarily resign from positions to which they were appointed in the dying days of Stephen Harper‘s government.

Last summer, Harper’s cabinet approved the appointment or term extensions for 49 people, whose positions took effect only after the Oct. 19 election.

The Prime Minister’s Office is particularly incensed over the unusual, and extraordinarily high, $1-million-plus severance packages that some appointees negotiated with the Conservative government. In total, taxpayers could be on the hook for $18.5 million to break the contracts.

Thirty-eight people were appointed to terms that took effect between Oct. 20, 2015, and Dec. 30, 2015. Ten people were appointed to terms starting in 2016 and one extreme case was to start in 2019. But John Badowski, the chairperson of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada, resigned his future appointment last week before being formally asked. 

Given that the Government has expressed its lack of confidence in these appointees, it would be wise for them to voluntarily resign.

Source: Liberals Urge 33 Of Harper’s Political Appointees To Resign Voluntarily

Hollande’s plans to strip dual nationals of citizenship stirs the Left – France

Healthy debate to have:

French government plans to toughen security laws in the wake of the Paris attacks, which include stripping dual nationals of their citizenship, have come under fierce scrutiny from members within its own ranks. Lille mayor and former labour minister Martine Aubry has called into question the moral basis of the move.

“I’m not sure stripping dual nationals of their citizenship is absolutely necessary,” Martine Aubry told French TV channel BFM on Thursday.

The French government has introduced a raft of security measures since the Paris attacks on 13 November. The police has carried out over 2000 raids on suspects with terrorist links as part of new emergency state laws. Today President François Hollande wants the state to have even more sweeping powers, such as being able to strip dual nationals of their citizenship if they’re involved in terrorist offences.

The prospect has sent alarm bells ringing within his Socialist party, concerned that the Left is jerking dangerously towards the Right.

“Should we treat dual nationals born in France differently? Should we be suspicious of anyone whose parents come from abroad?” Aubry continued.

In essence, the former Labour minister is criticizing what she considers to be a knee-jerk reaction on the part of the president “to give the allusion that he’s going far enough.”

Her comments come three days before regional elections, in which the Far-right Front National is slated to win.

The Paris attacks have reshaped the context. The focus is now less on social issues–although unemployment is higher than ever according to fresh statistics published on Thursday-and now more concentrated on security. A growing number of candidates are opting for stringent security measures in their manifestos to compete with Marine Le Pen.

“It’s out of the question to let the Front National win,” Aubry added, pledging her “full” support to François Hollande in regional elections, of which the first round kicks off this Sunday.

The fact remains however, that she still has doubts on whether his security face-lift suits him.

Source: Hollande’s plans to strip dual nationals of citizenship stirs the Left – France – RFI

Refusal to grant British citizenship to extremist’s family ruled unlawful

Over-reach, not authorized by legislation (apart from the substance):

An unprecedented decision by the home secretary, Theresa May, to refuse British citizenship to the wife and children of a supporter of Osama bin Laden in order to deter other potential extremists has been ruled unlawful by the high court.

Mr Justice Ouseley quashed the refusal of British citizenship to the wife and two adult children of the Islamist extremist, who is a refused asylum seeker but cannot be deported to Egypt for fear he will be tortured.

The judge said May had acted unlawfully because parliament had not expressly provided that British citizenship could be refused to deter others from engaging in extremism in the future.

The Egyptian family, who have been in Britain since 1994, cannot be named and were referred to in court as HY, MM, GY and TY. The father has been described by the Home Office as an Islamist extremist and is listed by the United Nations as associated with al-Qaida through Egyptian Islamic Jihad.

The mother, aged 51, is bedridden and mainly lives with her husband, while their children, who are in their 20s, have left home and are following professional careers and have their own families. All were given indefinite leave to remain in Britain in May 2009.

The family’s barrister, Michael Fordham QC , told a hearing in October that the wife and children were “blameless individuals whose good character is unimpeachable” and were being blamed for the “sins of their father”, who was no longer regarded as a threat by the security services.

The judge said they were each regarded as being able to truthfully take the citizenship oath and pledge of allegiance in good faith. The Home Office said there were “no lurking doubts” or reasons to suspect they were in any way involved in extremism.

…Robin Tam QC, for the home secretary, said British citizenship was a privilege and not a right, and it was not irrational to deny it as a deterrent to individuals connected by blood or marriage to those who had engaged in extremist activities.

Ouseley did not agree. He said there was “real unfairness in refusing naturalisation to someone who qualified in all other respects, in order to provide a general deterrent to others, over whom the applicants had no control”.

The judge said that if parliament had ever intended the home secretary to use such a discretionary power, it would have expressly provided for it. He said the effect of her approach, which he said was unprecedented, was to force applicants to choose between family and British citizenship in order to deter others from extremist activities.

Source: Refusal to grant British citizenship to extremist’s family ruled unlawful | UK news | The Guardian

Expats may have Harper Tory restrictions on voting dropped, Liberals say

To be watched – I think the current 5 year rule is appropriate (it was instituted in 1993 and the social contract reasoning of the Court decision makes sense). Moreover, not clear how many expats would in fact vote (see earlier Reframing the debate over expat voting: Russell and Sevi, Globe editorial for the numbers):

The new Liberal government wants more Canadians to vote in elections and won’t be reviving measures proposed by the former Conservative regime that critics said would have the effect of suppressing voting, the Prime Minister’s Office said Wednesday.

At the same time, a spokesman for the PMO said the government had made no decision on an existing law currently subject of a court battle that effectively disenfranchises expats abroad for more than five years.

“We will be able to clarify our intent in the coming months,” Olivier Duchesneau, deputy communications director in the Prime Minister’s Office, said in an email.

“But we believe that more Canadians should have the ability to vote, not the opposite.”

Two expat Canadians in the United States launched a constitutional challenge to rules in the Canada Elections Act that bar them from voting from abroad. They were initially successful in Ontario Superior Court in 2014, but the province’s Court of Appeal sided with the Conservative government in July.

The two are now waiting to see if the Supreme Court of Canada will take up their case. In the interim, they have called on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to withdraw the government’s defence of the legislation if the top court does agree to a hearing.

The PMO said no decision has been made on the litigation or the existing legislation, but made it clear the Citizens Voting Act or Bill C-50 proposed by the former government would stay dead.

Among other things, it tightened ID and registration requirements for voters living abroad. The Conservatives argued it was aimed at preventing fraud, but critics said it would make it harder for expats to vote.

The bill, introduced last December by then-democratic reform minister Pierre Poilievre in response to the initial court decision, passed second reading in May and was being debated in committee. The legislation died on the order paper when the election was called.

“The government is committed to scrapping the Citizens Voting Act,” Duchesneau said.

Source: Expats may have Harper Tory restrictions on voting dropped, Liberals say