The Franco-American Flophouse: Ted Cruz: Birthright Citizenship is Not Voluntary

A good discussion of birthright citizenship by Victoria Ferauge that captures some of the issues, as well as questioning the philosophical basis for birthright citizenship.

As always with these kinds of policy discussions – and they are needed and valuable – is that they need to be weighed against the practical impact of changes, particularly for immigration-based countries where birthright citizenship has traditionally been the most simple approach.

But as many have noted, beyond “birth tourism” concerns, the nature of citizenship is changing as people have increasingly complex lives and identities, and governments need to reflect on these changes and implications.

The Franco-American Flophouse: Ted Cruz: Birthright Citizenship is Not Voluntary.

My Book – Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Printing Proof Stage

Just finished the final edits – substantive, copy and formatting. On track for September 16 release. Good feeling, now on to pre-production and marketing.

The trouble with birth tourism

Robert Sibley of The Citizen on birth tourism. As per my earlier post (‘Birth tourists’ believed to be using Canada’s citizenship laws as back door into the West | National Post), while the CIC consultations earlier this year were helpful in clarifying the nature of the problem, and suggesting that it was more widespread among more communities, it was not ‘hard’ evidence with ‘hard’ numbers. It was rather ‘informed anecdote’ without the due diligence of applying more rigorous statistical analysis based on medicare billing and other records.

It may be adequate to give the government cover to change Canadian legislation – and there is, in today’s globalized world, a case to be made. However, CIC has not managed well previous policy and program changes, with the result that the number of  Canadians granted citizenship fell 37 percent in 2012 (from an average of 172,000 during 2007-11 to 113,000 in 2012), and the waiting period increased to 25 months (Australia’s is 6 months). And like all changes, the linkages between citizenship and related federal and provincial policies (e.g., vital stats) require detailed attention to get the balance right between improved citizenship integrity (needed) and efficient service to Canadians.

So a note of caution to Sibley and others: current implementation problems in citizenship can undermine the policy rationale.

The trouble with birth tourism.

Pico Iyer on Citizenship, Identity, Movement and Place

A very good, reflective TED talk, by Pico Ayer (thanks to The Franco-American Flophouse), on where one comes from and our increasingly fluid identities. For the many of us who draw our identity from a variety of different places, cultures and experiences, it captures how our notion of time and space has changed, and how we have to build our own sense of who we are, and the stillness to appreciate it.

A contrast to the citizenship ‘boxes’ that governments, for understandable reasons, have to put us into.

This Ramadan we’ve shown Islam and Britishness are not incompatible | Sayeeda Warsi

Good piece by Baroness Warsi, Co-Chairman of the UK Conservative Party, and Minister for Faith and Communities, on integration of British Muslims in the broader community.

This Ramadan we’ve shown Islam and Britishness are not incompatible | Sayeeda Warsi | Comment is free | theguardian.com.

The Franco-American Flophouse: Not Everyone Wants to Be A Citizen

In debates about citizenship, the default assumption is that all wish to become citizens of the country in which they live. A good piece on the exceptions and related reasons. As always, individual situations vary, and the degree to which someone has an accepted citizenship (i.e., not from a country where visa and other restrictions make life and travel a pain), the greater the flexibility to choose.

Part of the longer-term trend towards instrumental citizenship, rather than being fundamental to identity.

The Franco-American Flophouse: Not Everyone Wants to Be A Citizen.

Monarchy’s role in government: Most Canadians want fixes, but how? – The Globe and Mail

Good discussion of some of the issues around the monarchy and suggestions for more written clarity regarding the power of the prime minister in relation to the legislature. Other governments have done so without undermining the role of the monarchy; and the article also lists a number of other options that could go further.

Not likely to happen given any debate would be divisive but good to have a range of options laid out and discussed.

Monarchy’s role in government: Most Canadians want fixes, but how? – The Globe and Mail.

An independent Canada

Good piece by Robert Sibley on the history and the people that shaped Canada’s becoming independent in the 20s and 30s. And a strong comment on how much the role of the public service may have changed since then.

That’s the kind of visionary counsel — backbone stiffening, if you will — Canadians could once expect from their public servants. You have to wonder, given the current dysfunctional relationship between the government and the public service, if those days are long past, and, if so, how that might affect the country’s future.

An independent Canada

.

The other truth about Trudeau

Good to see a healthy debate on the legacy of Trudeau, given that so much writing has had elements of hagiography. Bob Plamondon’s recent The Truth About Trudeau provides a valuable counter-narrative that, like many counter-narratives, may try too hard to make its case. On the other side, Andrew Cohen, emphasizes the long-term impact of  Trudeau’s achievements, particularly the Constitution and the Charter,  and his role, sometimes divisive, in trying to keep the country together.

Like all leaders with a legacy of achievement, views and interpretations will differ, but if Trudeau doesn’t ‘haunt us still,’ his legacy continues to shape the country, in big and small ways.

Even the Conservative government, opposed to much of the Trudeau legacy, has to live within it, sometimes with grace (e.g., the 2008 apology to aboriginal Canadians), sometimes churlishly (e.g., refusing to publicly commemorate the 30th anniversary of the Charter). And the reference to multiculturalism in the Charter (the Canadian ‘brand’) has equally sticking power despite efforts to invoke pluralism as an alternative.

The other truth about Trudeau.

In defence of Jason Kenney | National Post

A good overview putting some of the critiques in a broader context. Yes, the changes have been significant and, in many cases overdue, and a number of others less defensible. But his great political skill has been able to operate at two levels at the same time: developing and encouraging support among the numerous ethnic communities in Canada while pursuing some major policy changes that make immigration more restrictive for non-economic immigrants.

One of my own ‘tests’ of how immigration and the related issues of citizenship and multiculturalism are perceived in a country is the presence or absence of strong anti-immigration lobbies or political parties. While we have a range of critics of immigration policies, naturally enough, we have no major organized opposition to Canada as an immigrant-based country.

All Canadian political parties are engaged with immigrants and new Canadians, with any wedge politics to increase support among ethnic communities, not to create a split with the ‘mainstream’.

The dynamic in Quebec is different, and more influenced by European debates and tensions.

In defence of Jason Kenney | National Post.