National Post View: Sneaking in new ‘Canadian values’

National Post editorial on the mixed messages from the Government on the niqab:

In an interview with iPolitics on Tuesday, Treasury Board President Tony Clement rolled out the red carpet for niqab-wearing women who wish to work in the public service. Indeed, he asserted they “are frequently worn” by civil servants. “If you are in your place of work or privately in your home or in your private life, what you wear is of no concern to the state,” he said, with the reasonable proviso that the garment presents no safety concerns.

In an interview with Maclean’s the same day, Minister for Multiculturalism (among other portfolios) Jason Kenney made similar noises. Though he defended his government’s stance against niqabs at citizenship ceremonies on grounds that it involves “an interaction between the individual and the state,” and what’s more “a public declaration,” he drew a firm line there. “I’ve said consistently … that I think the state has no business regulating what people wear,” he said.

Meanwhile in the House of Commons, Stephen Harper was taking a very different line. Responding to a question, he stood up and doubled down against the niqab: “Why would Canadians, contrary to our own values embrace a practice [at citizenship ceremonies] that is not transparent, that is not open, and frankly is rooted in a culture that is anti-women? That is unacceptable to Canadians and unacceptable to Canadian women.” (Our italics.)

In the past we’ve argued that no one in government has yet made the case for uncovered faces as an obligation of citizenship, albeit one that applies only at the moment of its ceremonial confirmation. That remains true today. Mr. Kenney speaks of “interaction between the individual and the state” as the threshold at which people must show their faces, which at least has a certain logical coherence. The Quebec Liberals, for example, have committed to banning the niqab in the provincial public service on the same grounds. But in Ottawa, we have the Prime Minister denouncing niqabs as misogynist symbols contrary to Canadian values, while two of his senior ministers mildly declare that what people wear is none of their business.

And still, no one has managed to articulate why niqabs should be banned at citizenship ceremonies — or just as confusingly, why they aren’t actually banned. The regulations governing citizenship judges advise them to afford “the greatest possible freedom in the religious solemnization or solemn affirmation” of the oath. The “ban” is merely a ministerial directive — one that could hardly contradict those regulations more blatantly. In fact, government lawyers defended the policy on just those grounds. “In the respondent’s view, the policy is not mandatory and citizenship judges are free not to apply it,” Justice Boswell of the Federal Court wrote, in striking the policy down.

If this cynical sleight of hand was an effort to keep the issue out of court, it has failed miserably. If it’s as essential to “Canadian values” as Mr. Harper says that citizenship oaths be taken with uncovered faces, then surely it belongs in the regulations. That he seems more inclined instead to bluster and spend public money appealing the Federal Court ruling, while his ministers try not to let the anti-niqab fire get too hot, speaks volumes.

Politicians trying to sneak new “Canadian values” in through the service entrance are not to be trusted. The Conservatives need to let this bugbear die.

National Post View: Sneaking in new ‘Canadian values’