Liberal deal with Bloc means hate-speech laws will lose exemption for ‘sincerely held’ religious belief

This will create considerable debate and will likely lead to court challenges. A good faith or “sincerely held” clause should not be a “get out of jail” card, but in the end, it will depend on context and specifics, and would to extreme religious extremists and positions:

The Liberals have agreed to remove religious exemptions from Canada’s hate-speech laws to secure Bloc Québécois support to help pass its bill targeting hate and terror symbols, National Post has learned through a source close to the talks.

Currently, the law exempts hateful or antisemitic speech if it based in good faith on the interpretation of a religious text, but that immunity is set to be removed. Additionally, the Liberals are expected to back off plans to eliminate the need for a provincial attorney general’s sign-off to pursue a hate-propaganda prosecution.

The removal of the religious exemption is expected to come via an amendment to the Criminal Code in the form of Bill C-9 at the parliamentary justice committee that will be supported by both the Liberals and Bloc, a senior government source confirmed.

The source was granted anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss party negotiations publicly.

“We do have Bloc partnership,” the source said. “The bill is in a place now, even with those Bloc amendments, that everyone is happy,” they added in reference to Liberal and Bloc MPs.

Bill C-9, which fulfilled a campaign promise Prime Minister Mark Carney made during the spring election, was his minority government’s first major justice bill introduced earlier this fall by Justice Minister Sean Fraser.

It seeks multiple changes to the Criminal Code to confront the issue of hate, with the Liberals citing a rise in police-reported incidents in recent years, particularly in the wake of sustained anti-Israel protests over the last two years.

Chief among the proposed changes is creating a new offence for intimidating someone to the point of blocking their access to a place of worship or another centre used by an identifiable group, as well as criminalizing the act of promoting hate by displaying a hate or terror symbol, such as one tied to a listed terrorist organization or a swastika.

The Opposition Conservatives have lambasted the current effort as censorship, saying provisions already exist within criminal law to counter hate, and that the bill’s proposal to remove the requirement for a provincial attorney general’s (AG) consent to lay a hate propaganda charge took away an “important safeguard,” according to the party.

The Liberals are now expected to accept another amendment eliminating that change from the bill entirely. That, too, was a Bloc request.

When the bill was first presented back in September, the Liberals argued that removing the AG requirement would help streamline the process of laying hate propaganda charges, while critics said it was an additional check on a charge with serious implications for free speech.

Once the amendments are passed, the Liberals and Bloc are expected to vote the bill through committee and the House of Commons. However, it is unclear when the justice committee will debate clause-by-clause amendments to the bill.

The House is scheduled to rise on Dec. 12.

The original text of the bill did not contain changes to the existing religious defences for hate speech, but the Bloc has consistently raised the need for it to be addressed.

Currently, Section 319 of the Criminal Code contains an exemption stating no person shall be convicted of promoting hateful or antisemitic speech if they expressed “in good faith” an opinion “based on a belief in a religious text.”…

Source: Liberal deal with Bloc means hate-speech laws will lose exemption for ‘sincerely held’ religious belief

Immigrants from China struggling to obtain security clearances for government jobs, senator says

Of note and not surprising (Senator Woo tends to underestimate risks of foreign interference):

A senator told a parliamentary committee that he’s hearing of immigrants from China, with marginal connections to the ruling Chinese Communist Party or other government bodies, who are finding it difficult to obtain security clearances for Canadian public-sector jobs.

Senator Yuen Pau Woo raised the matter during a meeting of the Senate committee on foreign affairs and international trade Thursday, where he asked officials from the Department of Global Affairs to address it.

“I’ve encountered more and more cases of individuals looking to do government jobs, maybe work for a senator, or an MP, having their security clearances rejected or not responded to at all,” Mr. Woo said.

On the face of it, Mr. Woo said, it seems this is happening because the applicants “come from the People’s Republic of China and have the most tangential links to the CCP or some government organ,” he said, referring to the Chinese Communist Party, which has ruled China for 76 years….

Source: Immigrants from China struggling to obtain security clearances for government jobs, senator says

Why increased candidate diversity can help rebuild trust in Canadian politics

Interesting experiment:

Inside our national experiment on trust

How do we do so? In 2023, we ran an online national survey which presented 4,950 respondents from all backgrounds with fictional candidate profiles, each with a set of randomized attributes (for example, race, gender and political party).

We asked respondents to rate the trustworthiness of these fictional candidates. We use these responses to determine what kinds of candidates are more or less trusted and what kinds of Canadians the respondents tend to trust or distrust. We also look at racialized and gender aspects of both candidates and voters.

We then consider the role of context in trust, including things such as racial diversity and socio-economic status at the level of communities within which racialized Canadians live.

Finally, we examine how trust based on shared racialized status can translate to broader system-level attitudes such as being satisfied with Canadian democracy.

What the findings show

We’ve already learned a few interesting things. For example, our experimental results suggest that racialized candidates are on average assessed as more trustworthy than others by Canadians of all backgrounds, but that racialized Canadians are less trusting generally.

We also find that both women and racialized candidates are more trusted than their male and white counterparts, but the intersectionality of women and racialized candidates creates weaker trust than expected. We also uncovered some evidence that racialized Canadians are more satisfied with democracy when there are more racialized candidates running in their districts.

Trust is fragile and while there may be some hope that Canada is in a stronger position relative to our closest friends and allies globally, we need to be vigilant about how we can build and strengthen trust relationships between Canadians and our politicians.

Source: Why increased candidate diversity can help rebuild trust in Canadian politics

Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force

Not sure how his boycott improves representation. Risks being “cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face” rather than having a meaningful impact:

Our community deserves stronger representation at the table. Who better to help develop guardrails for racial bias in AI than those who have already felt its sting?

The Black community understands viscerally what is at stake when algorithms decide how long you spend in jail, whether you get a job interview, a loan or suffer a false arrest. Our lived experiences and expertise would only strengthen (not weaken) Canada’s AI strategy, making it more robust and more just for everyone.

Yet, the message from those in charge has been clear: they don’t really want us to participate in developing AI strategy.

That is why I decided to take a stand: As a Black scholar whose decade of research has identified the real harm AI poses to the Black community, and one who believes in the genuine participation of this community in addressing that harm, I could not in good conscience take any step directly or indirectly that would lend moral legitimacy to the current composition of Canada’s AI task force.

Therefore, I refrained from making any submission during its consultation process, which ended Oct. 31.

When Black voices are meaningfully included, I and others in the Black community will be happy to contribute.

Gideon Christian is an associate professor and university research chair in AI and law at the University of Calgary. His research focuses on racial bias in AI technologies.

Source: Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force

And a letter from Liberal MP Greg Fergus, Boycotting the AI task force is counterproductive:

I was disappointed to see Gideon Christian’s recent Policy Options article “Why I boycotted Ottawa’s AI task force.”

I am a Member of Parliament. I hear from young people every day about their concerns regarding their place in the future of this country, and the incessant barriers they face in trying to forge their path in it. We all share an essential role in fighting and championing for our youth. We must strive to dismantle these barriers.

I am certain Professor Christian, based on his extensive career, has seen firsthand how the young, diverse, brilliant minds of our future make us stronger. They push us to innovate, to be better. We are building a world for them to inherit, one bolstered by technological growth. They deserve a seat at the table.

The appointment of a young Black scholar to the task force, regardless of the timing, gives her a valuable opportunity to contribute. I find it deeply unfortunate that Professor Christian would reduce her appointment to a symbolic gesture or optics, or that he would imply that she is lacking in qualification.

Rather than disputing her appointment, why would he not choose to act as a mentor instead? He chooses to boycott. This is not a choice I would make. I hope he will change his mind.

We need to be fighting for unity and co-operation where all are included, not tearing each other down. As an older Black Canadian, I am particularly pleased to see this emerging young Black leader access tables of influence.

I truly think we stand to gain by making places for the leaders of tomorrow. I believe we will soon see what can be accomplished by this taskforce and the great work done by young Canadians.

Together, we can build a future worthy of our youth.

Lederman: The backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ Nakba exhibit is preposterous

Indeed:

…But it is ludicrous to suggest that historical events not be explored – that perhaps they should even be suppressed – by a national museum devoted to human rights, in order to counter this disturbing rise. One should not have anything to do with the other. If someone walks away from a Nakba exhibit wanting to bully (or worse) some Jews, the problem is not with the museum – which, not incidentally, includes a comprehensive permanent gallery about the Holocaust.

“Sharing the stories or experiences of one group doesn’t somehow take away the experiences of another,” as the museum’s director and CEO Isha Khan told me. In an interview, Ms. Khan said the concerns are being heard and she stressed that the exhibition is still in development. “We take our responsibility very seriously. And this exhibition is being given the same care and thoughtful concern that any exhibit would,” she said. 

“I know that these are polarized times,” she continued. “Our job is to cut through that … and to inspire reflection, bring people together in dialogue. We hope this will do that.”

With the current state of discourse, the history of the Middle East has been dumbed down to the point of absurdity to fit social media posts and a prevailing narrative. There is more reason than ever for a museum to offer enlightenment.

Source: The backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ Nakba exhibit is preposterous

Predictably enough, the National Post has the contrary position, weak IMO: Terry Newman: Actually, the backlash against the Canadian Museum for Human Rights’ ‘Nakba’ exhibit is justified

Labeaume: Le Québec qui se métisse

Thoughtful and realistic commentary by former mayor of Quebec city:

…Il nous faudra faire la paix avec ce Québec d’aujourd’hui, accepter qu’il ait changé, irrémédiablement. Il est certes différent, voire déstabilisant pour beaucoup de Québécois, mais pas nécessairement pour nos enfants, et les leurs, pour qui cette mixité devient la normalité acquise.

Et je le répète, cette posture mentale ne veut pas dire abandonner ce combat de résistance pour conserver notre culture francophone, la faire partager, la faire grandir et continuer à célébrer les traditions qui nous sont chères. Comme elle ne traduit aucune naïveté.

Mais nous ne convaincrons pas ces enfants issus de l’immigration de se joindre à notre lutte culturelle en remettant en question leur appartenance, ou celle de leurs parents, à un statut de membre de plein droit de ce que nous estimons être la nation québécoise.

Toute manifestation d’intolérance envers ceux-là deviendra créatrice de métastases sociales et nous magasinera des lendemains problématiques en termes de cohésion sociale.

Source: Le Québec qui se métisse

… We will have to make peace with this Quebec of today, accept that it has changed, irremediably. It is certainly different, even destabilizing for many Quebecers, but not necessarily for our children, and theirs, for whom this mix becomes acquired normality.

And I repeat, this mental posture does not mean abandoning this struggle of resistance to preserve our French-speaking culture, share it, make it grow and continue to celebrate the traditions that are dear to us. As it does not translate any naivety.

But we will not convince these children from immigration to join our cultural struggle by questioning their belonging, or that of their parents, to a full member status of what we believe to be the Quebec nation.

Any manifestation of intolerance towards them will become the creator of social metastases and will give us problematic tomorrows in terms of social cohesion.

Élargissement de la laïcité: Québec impose le visage découvert à tous, de la garderie à l’université

Hard not to agree with banning the niqab but other religious symbols that don’t cover the face are another matter:

Cette nouvelle obligation vaudra à la fois pour la petite enfance, pour les étudiants au niveau postsecondaire et pour l’ensemble des employés de ces établissements, selon les informations obtenues par La Presse. Il faut s’attendre à ce que cette mesure s’applique également aux établissements privés. La Loi sur le renforcement de la laïcité à l’école, adoptée plus tôt cet automne, interdit déjà aux élèves et au personnel scolaire au primaire et au secondaire d’avoir le visage couvert.

Le ministre responsable de la Laïcité, Jean-François Roberge, doit déposer jeudi un projet de loi en ce sens, après avoir confirmé plus tôt cet automne qu’il interdirait le port de signes religieux aux éducatrices des centres de la petite enfance (CPE) et des garderies subventionnées, ainsi que dans les services de garde en milieu familial qui relèvent d’un bureau coordonnateur. Les éducatrices déjà en poste qui portent un signe religieux bénéficieront d’un droit acquis.

Aucun recensement n’aurait été fait pour savoir combien de personnes dans le réseau éducatif portent un signe religieux couvrant l’ensemble du visage, comme le voile intégral. 

Mais gouverner, c’est prévoir ce qui pourrait arriver, explique une source gouvernementale, qui n’est pas autorisée à parler du projet de loi, puisque celui-ci n’est pas encore déposé. Le Québec n’est pas à l’abri d’une éventuelle multiplication de tels signes religieux, souligne cette source.

Depuis 2017, la Loi favorisant le respect de la neutralité religieuse de l’État, adoptée sous les libéraux, prévoit que « le membre du personnel d’un organisme public doit exercer ses fonctions à visage découvert ». La personne qui reçoit un service public a pour sa part l’obligation d’avoir le visage découvert lorsqu’il y a « une interaction » avec un employé.

Avec la loi que présentera cette semaine Jean-François Roberge, une telle personne devra montrer son visage en tout temps pendant son parcours éducatif.

Pas d’interdiction du voile intégral en public

Malgré l’adoption d’une résolution par les militants caquistes demandant au gouvernement d’interdire à quiconque de cacher son visage en public, Jean-François Roberge ne bannira pas le voile intégral de l’espace public.

Au congrès annuel de la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ) à Gatineau, en septembre, les militants s’étaient prononcés à 152 contre 150 pour « interdire aux personnes, en tout temps, de cacher leur visage dans l’espace public ». Le ministre responsable de la Laïcité avait voté en faveur de cette résolution et s’était même présenté au micro pour inviter les gens à l’appuyer.

« On voulait de la diversité, de la mixité au Québec, que les gens aillent les uns envers les autres, qu’ils échangent, qu’ils apportent des éléments de leur culture, s’intègrent. Est-ce que ça peut se faire avec le visage caché ou couvert ? […] On peut se poser la question », avait-il dit.

« Il est tout à fait normal qu’on se pose la question pour une question de sécurité publique et de vivre-ensemble », avait ajouté M. Roberge….

Source: Élargissement de la laïcité Québec impose le visage découvert à tous, de la garderie à l’université

The Rise and Fall of the Gaza Converts

Interesting:

…In a 2025 talk at Georgetown’s Berkley Center for Religion, Peace, and World Affairs, researcher Dan Nilsson DeHanas discussed his research on Gen Z Muslims at university campuses in the U.K. and Australia. DeHanas said that the internet has created “a sense of perpetual solidarity” between Muslims and converts who are coming to Islam through a postmodern personal bricolage, concern for traditionally progressive causes like Palestine and climate change (the effects of which are felt keenly in the Middle East and North Africa, where many Muslims live), and the pursuit of “main character energy,” which he defines as “This sense that you’re actually engaging in the plot of something that’s real and exciting, like a feature film. You can’t just sit in the back. You have to go and drive the bus, or be right in the middle of everything.”

That impulse—to live faith as performance, to experience belief as a kind of public participation—also helps explain how quickly the online fervor curdled. The “revert wave” crested at the exact moment when Gaza dominated every conversation. But attention is its own ecosystem, and as Gaza faded from the algorithmic spotlight, so did the reverts’ audience.

Meanwhile, the antisemitic and misogynistic rhetoric of some online Muslim influencers, including reverts, became harder and harder to ignore. Kari, a woman who converted to Islam because of Gaza and posts about her reversion under the handle @izdzdaan, regularly intersperses videos of herself in hijab calling for decolonization in the name of missing indigenous two-spirit women with reposts of Tucker Carlson’s anti-Israel videos. Even some of the young Muslim women who spoke to DeHanas’ research team said that the misogyny is leaping off the screen and into real life, where young men they don’t know feel free to weigh in on how they dress and act. It “seems more possible today to say more radical things than you would have said before,” DeHanas said…

Source: The Rise and Fall of the Gaza Converts

B.C. college instructor fired over Hamas comments reinstated

Her comment appears to lack self-awareness given the nature of much of academic discourse:

Langara Faculty Association president Pauline Greaves said in a statement that she is grateful the troubling episode has come to a close.

“I understand many in our community were hurt and offended by what Dr. Knight said. But collegial dialogue and tolerance for views we don’t like are the bedrock of a robust, engaged academic environment.”

Source: B.C. college instructor fired over Hamas comments reinstated

Conservative MPs denounce ‘Liberal racism’ and DEI during Jamil Jivani event

Good example of some conservative perspectives on DEI, mirroring some of excesses of liberal perspectives:

….Jivani’s Tuesday event was primarily a broadside at progressive ideologies writ large, but it also referenced federal programs and initiatives. The Prime Minister’s Office was not immediately available for comment on the event, though Jivani said all Liberal MPs were invited to attend his forum, however none took part. 

Jivani — who spoke about his upbringing as the son of an Irish-Scottish mother and a Kenyan father — said people like him “should not be treated as charity cases” and should not be subjected to “lowered” standards to access opportunities.

“I also stand here in opposition to Liberal racism because I completely reject the twisted narrative of Canadian history that liberal elites use to justify the open discrimination against Canadians of European descent and their children. Your heritage in this country should never be used as a weapon against you,” the Bowmanville—Oshawa North MP said, eliciting applause. 

“It’s also my belief that together, we can end Liberal racism by speaking very truthfully and bluntly about what it is, and highlighting the ways that it manipulates our society and divides people against one another.”

In service of that goal, Jivani ceded the stage to three Conservative MPs to share their views on the subject: Calgary’s Shuvaloy Majumdar and two rising stars within Tory caucus, Newmarket-Aurora’s Sandra Cobena and Richmond Hill South’s Vincent Neil Ho….

Source: Conservative MPs denounce ‘Liberal racism’ and DEI during Jamil Jivani event