More Americans Are Giving Up U.S. Citizenship, New Report Finds

2025/06/13 3 Comments

To date, more for economic reasons (avoiding need to file US taxes) than for political ones. We shall see how that changes as this data is four years old, dating from Trump 1:

Once considered a rare and symbolic act, renouncing U.S. citizenship has become increasingly common — and, for many Americans living abroad, a practical decision. A new Boundless report reveals that annual renunciations have surged from an average of just 200–400 cases before 2009 to a record high of 6,705 in 2020, with numbers remaining elevated ever since.

The primary drivers of rising U.S. citizenship renunciations are complex international tax laws and foreign banking restrictions, but other factors also play a role in the growing trend.

Here are the key findings:

  • Trends: While still relatively rare overall, the consistent rise in citizenship renunciations since 2009 indicates a long-term shift rather than a short-term anomaly.
  • Motivations: The trend is primarily driven by a mix of legal, financial, and logistical challenges related to the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) — enacted in 2010 but fully implemented beginning in 2014. Growing disillusionment with U.S. policy and politics also plays a role in recent renunciation trends.
  • Demographic Insights: Most individuals giving up their citizenship are long-term expats living abroad, middle-income earners, and dual nationals who already possess citizenship in another country. A notable and expanding group includes “accidental Americans,” people unaware of their U.S. citizenship until flagged by overseas financial institutions
  • Global Context: Among other developed countries, the U.S. ranks sixth in renunciation rates relative to population and second in total renunciations. Unlike other countries — where military service or lack of emotional ties to the country drive renunciations — U.S. renunciations are largely driven by complex tax and banking rules applied to U.S. citizens living abroad.
  • Broader Implications: The ongoing rise in citizenship renunciations highlights major policy concerns, especially in areas like tax enforcement, foreign banking compliance, and the changing value proposition of American citizenship in a globalized world.
  • Renunciation Data Delays: Official U.S. renunciation statistics are typically published 12 to 18 months after the fact due to administrative processing and agency cross-referencing. This means data released in 2025 will mostly reflect renunciations from 2023 or early 2024. As a result, any shift in renunciation numbers during Trump’s first year back in office likely won’t be visible in the public record until 2026.

For many Americans living abroad, renouncing U.S. citizenship is less about politics and more about avoiding burdensome tax and banking rules. As more people live and work across borders, the U.S. may need to reevaluate whether its policies support or hinder the lives of its citizens overseas.

Source: More Americans Are Giving Up U.S. Citizenship, New Report Finds

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Visible minorities in the GTA increasingly supporting Conservatives: U of T study

2025/06/12 Leave a comment

Interesting and relevant study. Think the shift largely reflects economic concerns and affordability, particularly among younger voters, whether visible minorities or not, and the effectiveness of Conservative outreach and engagement:

Federal and provincial Conservatives are winning over more visible minority voters in the GTA, a new study has found.

According to researchers at the University of Toronto’s School of Cities, visible minorities in the GTA, who make up more than half of the population, are increasingly backing Conservative candidates in federal and provincial elections. The study, out Wednesday, considers anyone, besides Indigenous people, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour as a visible minority, as defined by Statistics Canada.

The findings are based on federal and Ontario election results over the past two decades, including the two most recent national and provincial elections earlier this year.

“What used to be a weak spot for the right is now a growing base,” Prof. Emine Fidan Elcioglu and research assistant Aniket Kali wrote in the study, noting the Conservatives have historically been seen as the party of the white and wealthy, at least until recent years.

“The more diverse the riding, the stronger the Conservative numbers.”

The researchers point to the federal election in April as an example.

Ridings where visible minorities make up the majority shifted rightward by 10 to over 20 percentage points compared to the 2021 federal election — higher than the Conservatives national gain of 7.6 percentage points in the vote count. Most of these ridings are located in the 905 belt around Toronto, which the Star previously reported denied Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Liberals a majority government thanks to a blue wave.

While the researchers had a sense that some visible minorities have shifted to the right when it comes to voting, the findings still had some surprises. 

“It was quite stark to see just how consistent the polls were over time,” Kali said in an interview.

There are multiple reasons for this shift in voting behaviour, according to the researchers.

First is a decades-long, concentrated attempt by the Conservative party to reach racialized communities through efforts such as multilingual ads and attending religious festivals. Conservatives have also recruited a lot of visible minority candidates — including more than the Liberals and NDP in the April federal election, according to a separate study.

All this, Elcioglu and Kali said, came as the Liberal party was increasingly being seen as “a party of broken promises” around affordability, housing and other issues.

“The Liberal arty and the sort of disenchantment with (Justin) Trudeau is certainly part of the puzzle,” Elcioglu said, “but it doesn’t explain everything.”

Another reason for the shift to the right is changing attitudes among second-generation Canadians.

In interviews with 50 second-generation Canadians around the GTA — most of whom were either South Asian or Chinese — Elcioglu said she heard that people thought voting Conservative meant becoming more “Canadian.”

“It’s a way to say, ‘I made it. I belong. I’m not voting like my Liberal party immigrant parents,’” Elcioglu said of the responses she heard in the interviews.

Although the study shows growing support among visible minority voters for the Conservatives, the researchers stressed that this group of people is not a monolith.

“Immigrants and minorities are a serious political constituency in the GTA.  They have serious issues and the party that organizes them on those issues and speaks to those issues is going to win some loyalty.”

Elcioglu said this understanding will be important for the Liberals and NDP if they want to win seats in future elections.

“Progressive parties shouldn’t assume that they have the support of racialized voters,” she said. “They need to do more listening and speak to the real issues.

“They need to go out into the suburbs.”

Source: Visible minorities in the GTA increasingly supporting Conservatives: U of T study

Filed under Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with , ,

Senator Dasko pitches elections law reforms to address enduring issue of candidate diversity

2025/06/12 Leave a comment

Repeat of previous bill that died: Highly unlikely that this bill, should it make it to the Commons, will pass given that political parties oppose being shackled by similar provisions as the public service and federally-regulated sectors, as in the case of privacy:

…Experts offered mixed reviews of Bill S-213, describing it as a ‘baby step’ forward, or as a watered-down attempt to address an already well-known problem….

But one area where Tolley said she wishes the bill went further is in terms of broader—not gender specific—diversity.

“There has been a tendency when we have these conversations about diversification to focus on

gender, and assume that if we figure out the gender piece, all of the other diversities will follow.

The research suggests that’s not really the case,” she said. “When we focus on diversity in this sort of aggregate or generic way, the primary beneficiaries tend to be white women, often to the exclusion of other groups.”

Still, recognizing the “balancing act” in play in regulating political parties, Tolley said she sees the bill as a “baby step” forward….

Andrea Lawlor, an associate political science professor at McMaster University, described S-213 as a “very limited way of introducing some requirements around political parties,” but said the voluntary nature of both aspects of the act—of having policies and programs to disclose, and responding to a demographic questionnaire—undermines its effectiveness.

“It takes a kernel of a really good idea, which is enhanced transparency, but I feel it waters itself down,” said Lawlor, who nonetheless lauded S-213 as a good-faith effort.”

Due to its voluntary nature, the survey could produce an “incomplete picture,” and the bill gives parties “that are weaker on these measures” an out in terms of even having policies, programs, or rules to encourage candidate diversity, said Lawlor.

“A party can kind of say, you know, ‘mind your own business, our internal party processes are our own.”…

Source: Senator Dasko pitches elections law reforms to address enduring issue of candidate diversity

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

French: Justice Jackson Just Helped Reset the D.E.I. Debate

2025/06/09 Leave a comment

Of interest:

…In its ruling, the Supreme Court rejected the Sixth Circuit’s test. It held that all plaintiffs approach the law equally, regardless of their group identity, and all plaintiffs have to meet the same legal burdens to win their case. There can be no extra hurdle for members of majority groups.

I wasn’t surprised by the outcome, but I was at least mildly surprised that it was unanimous. And I was definitely surprised by the author of the majority opinion — Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, one of the court’s most liberal members.

Jackson’s words were clear. Nondiscrimination law is focused on protecting individuals. Quoting previous Supreme Court cases, Jackson wrote, “Discriminatory preference for any group, minority or majority, is precisely and only what Congress has proscribed.” As a consequence, “Congress left no room for courts to impose special requirements on majority-group plaintiffs alone.”

Crucially, the court didn’t rule that Ames had been discriminated against. Instead, it sent the case back down to the lower court to be decided under the proper, equal standard.

Standing alone, the Ames case is relatively narrow in scope. It only holds that all employment discrimination plaintiffs have to meet the same test. Taken together with the court’s other recent cases, including most notably 2023’s Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, which prohibits race preferences in university admissions, the lesson is plain: Any discrimination rooted in immutable characteristics, such as race, sex or sexual orientation, will automatically be legally suspect, regardless of whether the motivation for discrimination was malign or benign…

Source: Justice Jackson Just Helped Reset the D.E.I. Debate

Filed under DEI, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

More visible minority candidates ran — and won — in Canada’s federal election. The Conservatives boosted the numbers

2025/06/06 2 Comments

Coverage of our study:

More visible minorities ran and were elected in the spring federal election compared to the previous election, an increase that a new report found was driven by representation in parties on the right.

There were 315 visible minorities representing the six major parties, according to the report published by the Institute for Research on Public Policy. The candidates accounted for 20.1 per cent of the 1,568 candidates in the April 28 election. This was an increase from 18.2 per cent in 2021, 16.8 per cent in 2019 and 13.4 per cent in 2015.

While the Liberals, New Democrats and Greens all reported a drop in their visible minority representation from the 2021 race — by 0.9, 3.2 and 1.3 percentage points respectively — Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives and Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party of Canada saw their numbers up by 5.9 percentage points and seven points, with the Bloc Québécois up 1.3 points. (The People’s Party failed to win a seat.)

The report refers to “visible minorities” as persons, other than Indigenous people, who are non-Caucasian in race or non-white in colour, as defined by Statistics Canada. 

“The Liberals almost seemed to have dropped the ball in terms of candidate recruitment compared to the Conservatives, who obviously were making a fairly concerted effort to recruit a larger number of visible minority candidates,” said Andrew Griffith, who co-authored the report with retired McGill University political science professor Jerome Black.

“They were still building off the Jason Kenney legacy that visible minorities are our natural conservatives,” added Griffith, referring to the former Conservative immigration minister tasked with building bridges with minority communities under the Harper government.

And the deliberate recruitment efforts seemed to yield results, with the proportion of elected visible minority MPs up by 2.4 percentage points, accounting for 17.8 per cent or 61 of the 343 MPs in the new Parliament.

While the number of Liberal MPs who are visible minorities fell by 2.2 percentage points, the Conservatives boosted their visible minority MPs in the House of Commons by 7.5 percentage points. 

The MP breakdown, by ethnicity, was South Asian, 29 seats, Black, 11 seats; Chinese and Arab/West Asian, both seven; Latin American, two; Filipino and Southeast Asian, each with one; and three listed under “other/multiple” backgrounds.

University of Toronto professor Emine Fidan Elcioglu said she was not surprised by the shift as the Conservatives rebranded the party under prime minister Stephen Harper to cultivate support from ethnic communities.

“They wanted to seem like the new party of diversity, so they were very intentional in their ethnic outreach,” said the sociologist, who studies migration politics.

“They were (previously) pushing forward policies that alienated immigrant visible minority communities. They were also reframing themselves as pro-good immigrant, anti-bad immigrant.”

Over the years, she said, visible minority groups have also started to embrace that thinking as shown in recent public debates about the impacts of immigration on the housing and affordability crisis.

Poilievre is “very much looking at these groups as a potential part of his base,” Elcioglu noted. “But I think we need to be really careful to not assume that just because there is more visible minority candidates in the party, that is necessarily going to be fundamental in voter motivation.”

Having more racialized candidates doesn’t necessarily translate to more inclusion, she said, and it could just be a cover for more stringent immigration policies, more austerity measures and more gutting of the social security safety net that affect the society’s most marginalized and vulnerable.

“So, great, you recruit people who are not white men, but what are you doing with that?” asked Elcioglu. 

The report also found the number of women running in the April election down from the 2021 election by 2.4 per cent to 553, and Indigenous candidates by 0.9 per cent to 48. In total, 104 women and 12 Indigenous people were elected.

“It seems like there’s almost a glass ceiling of about 30 per cent for women,” said Griffith. “For Indigenous MPs, it’s a bit different just because of how the population is distributed across the country, but that also has stalled.” 

Candidate profiles and assessments in the analysis are based upon candidate photos, names and biographies, general web searches, and ethnic and other media that focused on particular groups.

Source: More visible minority candidates ran — and won — in Canada’s federal election. The Conservatives boosted the numbers

Filed under Aboriginal, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Carney government introduces bill to beef up border security

2025/06/05 1 Comment

Predictable criticism from refugee and immigration advocates who invariably either cannot ackowledge abuses of the system or come up with possible measures to deal with the same, beyond calling for more resources.

One nugget that should improve processing and service for citizenship is:

“Make it easier for IRCC to share client information between different IRCC programs (e.g. using permanent residence application data to process citizenship applications).”

My sense is that the immigration and asylum provisions will likely be supported by the Conservative opposition but there will likely be tensions within the Liberal caucus:

…The bill was immediately met with concerns about privacy, refugee rights and its omnibus aspect.

NDP MP Jenny Kwan said the bill should be “alarming” to Canadians and risks breaching their civil liberties, particularly for its changes on immigration.

“They are trying to create this illusion that Canada’s border is more secure in some way, but however, a lot of the components within the bill targets Canada’s own immigration policies and processes that has nothing to do with the United States,” she said, questioning why there were no measures specifically targeting illegal guns coming from the U.S., for example.

“There are lots of pieces that I think should be concerning to Canadians.”

Anandasangaree, a former human rights lawyer, defended seeking those new powers Tuesday.

“I worked my entire life in the protection of human rights and civil liberties. That’s a marquee part of the work that I’ve done before politics, in politics,” he told reporters.

“In order for me to bring forward legislation, it needed to have the safeguards in place, it needed to be in line with the values of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and I fundamentally believe that we have striked the balance that, while expanding powers in certain instances, does have the safeguards and the protections in place to protect individual freedoms and rights.”

Those safeguards include not allowing information on immigration to be shared with other countries unless permitted by the minister, as well as judicial oversight that would require a warrant except in “exigent” circumstances. 

The proposed legislation, which will require the support of another party to pass in the minority Parliament, is meant to address the surge of asylum-seekers and the ballooning backlogs in refugee applications. Anyone who first arrived Canada after June 24, 2020 would not be allowed to make a refugee claim after one year, regardless of whether they left the country and returned; irregular migrants who enter Canada from the U.S. between land ports of entry would also be denied the rights to asylum.

“They’re coming up with all of these various ways to basically turn the tap off, to actually make it a more restrictive process,” said Queen’s University immigration and refugee law professor Sharry Aiken.

“That will harm vulnerable people and deny some groups of claimants their right to accessing a fair hearing” by the independent Immigration and Refugee Board, Aiken said.

Canada has seen the number of asylum-seekers triple in less than a decade, from 50,365 in 2017 to 171,845 last year. As of April, the refugee tribunal has 284,715 claims awaiting a decision.

More international students, visitors and foreign workers are seeking asylum to prolong their stays in Canada after Ottawa clamped down on the runaway growth of temporary residents and reduced permanent resident admissions amid concerns of the housing and affordability crisis.

The Canadian Council for Refugees said the proposed asylum changes mirror the American approach, where borders are militarized and securitized as refugees and migrants are viewed as a security threat.

“Under international law, there is no time frame on the right to seek protection. Where we do find this precedent is in the U.S.,” said Gauri Sreenivasan, the council’s co-executive director.

Anandasangaree said those who are affected by proposed ineligibility rules for asylum could ask for an assessment by immigration officials to ensure they would not face harm if sent back to their country.

However, critics said that process is less robust than a full hearing by the refugee board, and this would simply pass the administrative burden to the already strained Immigration Department and the Federal Court.

“It could force many people who have no choice because they are under threat in their country or in the U.S. to live underground without status,” Sreenivasan warned.

Source: Carney government introduces bill to beef up border security

And Althia Raj questions who pressed for these changes (likely under development for some time by IRCC officials given the numbers and abuses):

….Those who work with refugees are also alarmed.

Prime Minister Mark Carney’s first piece of legislation pulls away the welcome mat for asylum seekers. It makes it nearly impossible for those who have been in Canada for more than a year, either as students, permanent residents, or temporary workers, and those who’ve snuck into Canada between land border crossings and have been here for more than two weeks, from having their asylum cases heard.

“A lot of people are going to get rejected because they’re not going to have an opportunity to explain for themselves why they would be in danger when they go back (home),” said Adam Sadinsky, an immigration and refugee lawyer with Silcoff Shacter in Toronto.

On Parliament Hill, the NDP’s Jenny Kwan described the law as “violating people’s due process and taking away people’s basic rights,” and also noted that it will drive people underground.

A problem that could be fixed by beefing up the immigration system — staffing and resources — will instead encourage those who are in Canada, and fear being deported to their home country, to stay here illegally. It will make it much more difficult for federal, provincial and municipal authorities to know who is living here, where they are, and what services they need. And it may simply move staffing and resource pressures away from the Immigration and Refugee Board toward the federal court, who will now hear more requests for stays to remain in Canada and for judicial review of unfavourable decisions.

On CBC, Anandasangaree said his “comprehensive bill” was directly linked with what is happening at the Canada-U.S. border, but it also “responds to … the mandate (Canadians) gave us on April the 28th.”

Does it? Are these the values that Canadians voted to uphold?…

Source: Opinion | Border bill primed to give Mark Carney’s government sweeping new powers. Who asked for this?

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism, Refugees Tagged with , , , , ,

The diversity of candidates and MPs stalled for some groups in this election

2025/06/05 Leave a comment

My latest collaboration with Jerome Black on the diversity of candidates and MPs. Stall for women and visible minorities, ongoing increase for visible minorities.

In summary, differences in political-party representation reflect dissimilarities in demographic trends (such as higher growth rates of visible minorities), overall election dynamics, political-party recruitment efforts, and the extent to which groups feel their concerns are reflected in political platforms and messaging.

Source: The diversity of candidates and MPs stalled for some groups in this election

Filed under Aboriginal, gender, Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Christopher Dummitt: Systemic discrimination is legal in Canada

2025/06/04 Leave a comment

Apart from the header, valid questions although I am not convinced the DEI programs necessarily “exacerbate ethnic conflict in Canada:”

…The question is: how long will this remain the case? And, even more importantly, what counts as evidence for disadvantage? Who gets to decide whether current-day disadvantage comes from discriminatory treatment or not?

The reality is that different social groups have different social outcomes. As Thomas Sowell pointed out years ago, it would be bizarre to think that they wouldn’t. The question is: are these differences a result of choices, cultures and random chance — or are they a more nefarious expression of discrimination, either systemic or outright?

One of the odd things to happen in our intellectual circles — our universities and even our law schools — is that this question is rarely asked with an open-ended curiosity as to what the answer might be.

One wonders whether it even comes up when employers or universities set about establishing discriminatory affirmative action programs. Or, more likely, are they working from a consensus within the institution that there really are disadvantaged groups — and that this is obviously caused by discrimination?

We should be clear: it’s entirely possible that disadvantages are caused by subtle forms of discrimination that continue despite Canada’s now very equal legal system. It’s certainly possible — and the idea ought to get a fair hearing.

But in many progressive circles today, it’s now considered rude to even ask the question — to wonder whether social and economic differences between groups might be caused by something other than prejudice.

This is why the topic of viewpoint diversity — in our universities, our law schools, in the world of expertise — isn’t the esoteric topic it might seem.

Even as the wider Canadian society seems to be retreating from the excesses of cancel culture and woke shibboleths (good news on that front), the staffing of our knowledge institutions, our universities and our law schools still overwhelmingly comes from those on the left — from the same groups who assume that socioeconomic variation is, de facto, linked to discrimination.

These are the people who get to decide when — if ever — the only legal form of systemic discrimination allowed in Canada (affirmative action) will ever end.

There’s plenty of evidence coming out of think-tanks and even Statistics Canada that the Canada of 2025 has moved a long way from the Canada of 1981, where affirmative action was justified. The most economically well-to-do Canadians are not those of European ancestry — despite the popular perception to the contrary. The groups of Canadians with the highest income — and highest levels of educational attainment — are those of South Asian and Chinese ancestry. Whites tend to come in the middle of the pack, while Black Canadians and Indigenous people are lower down the economic scale. If affirmative action is going to continue, the public needs to be reassured that those justifying its existence, at the very least, keep up to date with which groups are up and which are down — though even this framing shows how divisive such policies would be.

There’s also plenty of evidence that the “race conscious” programs allowed by the Charter — and pushed by DEI advocates — actually exacerbate ethnic conflict in Canada.

There could, of course, be evidence that continued systemic discrimination justifies affirmative action. But it would help to know that the organizations instituting these types of progressive discrimination are at least open to the idea that Canada can, and will, move on.

Source: Christopher Dummitt: Systemic discrimination is legal in Canada

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Trump’s $5 million Gold Card offers the rich a fast lane to residency

2025/06/03 Leave a comment

Good assessment of this harebrained scheme, unlikely to attract the worthy. Lack of details on how it would work also cause for concern. Silver’s comment at the end sounds about right:

Lawyers’ phones are ringing with wealthy foreigners wanting to know more about how to score a “Gold Card” – a glorified green card that would allow them to live and work in the U.S. without going through the usual hassle or red tape. Apparently, the card’s $5 million price tag is not scaring off the jet-setters looking to make the U.S. home. Or at least one of their homes.

“$5 million to these people is jet fuel cost. It means nothing to them,” says Matthew Kolken, an immigration lawyer from Buffalo, NY, who has Canadian clients asking about the Gold Card. The clients declined to comment, but Kolken says he thinks the Gold Card is underpriced, if anything, considering the time and hassle it would save foreign multi-millionaires.

“It allows them to potentially buy their way into the United States,” says Kolken. “They would just be able to throw down their Amex Black Card.”

And plenty are interested.

“I have one from India, one from Pakistan, and two from Egypt. And a colleague who has a few [clients] from Russia,” says immigration attorney Mona Shah. Most are drawn to the offer of an express lane to permanent residency, plus more favorable tax implications; foreign nationals living in the U.S. on a Gold Card would only be taxed on their U.S. earnings.

Shah says the security — and the status — of being able to flash that “Gold Card” to get waved into the U. S. is also a big draw, as well as what Trump has described as “privileges – plus.” The president hasn’t elaborated on what that means, but Shah says clients are imagining VIP perks that range from easy loans to a special fast-track lane through Customs at U.S. airports.

“They seem to believe that this is going to be some kind of separating first class from economy class, and that this is some kind of ‘red carpet’ visa and they will be treated like a VIP everywhere,” says Shah.

But whether any such perks – or obligations – will come with the Gold Card remains far from clear, and the administration is not offering any more details some three months after President Donald Trump first started hyping the idea.

“It’s a great thing, the Gold Card. Remember the words ‘the Gold Card!'” he proclaimed to reporters in the Oval Office in February. “Wealthy people will be coming into our country by buying this card. They’ll be wealthy and they’ll be successful and they’ll be spending a lot of money and paying a lot of taxes and employing a lot of people. And we think it’s going to be extremely successful, never been done before anything like this.”

Trump added that he’d be happy to call it the “Trump Gold Card.” In fact officials say a government website is now using the name TrumpCard.gov, and Trump has since revealed a sample card with a picture of his face on the front.

Trump has said the proceeds of the Gold Card would go to help pay down the budget deficit, and possibly even chip away at the massive $36.2 trillion national debt.

“We’ll be able to sell maybe a million of these cards, maybe more than that,” Trump said. “A million cards would be worth $5 trillion. And if you sell 10 million of the cards, that’s a total of $50 trillion. We have $35 trillion in debt. That’d be nice.”

But most immigration experts and attorneys see that figure as wildly unrealistic. They expect sales to be in the low thousands.

Immigration lawyer Darren Silver says he’s received a flurry of calls about the Gold Card, but interest wanes as soon as he explains this program is not like the existing EB-5 visa program, which requires an investment of something closer to $1 million in a business that creates jobs or $800,000 for investments in a lower-income ‘targeted employment area.’

Silver says his clients are surprised when he tells them the Gold Card is not an investment that might offer any returns. It’s effectively just a donation.

“I had to explain to them, ‘you’re gifting the U.S. government $5 million. That’s all you’re doing.'” says Silver. “And once I explain that to them, they’re out.”

Source: Trump’s $5 million Gold Card offers the rich a fast lane to residency

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Roberge veut renvoyer le multiculturalisme dans les « limbes de l’histoire »

2025/05/30 Leave a comment

Forgets, of course, s27 of the Charter and the Multiculturalism Act, not to mention that the differences between multiculturalism and interculturalism are relatively small, as both properly understood pertain to civic integration and the CAQ’s more divisive approach has been subject to considerable criticism.

And somewhat ironic for Minister Roberge to state that the parties in the Assemblée nationale opposed Bill 84 given “clientélisme partisan when arguably, so is the CAQ:

« Le multiculturalisme ne s’applique plus sur le territoire québécois, enfin ! […] C’est un modèle qui a toujours été nuisible pour le Québec », a affirmé le ministre mercredi à l’Assemblée nationale.  

Selon lui, dans ce modèle, l’État se donne le devoir de permettre aux nouveaux arrivants de garder leur culture et leur langue d’origine. « C’est ça, le multiculturalisme canadien. On vit les uns aux côtés des autres », a-t-il expliqué.  

Sa nouvelle loi – qui s’inspire de l’interculturalisme – vise à envoyer le signal aux immigrants qu’ils « arrivent dans un État qui a son propre modèle d’intégration » et qu’ils doivent accepter le contrat social du Québec basé sur des valeurs comme la démocratie, la langue française, l’égalité entre les hommes et les femmes ou encore la laïcité.  

« Sans quoi, bien, ce n’est pas une bonne idée de venir ici », indique Jean-François Roberge.  

Mais il reste des éléments à mettre en place afin de clarifier le modèle du ministre. Il promet qu’une « Politique nationale sur l’intégration à la nation québécoise et à la culture commune » sera mise en œuvre avant l’élection de 2026.  

Jean-François Roberge ajoute qu’après l’adoption de cette politique nationale, « tous les ministères, tous les organismes, les municipalités, etc., lorsqu’ils vont subventionner un projet d’un partenaire, vont devoir s’assurer que ce projet est compatible avec les fondements du modèle d’intégration nationale ». 

Le ministre assure que les financements qui ont déjà été octroyés ne seront pas retirés.  

Dans cinq ans, il y aura un rapport pour évaluer le nouveau modèle d’intégration. Les critères seront élaborés dans la Politique nationale.  

Le projet de loi 84 a été adopté mercredi matin au Salon rouge. Le Parti québécois a voté avec le gouvernement. Les solidaires et les libéraux s’y sont opposés. Le ministre s’en est désolé.  

« Je ne sais pas trop, c’est probablement pour des questions de clientélisme partisan. Il devait y avoir quelques membres très très multiculturalistes qui n’ont pas compris que c’était un projet d’ouverture », a-t-il dit.  

Source: Roberge veut renvoyer le multiculturalisme dans les « limbes de l’histoire »

“Multiculturalism no longer applies to Quebec territory, finally! […] It is a model that has always been harmful to Quebec, “said the minister on Wednesday in the National Assembly.

According to him, in this model, the State makes it its duty to allow newcomers to keep their culture and language of origin. “This is Canadian multiculturalism. We live side by side,” he explained.

His new law – which is inspired by interculturalism – aims to send the signal to immigrants that they are “arriving in a state that has its own model of integration” and that they must accept Quebec’s social contract based on values such as democracy, the French language, equality between men and women or secularism.

“Without that, well, it’s not a good idea to come here,” says Jean-François Roberge.

But there are still elements to be put in place in order to clarify the minister’s model. He promises that a “National Policy on Integration into the Quebec Nation and the Common Culture” will be implemented before the 2026 election.

Jean-François Roberge adds that after the adoption of this national policy, “all ministries, agencies, municipalities, etc., when they are going to subsidize a partner’s project, will have to ensure that this project is compatible with the foundations of the national integration model”.

The Minister assures that the funding that has already been granted will not be withdrawn.

In five years, there will be a report to evaluate the new integration model. The criteria will be developed in the National Policy.

Bill 84 was adopted Wednesday morning at the Red Hall. The Parti Québécois voted with the government. The solidarity and liberals opposed it. The minister apologized.

“I’m not sure, it’s probably for questions of partisan clientelism. There must have been some very multicultural members who didn’t understand that it was an opening project,” he said.

Filed under Interculturalisme, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →