Jim Maclean: In Ontario, a new race-based government | The Limits of Anecdote and Assertion

2015/12/08 Leave a comment

This commentary by Jim Maclean illustrates the risk of anecdote and assertion-based commentary Highlights of his piece:

Wynne told the Post that it’s time to use “the race lens” when formulating government policy, adding, “we need to start,” although she said she has yet to discuss the idea formally with cabinet. But if she is musing about it in public, you can bet a formal proposal is in the works.

To ensure the government’s “race lens” focuses properly, Wynne says a “structure” will need to be created “that is going to allow us to filter the policies we put in place, to create new policies to put protections in place.” How these race-based “protections” will differ from or supersede the broader (but apparently inadequate “human rights” protections that already exist in Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms and many other pieces of provincial legislation is unclear. Also yet to be determined: the shape and size of the “structure” that Ontario will need to establish to filter government policies through Wynne’s “race lens.” Will it be akin to the bureaucracy that administers Quebec’s French language laws?

If anything, it will likely be bigger, because in order to ensure that Ontario’s current and future policies are properly “racially focused,” a large and racially-diverse number of civil servants will need to be hired so that the filtering is fully representative of all of the racial groups that make up Ontario’s diverse population. How else to ensure that the racial lens focuses correctly?

But let’s not stop with race. What of ethnicity? To be truly sensitive and inclusive, perhaps “ethnic” lenses may have to be used in addition to “racial” lenses, to focus more accurately, because, of course not all members of a particular race share the same views.

A little thinking is clearly a dangerous thing, and perhaps the Premier should do a lot more thinking about this initiative.

Once Ontario’s new Ministry of Racial Profiling has been set up, it will likely take years for all existing provincial government policies, and all future policies, to be correctly filtered. A tremendous, bureaucratic make-work project.

To be fair, each and every policy would have to be considered, would it not? And why stop with government policies? Why not have the Ministry examine all existing Ontario legislation? That would be the only fair and, um, consultative, thing to do.

….One can only hope that intelligent, thoughtful opponents to this ill-considered proposal will find their voices, and that they do so soon, before serious damage is done to the multi-racial and multicultural fabric of Ontario.

So, as hopefully an intelligent and thoughtful proponent of a diversity lens, let me note a few fallacies in his arguments:

  • Ontario is the second most diverse province, with 26 percent visible minorities, and with greater diversity within visible minorities than British Columbia;
  • When devising policies and programs, it is important to understand the needs of the population served. In Canada’s four largest provinces, that means understanding the range of groups being served;
  • Government has long-applied a gender lens to various policies and the federal government did apply a rural lens at one time;
  • This is no different from the private sector, where sectors as diverse as banks, grocery chains, fast food outlets and telecoms all conduct such research to better understand, and respond to, client needs;
  • Understanding citizen needs does not automatically mean a targeted policy or program response but it ensures policy makers have the necessary information to make recommendations; and,
  • any response can range from substantive policy or program adjustments to improve outcomes, or improved ways to let citizens know about government programs that may be relevant to them.

From the theoretical to some practical examples:

  • Would police-carding practices not have been questioned if a race-lens highlighted the disproportionate carding of Blacks?
  • Would the Toronto District School Board have been able to develop programming to improve high school graduation rates among Somali-Canadian youth without a diversity lens?
  • Would the roll-out of Ontario’s new sex education program not have been smoother had resistance from some segments of some communities been identified earlier through such a lens.

Lastly, to Maclean’s fear that the Ontario government will have to hire a “large and racially-diverse number of civil servants,” he can rest easy: 20.4 percent of Ontario’s public service are already visible minority.

In any case, the purpose of a “lens” is for all public servants, whatever their origin, to become more attuned to the population they serve.

Source: Jim Maclean: In Ontario, a new race-based government | National Post

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

How fear became the politician’s weapon of choice

2015/12/08 Leave a comment

Ian Buruma on the politics of fear:

As long as France’s state of emergency lasts, police may arrest people without warrants, break down the doors of private residences in the middle of the night, take over restaurants and other public places with armed force, and generally behave like agents in a police state. Most French citizens are now so frightened of Islamist attacks that such measures are widely supported. But they are almost certainly counterproductive.

A national leader can declare war on a state, not on a network of revolutionaries. Islamic State, despite its claims, is not a state, and Mr. Hollande should not treat it as one. Besides, even if bombing IS strongholds in Iraq or Syria makes military sense, it won’t break the spell of Islamist revolution for frustrated, bored and marginalized young people in French slums.

On the contrary: The canny leaders of IS also rely on an apocalyptic “us or them” view of the world. Most Muslims are not violent revolutionaries who condone, let alone admire, mass violence. IS seeks to broaden its support, especially among young Muslims, by convincing them that true Muslims are in an existential war with the West – that the infidels are their mortal enemies. For them no less than for Mr. Trump, fear is the most powerful weapon.

So the more a Western government allows its policemen to humiliate and bully Muslims in the name of security, the more IS is likely to win European recruits. The only way to combat revolutionary Islamist violence is to gain the trust of law-abiding Muslims in the West. This will not be easy, but arbitrary arrests are surely the wrong way to go about it.

Likewise, when it comes to civil wars in the Middle East, Western restraint is usually a better strategy than hasty military intervention driven by domestic fear. Republican candidates in the United States are already using the recent murder spree in Paris to blame President Barack Obama, and by extension any future Democratic candidate, for being weak. Mr. Trump has promised to “bomb the shit out of ISIS.”

This bellicosity has had the effect of pushing Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination, into distancing herself from Mr. Obama. As with Mr. Hollande, she has to assuage public fear by talking tough and promising more military action.

Mr. Obama has consistently resisted the temptation to unleash more wars. His policies have sometimes been inconsistent and irresolute. But in his refusal to give in to panic and act rashly, he has been far braver than all the big talkers who accuse him of being a wimp.

Source: How fear became the politician’s weapon of choice – The Globe and Mail

Filed under Government, Radicalization Tagged with , ,

Trudeau Cabinet takes diversity, inclusiveness to an unparalleled extent | hilltimes.com

2015/12/08 Leave a comment

My piece in The Hill Times:

The Liberal government has emphasized its diversity and inclusive language in speeches, in Cabinet, in Cabinet committees, and in Cabinet ministers’ mandate letters. This emphasis has been reinforced by the return of the multiculturalism program to Canadian Heritage. All together, these initiatives represent the mainstreaming of diversity, inclusiveness and multiculturalism to an unparalleled extent.

It starts with the language of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who regularly emphasizes that: “Canadians understand that diversity is our strength. We know that Canada has succeeded—culturally, politically, economically—because of our diversity, not in spite of it.”

It continues with the creation of the Cabinet Committee on Diversity and Inclusion, with a strong inclusion mandate for indigenous and new Canadians: “Considers issues concerning the social fabric of Canada and the promotion of Canadian pluralism. Examines initiatives designed to strengthen the relationship with indigenous Canadians, improve the economic performance of immigrants, and promote Canadian diversity, multiculturalism, and linguistic duality.”

It is reflected in his choice of ministers: 50 per cent women, 17 per cent visible minority. And is further reinforced in the shared mandate letter commitments for all ministers with two strong multiculturalism-related commitments: “Canadians expect us, in our work, to reflect the values we all embrace: inclusion, honesty, hard work, fiscal prudence, and generosity of spirit. We will be a government that governs for all Canadians, and I expect you, in your work, to bring Canadians together.

“You are expected to do your part to fulfill our government’s commitment to transparent, merit-based appointments, to help ensure gender parity and that indigenous Canadians and minority groups are better reflected in positions of leadership.”

Holding all ministers to account, with PMO tracking of these and other shared commitments (in addition to minister-specific commitments), should ensure greater progress on the two objectives of multiculturalism:  recognition and equality.

It will take some time to see how well these commitments are implemented.

Equally important, the previous government’s weak record on the diversity of judicial appointments (less than two per cent visible minority) will start to be addressed.

Overall, the new government made few changes to how government is formally organized (machinery changes). This was wise given the disruption and turmoil that such changes can entail (e.g., the Martin government’s splitting apart Human Resources and Skills Development and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade in 2004, reversed by the Harper government in 2006).

This makes the return of the multiculturalism program to Canadian Heritage all the more striking, after some eight years at Citizenship and Immigration (now Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship or IRCC).

The original transfer to CIC was largely driven by political reasons given then Immigration minister Jason Kenney’s political outreach role with ethnic groups. However, there was also a policy rationale. Multiculturalism deals with longer-term multi-generational issues (along with ‘mainstream’ visible minority relations) in contrast to the newcomer focus of the immigration, integration and citizenship programs, and multiculturalism could be seen as a logical extension of CIC’s mandate, and was portrayed as such in one of CIC’s strategic objectives, ‘building an integrated society.’

In practice, however, the multiculturalism program withered away at CIC.

When the program moved to CIC in 2008, it had a $13-million budget: $12-million for grants and contributions and 73 full-time positions. The last departmental performance report (2013-14) showed 29 full-time positions (a decline of 60 per cent) with a $9.8-million budget. Money for grants and contributions fell to $7.9-million.

Negotiations over the resources to be returned to Canadian Heritage will be challenging, given the impact may be felt in other program areas in IRCC that benefited from the redistribution of Multiculturalism funds. Moreover, the weakened capacity will require a major rebuilding and restaffing effort.

From a policy perspective, the return of multiculturalism to Canadian Heritage reinforces the overall government diversity and inclusion agenda, as well as the Canadian identity agenda, which fits nicely with Canadian Heritage’s overall mandate.

However, Canadian Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly’s specific mandate letter commitments make no mention of multiculturalism. This apparent oversight may just be to provide the public service time to manage the return of multiculturalism and reintegrate within Canadian Heritage. Furthermore, the lack of a junior minister may make it harder for the multiculturalism program to define its new role within Canadian Heritage and, more broadly, across government.

Joly’s public statements to date have not included any significant references to multiculturalism. Her general orientation, however, has been clear: to promote the “symbols of progressiveness. That was (sic) the soul of our platform.”

Overall, the commitment to a diversity and inclusion agenda, supported by a Cabinet committee and shared ministerial mandate letter commitments, and the rebuilding of multiculturalism back at Canadian Heritage bode well for a more effective inclusion, diversity, and multiculturalism strategy across government.

Source: Trudeau Cabinet takes diversity, inclusiveness to an unparalleled extent | hilltimes.com

Filed under Government, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

There will be some hard things said: Muslim group hears about Truth and Reconciliation

2015/12/08 Leave a comment

Another good initiative in building bridges and understanding by the Canadian Council for Muslim Women:

It’s a been a time of soul-searching for Muslims trying to find their place in Canada. That’s why it’s the right time to hear about Truth and Reconciliation right from the source, says the organizer of a panel that brought Muslim and Aboriginal people together.

“I thought we should take a step back and put our own problems into perspective,” said Ferrukh Faruqui, who moderated the event on Saturday.

Faruqui grew up in Winnipeg and went to medical school there, but admits she knew little of the historic struggles of Canada’s First Nations. “We want to listen to truths long buried and offer our support.”

The panel organized by the Ottawa chapter of the Canadian Council for Muslim Women consisted of Faruqui as moderator and three guests: Minwaashin Lodge co-founder Irene Compton;  Victoria Tenasco-Commanda, the culture co-ordinator at the Wabano Centre for Aboriginal Health, and Shady Hafez, a Carleton University student whose mother is Algonquin and father is Syrian.

The panel spent much of its time talking about echoes of the residential school system, which operated for more than 150 years. Some 150,000 aboriginal children went through the system, and thousands never returned home. The last school closed only about 20 years ago. The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which probed the history of that school system and its lasting repercussions were released last June in a summary report. A final report is to be released Dec. 15.

“I am going to warn you that there will be some hard things said,” warned Compton before she started to speak.

Source: There will be some hard things said: Muslim group hears about Truth and Reconciliation | Ottawa Citizen

Filed under Aboriginal, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

How Young Brains Get Radicalized – The Daily Beast

2015/12/07 Leave a comment

Not surprising, the same neuroscience that helps explain greater willingness to take risks (e.g., drunk driving, extreme sports etc) also plays a role in understanding susceptibility to radicalization:

Fortunately, findings from neuroscience may help us to understand where these vulnerabilities exist, and why some brains—particularly adolescent brains—are more susceptible to believing whatever they are fed. Such neural insights are important because they contribute to a better understanding of how to combat radicalization here at home.

According to peer-reviewed research, radicalization is made easier in brains that have impaired functioning in one of the main regions responsible for generating the ability to doubt. Specifically, scientists have found that damage to the brain area known as the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) may cause individuals to have a “doubt deficit”—a hindered ability to question, scrutinize, or be skeptical of new information.

In a 2012 study published in the journal Neuropsychology, researchers found that patients with damage to the vmPFC scored higher on measures of religious fundamentalism and authoritarianism compared to others.

Such qualities would make people with similar impairments, such as those with decreased or disrupted brain activation in the vmPFC, the perfect prey for ISIS recruiters. According to the authors of the study, “Individuals high in authoritarianism tend to easily submit to authority, are often aggressive in the name of authority, and tend to hold dogmatic beliefs without a reflexive critique.”

So the question is, who possesses poor brain circuitry in the prefrontal cortex that could produce doubt deficits? The unsettling answer: young people.

There is overwhelming evidence that teenagers and those in their early 20s have brain circuits in the prefrontal cortex that are still developing. It may come as no surprise that this brain region is also involved in controlling impulses, regulating our emotions, and making sound decisions. The brain’s wiring simply hasn’t had a chance to make all the proper connections to support such behavior.

This falls in line with what is actually being observed in the real world. Teenagers are commonly targeted through the Internet by ISIS recruiters, like 19-year-old Asher Abid Khan from Texas, who was drawn to the group after watching propaganda videos put up by ISIS online.

In another case, ISIS members spent months carefully grooming a 23-year-old female named Alex, who was a devout Christian and Sunday school teacher. A recruiter known to her only as “Faisal” provided the lonely girl with constant companionship by spending hours communicating with her through Skype, Twitter, and email, teaching her the fundamentals and rituals of Islam as a first step.

By being so persistent, ISIS recruiters are also exploiting the brain’s natural tendency to accept beliefs rather than reject them. Since the latter requires an additional evaluation phase, which means more work for the brain, its default state is to believe.

These accounts clearly show that ISIS recruiters recognize the young brain’s vulnerabilities—and how to take advantage of them. If we want to protect against their techniques, we have to understand these vulnerabilities as well.

Source: How Young Brains Get Radicalized – The Daily Beast

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with

Douglas Todd: Racism, a word to use with care

2015/12/07 Leave a comment

Perspective from former British Columbia Premier and federal cabinet minister Dosanjh:

Suffering is difficult to compare — and the fact such global acts of racism are more enormous than what has happened in B.C. or Canada does not lessen the pain for those who have been discriminated against here.

Nevertheless, when former B.C. premier Ujjal Dosanjh first came to Canada almost 50 years ago, he was among the many newcomers who found the West Coast a “fair and inclusive” place compared to where he had been.

After growing up in the Punjab region of South Asia and later moving to Britain, Dosanjh was relieved to come to B.C. and get away from the exceptional “colour consciousness” and harsh caste system he had experienced in India.

The budding young lawyer was also pleased to leave behind the marauding “skin heads and teddy boys” of England, where maverick politician Enoch Powell had just made his infamous 1968 “rivers of blood” speech about unchecked immigration.

B.C.’s record in regards to racism is “not great historically,” says Dosanjh, who served in the federal Liberal cabinet following years as a provincial NDP cabinet minister and premier.

Still, Dosanjh believes it’s wise to put past incidents of B.C. racism into perspective.

“We have learned in B.C. And we’ve been moving forward, including on the First Nations file. To not acknowledge the distance we have come is to do an injustice to Canada,” he says.

Dosanjh remains painfully aware of the ruthless bigotry promulgated elsewhere today, and not only by ISIS. He knows hundreds of millions of India’s lower castes are still discriminated against as “unclean” and that China continues to brutally target Muslim ethnic minorities.

The term racism is often abused in Canada, Dosanjh believes. Last week he gained national attention, and applause, for challenging how Ontario Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne tossed out the epithet.

When Wynne suggested people criticizing the federal government’s promise to rapidly bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada were masking “racism and xenophobia,” Dosanjh said Wynne had “in one fell swoop” insulted not only him but the 67 per cent of Canadians who disagreed with the government.

Dosanjh believes Wynne was trying to silence Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s critics by lobbing the often-misused word (which the Oxford Dictionary helpfully defines as “prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one’s own race is superior”).

Similarly, people of many ethnicities have charged Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and the city’s housing developers with manipulating the racist label to shut down protests about the way international investors are fuelling Metro Vancouver’s astronomical housing prices.

In ethics, the principal of proportionality is key. In just-war theory, the response to an act of aggression should be proportional to the initial violence. In the courts, the punishment should fit the crime.

Is it possible that many charges about B.C.’s history of racism are disproportionate?

For his part, Dosanjh said he “doesn’t recognize” the portraits of a horrifyingly racist B.C. often painted by academics and activists.

“Some experts become vested in continuing to say what they’re saying even when things have changed. They focus on one thing to the exclusion of all else. It’s like a new religion; after it starts, it ossifies.”

Does it create unnecessary division to allege that racial intolerance has been worse that it actually has been?

It’s crucial to remain on guard and denounce racism whenever it arises. But, in the name of proportionality and building community, it’s also important not to exaggerate it.

Source: Douglas Todd: Racism, a word to use with care

Filed under Multiculturalism, Racism Tagged with ,

Immigrants in Parliament, including cabinet ministers and just announced parliamentary secretaries | Canadian Immigrant

2015/12/05 Leave a comment

For those interested, and impatiently awaiting the updated Parliamentary MP listing with birthplace and birthdate info, Diana Manole went through google and other tools to piece together this list: 41 foreign-born MPs, 35 of which are visible minority.

Source: Immigrants in Parliament, including cabinet ministers and just announced parliamentary secretaries | Canadian Immigrant

Filed under Government, Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Contracts trump culture — Iranian woman doesn’t have to return dowry after leaving marriage: Ontario court

2015/12/05 Leave a comment

Rule of law prevails, appropriately without accommodation:

Reliance on cultural norms is no substitute for explicit contract language when giving a gift or transferring property, Ontario’s top court ruled Wednesday.

The decision comes in the case of a young Iranian couple in Ottawa whose marriage fell apart after the bride received a dowry — also known as a mahr — from the groom’s family.

“A wide variety of cultures and their norms and traditions form an integral part of the Canadian mosaic,” the Appeal Court ruled.

“They cannot simply be imported into a transaction involving the transfer of real property by reference to a concept such as ‘dowry,’ which forms a part of a particular culture or tradition.”

A wide variety of cultures and their norms and traditions form an integral part of the Canadian mosaic

Ahmad (Reza) Abdollahpour and Shakiba Sadat Banifatemi married in Ottawa in March 2012. According to Iranian custom, his family gave the bride a dowry that included a 50 per cent stake in a house they owned. They transferred the ownership by way of a deed of gift.

After they separated in December 2013, Abdollahpour and his family wanted the property back. Banifatemi refused and the Abdollahpours sued.

The groom’s family argued the transfer was part of the dowry and that Iranian culture and tradition dictated that Banifatemi would have to return the gift if she left the marriage.

A year ago, Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Smith sided with the former bride, prompting the former groom and family to appeal. They argued Smith was wrong to find the gift was given unconditionally.

In upholding the ruling, the Appeal Court noted the two families had negotiated the property transfer before the marriage — after receiving independent legal advice — — and that the lawyer for the groom’s family described the transfer as a “wedding gift to both kids.” In addition, the deed of gift, which was formally registered, stated that the groom’s family was transferring “irrevocably” the property to the bride.

As such, the Ontario Court of Appeal concluded, everything pointed to an intention by both sides that the transfer was both irrevocable and unconditional, and that there was no indication of any expectation of a return if the marriage broke down.

It simply isn’t good enough, the Appeal Court concluded, to insist after the fact that cultural expectations formed part of an agreement unless explicitly noted, or that merely listing a gift as part of a dowry is sufficient to create an implied set of conditions related to traditional norms.

Source: Contracts trump culture — Iranian woman doesn’t have to return dowry after leaving marriage: Ontario court

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Canadian Encyclopedia: 30 immigrant groups to Canada

2015/12/04 Leave a comment

Good list and background information (click on the story to see timeline and links):

To celebrate its 30th anniversary, The Canadian Encyclopedia created 30 lists of 30 things that make us proud to be Canadian, from famous people and historic events, to iconic foods and influential artists. Read more of their lists here.

The various waves of migration to Canada over the course of its history have made the country what it is — a mosaic of peoples of diverse backgrounds. In 2011, Canada’s foreign-born population was approximately 6.8 million people, or 20.6 per cent of the total population — the highest proportion among G8countries.

Canada’s checkered history of immigration has included instances of outright discrimination (see Komagata Maru; Chinese Head Tax; MS St. Louis) as well as genuine humanitarian heroics; Canada is the only nation to receive the United Nations Refugee Agency’s Nansen Award, in recognition of its efforts to resettle 60,000 Vietnamese refugees.

Source: Canadian Encyclopedia: 30 migrant groups to Canada – Macleans.ca

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Review: Robin Higham’s What Would You Say? … as guest speaker at the next Canadian citizenship ceremony

2015/12/03 2 Comments

what would you saysRobin Higham, my helpful ‘trusted reader’ for my book, Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism, has written What Would You Say? … as guest speaker at the next Canadian citizenship ceremony, an anecdote-based approach to understanding the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.

His latest book develops further his thoughts on integration, first expressed in his earlier work, Who Do We Think We Are, which focussed on reasonable accommodation,.

As before, Higham uses archetype-characters both Canadian-born and immigrants to express a range of perspectives, ranging from ‘old-stock’ (indigenous, two francophones, anglophone) to ‘new-stock’ (East European, Latin American, Indo-, and Muslim) Canadians. Higham uses these characters to fashion a conversation regarding the responsibilities of integration and citizenship.

This is an effective technique to outline some of the issues involved and capture different perspectives.

However, like any anecdote-based approach, it has a number of weaknesses, starting from how one frames such discussion, and what assumptions and premises underlie his argumentation.

Higham’s underlying bias and ideology are clear. His choice of Gilles Paquet’s apocalyptic frame — political correctness, reluctance to confront, culture of entitlement, and unreasonable accommodation — and how these are interpreted, reflect a distinctly conservative perspective, focussed on social cohesion more than inclusion.

But this frame is more asserted than demonstrated through evidence, along with his underlying premise that integration is the responsibility of the newcomer. His characters all largely assert this, with the anecdotes selected to buttress his arguments, with limited examples of the more nuanced approach to integration.

In reality, there is a more complex dynamic of integration and accommodation, whereby wider society also plays a significant role in how it adjusts to the needs and requirements of newcomers, within the general framework of Canadian law.

A large part of the relative success of Canadian immigration, citizenship, and multiculturalism policies reflects this integration and accommodation dynamic. Canadian society adapts over time as its diversity changes. Integration is not one-way but multi-dimensional, as successive debates over what kinds of accommodation are reasonable and what are not illustrate.

There is an abundance of evidence, ranging from Statistics Canada, OECD and other international organizations, along with and public opinion research and election results, that indicates, overall, that Canada is remarkably successful compared to other countries in building an integrated society that recognizes the diversity of different groups, and one that most Canadians are comfortable with. A large part of this success reflects precisely our ability to be flexible and accommodate difference, allowing integration to take place over time, but within the overall Canadian constitutional and legal framework.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that ‘political correctness’ and a ‘reluctance to confront’ can be seen as civility and that the alternative, as seen in the recent Canadian election (e.g., the wedge politics of the niqab), the USA (e.g., the Republican primary) and Europe is neither helpful to integration and belonging. And while a preference for a more Cartesian approach to accommodation issues may be seductive given greater clarity, society evolves with time, and the more ad hoc approach of (English) Canada has arguably proven more effective.

This is not to say that Canada is without challenges, whether it be with respect to the persistence of poorer economic outcomes, finding the right balance between integration and accommodation, or the declining rate of citizenship.

But given this, where does Higham end up on citizenship rights and responsibilities for newcomers?

  1. Be mindful of what wasn’t working when you left home – emigrated – and also remember why you chose to come to Canada. Many newcomers probably arrive here with valuable citizenship lessons for us all.
  2. Exercise civility … even towards the ‘others’ in your community. You should also find that there are many fewer ‘others’ around you once you join the ‘otherness community.’
  3. Civics … we need your engagement and investment in our democratic processes and institutions. They are our default complaint-management mechanism.
  4. Strive for low maintenance citizen status, especially, but not only, with respect to government and community-funded, social-support programs.
  5. Build trust amongst citizens, all citizens. Always talk to strangers. Seek to minimize ‘transaction costs.’
  6. Be sensitive to the package of those obvious un-Canadian transgressions. Know what kinds of things it is best to avoid.
  7. At home, be alert to your responsibility to respect and protect each of your family members’ rights. You will have to both monitor and coach the youngsters in your entourage.
  8. Accept that there are limits to the capacity of your community to accommodate new expressions of values, beliefs and traditions. Expect to have to make adjustments of your own in order for you and your family to develop and to prosper.

To Higham’s credit, these are expressed with respect, modelling how one can overcome the ‘reluctance to confront’ in a manner that encourages dialogue rather than shutting it down.

But it does beg the question: how would one construct such a list that applies to all, both old and new Canadians? My take, drawing on Higham’s list, suggests that this is not difficult:

  1. Be mindful of what wasn’t working when you or your ancestors left the country of origin and chose to come to Canada.
  2. Exercise civility towards all, whether new or old Canadians, whether from one’s ethnic or religious group or not, whether male or female, whether gay, straight or transgendered, etc.
  3. Engage and participate actively in wider Canadian political life and debates, not just ones of immediate interest to you.
  4. Our social safety net is to be used when needed, not abused.
  5. Be trustful of others and forgiving of misunderstandings.
  6. Be understanding of others and their sensitivities, whether cultural, religious or other. Accommodate where feasible and treat accommodation requests with respect.
  7. Be mindful of one’s biases and prejudices before acting or opining.
  8. Apply these in the home, workplace and wider society.

Returning to a theme that I have explored in my own writings, the relative strengths and weaknesses of evidence and anecdote, I think it important to underline that while both have their place in terms of policy development, assertions and anecdotes are invariably more susceptible to bias and ideology.

Evidence may not be bias-free — how one chooses which evidence to cite and how one constructs an evidence-based narrative — but is more constrained than relying on pure anecdote. With Ottawa returning (thankfully) to more evidence-based policy making, public servants nevertheless must be mindful of the risks of such bias in their choice of evidence, particularly since it may be less challenged by the political level.

I encourage those interested in citizenship and multiculturalism issues to read Higham’s book for his modelling of respectful dialogue. But I would also encourage all to consider how to frame such discussions in a manner that includes old and new Canadians alike, and offer my list above to continue the conversation.

—

A slightly condensed version of this article appeared here: Integration Not Sole Responsibility of Newcomers – New Canadian Media

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →