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 , , , , , , , ,

Delacourt: Pierre Poilievre says he’d stand up to Donald Trump while taking a page from his playbook

2025/10/17 Leave a comment

Along with the anti-DEI petition:

…On the Friday before the long weekend, Poilievre also endorsed what another Conservative MP, Michelle Rempel Garner, was preaching — an end to birthright citizenship. Or, as Poilievre called it in another post, “birth tourism.”

Again, there’s an echo from one of Trump’s first executive orders on taking office.

“The privilege of United States citizenship is a priceless and profound gift,” the order states, going on to explain that citizenship would not be conferred to any child born in that country to a mother or father not lawfully present in the U.S. or there on a temporary basis.

“Canadian citizenship is a honour and privilege, and it must always be treated as such,” Poilievre said in an Oct. 10 post on X, formerly Twitter.

Neither of these seemingly Trump-inspired initiatives by the Conservatives are scourges in Canada. Fewer than 1,500 of the nearly 400,000 children born in Canada in 2024 were born to mothers whose residence was outside Canada. Railing against diversity, equity and inclusion may get some politicians votes, but it can also play into backlash against immigrants — which the Conservatives always hasten to point out, they’d never do….

Source: Pierre Poilievre says he’d stand up to Donald Trump while taking a page from his playbook

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship, DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Coyne: If birth tourism is such a big scam, why do so few immigrants take advantage?

2025/10/16 Leave a comment

Tellingly, Coyne does not cite the example of Australia, which does require one of the parents to be either a Permanent Resident or citizen along with some residency requirements. Agree as the author of the study cited that the numbers are relatively small but they do have an impact on some hospitals in urban areas and overall undermine the meaningfulness of Canadian citizenship.

Classic case, to use former immigration minister Kenney’s phrase, “Canadians of convenience:”

…It’s often argued StatsCan’s numbers are an undercount. Hospital discharge data maintained by the Canadian Institute for Health Information appear to show the number of births to non-residents at three to four times that number: peaking at more than 5,200 in 2024, or (gasp) 1.4 per cent of all births. But still: 3 million temporary residents, and only a measly 5,200 babies? A ticket to citizenship, if not for themselves then at least for their kids, that 99.8 per cent of them pass up? 

If that suggests the problem of “birth tourism” is more rhetorical than real, there is still the principle: doesn’t it “devalue” Canadian citizenship to hand it out to the children of non-citizens? Let’s follow that line of thought. So we deny them citizenship. What happens then?

The critics are right to suggest that a good many of those 3 million “temporary” residents, perhaps as many as half, are likely to remain in Canada, more or less permanently. And yet their children born here would be denied citizenship? A permanent underclass with no legal connection to the country they’ve lived in their whole lives? Is that likely to encourage a sense of belonging, or the contrary?

There are countries that have adopted this rule, but they’re not particularly happy examples. Would anyone claim that Britain or France has a superior record when it comes to integrating immigrants? Or Germany, which, before the law was changed in 2000, denied citizenship to people who had been living there for generations? If we’re talking about “peer countries,” why talk about Old World countries, and not about most of the New World, immigrant-based countries like us, where jus soli is the norm?

I’d say this is a solution in search of a problem, but it’s more like an accelerant in search of a flame. Birthright citizenship works fine. Leave it alone.

Source: If birth tourism is such a big scam, why do so few immigrants take advantage?

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Chapman: Bill C-3 corrects inequalities, brings Citizenship Act into compliance with the Charter

2025/10/14 Leave a comment

Written before the amendments made by the House immigration committee although I expect Chapman likely opposes all of the amendments based upon his previous writings and testimonies.

And in his criticism of the CPC and their procedural maneuverings, he neglects to acknowledge that the Liberal government and the NDP in previous parliaments poisoned the chalice by expanding the scope of the narrow S-245 to include removal of the first-generation cut-off, hardly an example of being “respectful of democratic institutions:”

…Last week, I watched the committee discussion with concern as the Conservative Party under Pierre Poilievre returned to a familiar, dogmatic and troubling playbook—one that elevates fear over fact, and partisan rhetoric over responsible governance. Dismissing expert analysis, disregarding a clear judicial ruling, and inflaming public sentiment may deliver short-term political gain.

However, the long-term cost is steep: the steady erosion of the institutions that underpin our prosperity, our unity, and the rule of law itself.

Democracy depends not only on laws and courts, but on a shared commitment to uphold them. When a political party becomes comfortable with unequal treatment under the law, distorts public discourse, or refuses to acknowledge and correct its own mistakes—these are not isolated errors. They are signs of weakened accountability and declining leadership.

The moral and legal imperative to enshrine equal rights in the Citizenship Act is clear. Equality rights cannot be optional. Canadians must be cautious not to follow the troubling path of democratic backsliding visible else where. A decade ago, few would have predicted how quickly democratic norms in the United States would come under pressure. Institutional decline begins quietly—then accelerates. As with financial markets, trust builds slowly but can disappear overnight. 

And in politics, fear remains an expedient and dangerous currency—too often spent more readily than truth. Leadership of any party—indeed of any party—must be about more than electoral calculus. It must be rooted in principle—be respectful of democratic institutions, guided by evidence, and committed to the rights, dignity, and equality of all citizens.

Bill C-3 is a necessary step in that direction.

Source: Chapman: Bill C-3 corrects inequalities, brings Citizenship Act into compliance with the Charter

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with

Jamie Sarkonak: Canada doesn’t owe the world’s children a passport

2025/10/14 Leave a comment

More support for curbing birthright citizenship:

Anyone in the world can come to Canada, have a baby, and secure that child a lifetime of Canadian benefits along with a family link to this country for later chain migration. They don’t have to speak English or French; they don’t have to share our taboos against incest and rape; they don’t need to contribute anything to Canadian society. There are no guardrails.

But on Tuesday, we got a glimpse of how good things could be when Conservative immigration critic Michelle Rempel Garner proposed a simple change to the law that would prevent citizenship from being granted to children born in Canada to non-citizens — unless at least one parent has permanent residency.

This would close Canada’s widest and most longstanding chain migration entry point without being too harsh on the foreign nationals who have established a connection to the country (though we do need higher standards for PR, too). It’s about as fair as you can get. Alas, Rempel Garner’s amendment was promptly shot down by the Bloc Québécois and the Liberals, who believe in the extreme approach of handing passports out like candy at a parade.

The rest of the world has noticed our complete lack of boundaries and is taking advantage of it. Non-resident births in 2021-22 doubled to 5,698 from the previous year’s 2,245. It’s a cottage industry in B.C., and in one study of 102 birth tourists at a Calgary hospital, the most popular source country was Nigeria, but parents also came from the Middle East, India and Mexico. Keep in mind that these are just the non-residents — there are plenty of other temporary residents giving birth here, but we don’t seem to be keeping track.

Even if these children grow up and never set foot in Canada again, they’ll be entitled to all the benefits of citizenship. They’ll be able to run for office, vote, and obtain consular services if unrest engulfs whatever country their family has chosen to raise them in. If they ever join a terror organization like ISIS, Canadian officials will be expected to retrieve them.

Not to mention the privilege of low domestic tuition, a right to public health care, the unfettered ability to re-enter the country, the ability to claim all kinds of social benefits, the absolute impossibility of deportation should they ever commit a heinous crime, and the guarantee that their children will be eligible for Canadian citizenship, too — and their children, if the Liberals pass Bill C-3, which has now cleared committee.

It’s not just the developing world’s rich who are using this loophole. It’s an avenue that’s open to any economic migrant: from “students” of strip-mall colleges, to temporary workers, to bogus asylum seekers. Having a child in Canada bolsters their applications to remain, particularly if they ever face deportation….

Source: Jamie Sarkonak: Canada doesn’t owe the world’s children a passport

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Yakabuski | Le droit du sol en danger/Birthright citizenship

2025/10/14 Leave a comment

More commentary on birthright cit and birth tourism and the need for more accurate data [I estimated that about 50 percent of non-resident self-pay births were likely due to birth tourism, so about half of what Yakabuski cites. And if anyone has about $60,000, Statistics Canada could do an analysis of non-resident self-pay births by immigration category which would separate out those on visitor visas (largely birth tourists) from international students, temporary workers and asylum seekers:

…Selon un article de l’ancien haut fonctionnaire Andrew Griffith publié en janvier dans Options politiques, il y aurait eu 5219 naissances attribuées au tourisme obstétrique au Canada en 2023-2024, soit environ 1,5 % de toutes les naissances au pays. Toutefois, le gouvernement fédéral ne recueille de statistiques officielles ni sur le tourisme obstétrique ni sur les naissances chez les résidents temporaires.

Avant de changer nos lois pour éliminer un principe aussi fondamental que le droit du sol, nos législateurs devraient avoir la certitude qu’un véritable problème existe et, surtout, qu’il n’existe aucune autre façon de le régler. Pour l’instant, les conservateurs ne se fient que sur des données anecdotiques pour s’enligner sur le chemin trumpiste.

… According to an article by former senior official Andrew Griffith published in January in Political Options, there were 5219 births attributed to obstetric tourism in Canada in 2023-2024, or about 1.5% of all births in the country. However, the federal government does not collect official statistics on obstetric tourism or on births among temporary residents.

Before changing our laws to eliminate a principle as fundamental as the law of the soil, our legislators should be sure that a real problem exists and, above all, that there is no other way to solve it. For the moment, the Conservatives rely only on anecdotal data to align themselves on the Trump path.

Source: Chronique | Le droit du sol en danger

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Urback: The Conservatives are right: Canada should end birthright citizenship

2025/10/11 Leave a comment

Nice to see my work cited and discussion of current and potential numbers:

…It’s difficult to get a complete picture of how many parents who are not citizens or permanent residents are giving birth. Using figures about women who “self-pay” for births at hospitals, Andrew Griffith at Policy Options calculated that tourism births – by which women travel to Canada specifically to give birth – increased to 5,219 in 2024, which is nearly back up to Canada’s prepandemic high. There may be some overlap in that number with the number of births by non-residents, such as temporary foreign workers and international students, since some of them will not be covered by provincial plans or direct-bill insurance from their schools. 

Those who are covered, however, are outside of that calculation. An analysis of hospital deliveries from the early 2010s to 2017 found that approximately 6,000 births annually were by non-permanent residents; “more specifically, around 4,000 births were by temporary foreign workers, more than 1,000 by international students, and around 1,000 by refugee claimants and TR permit holders, annually.”

In the last quarter of 2017, there were nearly 972,000 non-permanent residents living in Canada. By the last quarter of 2024, that number had ballooned to more than 3.1 million. If a comparable proportion of those residents have babies while in Canada, it will mean thousands more children with citizenship whose parents may or may not be entitled to stay in the country, but whose citizenship will absolutely complicate immigration decisions. …

Source: The Conservatives are right: Canada should end birthright citizenship

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Chris Selley: ‘Birthright citizenship’ is an outdated concept

2025/10/11 Leave a comment

More commentary on birthright citizenship:

…The Liberals say they’re not interested in changing the law — though they didn’t freak out and call everyone racist for even raising the subject, as you might expect them to. (Is it possible they can … learn?) And it’s difficult to imagine this issue ever floating to the top of the pile, even with a Conservative government in power.

But in the absence of legislative action, as with so many files, we could commit to start collecting relevant data about the birth tourism and non-resident birth phenomenon.

Statistics Canada reports that in 2024, 1,610 people gave birth in Canada who did not reside here. That’s the number usually quoted in reference to “birth tourism” — but does it include people on temporary visas, like students and temporary foreign workers? Those aren’t necessarily abuses of any system; people do shag, regardless of their immigration status, and sometimes those people do get pregnant.

When I inquired of Statistics Canada about this, I got an intensely Canadian answer. “The mother’s residency status is typically determined based on the information she provides on the birth registration form. However, the specific requirements and procedures may vary by jurisdiction,” a spokesperson explained. “Since this is self-reported, we can’t tell from the data whether someone is a temporary resident or not.”

Could we at least do better than that? Is that too much to ask — to know the scope of the problem that we’re probably not going to solve?

Source: Chris Selley: ‘Birthright citizenship’ is an outdated concept

Filed under Birthright Citizenship, Citizenship Tagged with

Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025): Interesting data requirement addition

2025/10/10 2 Comments

Complete text of revised bill. Only part that struck my interest that had not been reported previously was the data provision:

26.1 (1) Within three months after the end of each fiscal year, the Minister must prepare a report for the previous year that sets out the number of persons who become citizens as a result of the coming into force of An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025), their countries of citizenship other than Canada, if any, their most recent country of residence and the provisions of this Act under which they are citizens.

(2) The Minister must cause the report to be laid before each House of Parliament on any of the first 15 days on which that House is sitting after the report is completed.”

Source: Bill C-3, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (2025)

Filed under C-3, Citizenship Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →