Racial profiling not addressed in Ontario public consultation over street checks

Valid concerns. That is the issue:

A public consultation about the police method of street checks Friday afternoon left some attendees disappointed over its structured format that left no time to discuss issues such as racial profiling.

The consultation, which was held at Carleton University and addressed issues including the definition of “street check,” rules about how they should be applied and administrative oversight, was attended by approximately 15 members of the public, along with a handful of Ottawa police and government officials.

“It’s a very active conversation,” said Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services Yasir Naqvi. “I’m very happy to hear the diversity of the people who are attending from our community, so we have varied perspectives represented in this consultation.”

The format of the consultation involved discussions among small groups on three specific questions, with results of their ensuing discussion written on sticky notes and posted on a board.

Participants were also encouraged to speak to the group as a whole after the group segment was finished.

But not all the people in attendance were satisfied with the scope of the conversation.

Carl Nicholson, a member of the Police Services Board who was not acting in an official capacity, said the “structured” discussion left little wiggle room to discuss potential bias and racial profiling.

“You can be sure it’s not far from our minds,” he said. “We do want the opportunity to explore what is driving those numbers.”

The numbers he mentioned refer to a document released in July. The police service’s combined statistics from 2011 through 2014 showed that 58 per cent of people it has street checked are white, 20 per cent are black and 14 per cent are Middle Eastern. Aboriginal, Asian, East Indian, Latin American and those whose race is unknown accounted for about seven per cent. The ethnicity of about 10 per cent of people street checked wasn’t recorded.

Racial profiling not addressed in public consultation over street checks | Ottawa Citizen.

Police Association of Ontario defends carding ahead of consultations

Clumsy and inappropriate way to influence the consultations and discussion:

As the province launches a round of public consultation on police carding, Ontario’s largest police association is stepping up its defence of the controversial practice with a poll suggesting 40 per cent of Ontarians support carding when provided with highly selective examples of the procedure.

In an online survey of 1,350 people conducted for the Police Association of Ontario (PAO) by ResearchEtc. last month, 36 per cent of respondents said they opposed carding, a colloquial term for the police practice of stopping, questioning and collecting information from residents without arresting them. Another 24 per cent stated they supported the measure, with a remaining 40 per cent falling into the “neutral/don’t know” category.

Those percentages changed when respondents were informed that a street check – another term for carding – was involved in capturing Russell Williams, the former commander of CFB Trenton currently serving two life sentences for first-degree murder. Opposition to the practice dropped to 18 per cent while support increased to 40 per cent.

“All the publicity around this has cast a shadow of doubt on our members,” said association president Bruce Chapman. “We believe the public supports the police and this verifies it.”

But the Williams example is a far cry from the repeated stopping and interrogating of young black men in Toronto that has stoked calls to rescind carding entirely, which speaks to the troublesome broadness of the term. Police netted Mr. Williams at a road block set up specifically to find one of the women he’d killed. In Toronto, critics claim street checks are rarely related to specific, ongoing crimes. Of 1.1 million carding entries filed from 2009 to 2011, the most common justification was “general investigation” – given in one-third of all stoppages, according to a Toronto Police report.

“This survey amounts to a lot of propaganda and distortion of facts,” said Knia Singh, a law student who said he has been carded by police 10 times and launched a constitutional challenge of carding in June. “The example the association gives is not carding as the African-American community or First Nation community know it. Members of these communities are being stopped when they are standing around minding their own business.”

Police Association of Ontario defends carding ahead of consultations – The Globe and Mail.

A Racial Gap in Attitudes Toward Hospice Care

Interesting. Wonder the degree to which it is similar in Canada? There is now and then anecdotes (see Family overjoyed as top court rules doctors must seek consent before taking a patient off life support) but have not seen any surveys:

It is an attitude borne out by recent federal statistics showing that nearly half of white Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in hospice before death, compared with only a third of black patients. The racial divide is even more pronounced when it comes to advance care directives — legal documents meant to help families make life-or-death decisions that reflect a patient’s choices. Some 40 percent of whites aged 70 and over have such plans, compared with only 16 percent of blacks.

Instead, black Americans — far more so than whites — choose aggressive life-sustaining interventions, including resuscitation and mechanical ventilation, even when there is little chance of survival.

The racial gaps are expected to widen when Medicare is expected to begin paying physicians in January 2016 for end-of-life counseling, and at a time when blacks and other minorities are projected to make up 42 percent of people 65 and over in 2050, up from 20 percent in 2000.

At the root of the resistance, say researchers and black physicians, is a toxic distrust of a health care system that once displayed “No Negroes” signs at hospitals, performed involuntary sterilizations on black women and, in an infamous Tuskegee study, purposely left hundreds of black men untreated for syphilis.

“You have people who’ve had a difficult time getting access to care throughout their lifetimes” because of poverty, lack of health insurance or difficulty finding a medical provider, said Dr. Maisha Robinson, a neurologist and palliative medicine physician at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, Fla. “And then you have a physician who’s saying, ‘I think that we need to transition your mother, father, grandmother to comfort care or palliative care.’ People are skeptical of that.”

Federal policies surrounding hospice also arouse suspicion in black communities since Medicare currently requires patients to give up life-sustaining therapies in order to receive hospice benefits.

That trade-off strikes some black families, who believe they have long had to fight for quality medical care, as unfair, said Dr. Kimberly Johnson, a Duke University associate professor of medicine who has studied African-American attitudes about hospice.

Dr. Johnson said her black patients were more likely to believe there are actual religious prohibitions against limiting life-sustaining therapy, and that suffering can be redemptive, or “a test from God.” And those beliefs, she added, were “contrary to the hospice philosophy of care.”

But now some doctors and clergy members are trying to use church settings to reshape the black community’s views, incorporating the topic in sermons, Bible study groups and grief and bereavement ministries.

Dr. Robinson, who is black and a daughter of Tennessee pastors, has been helping pastors develop faith-based hospice guidelines. She tells them, “God can work miracles, yes he can, but even in hospice.”

That message recently rang out from the pulpit at God Answers Prayer Ministries, an African-American church in South Los Angeles, as Bishop Gwendolyn Coates-Stone tried a sermon theme on advance care.

“It’s such a great cost to hold on to some of those sicknesses and diseases that eventually are going to take us out,” she exclaimed into a microphone, bobbing and weaving in a swirl of royal purple robes. “Just like Jesus talked about his death and prepared his disciples for his death, we ought to be preparing our disciples for our death!”

A Racial Gap in Attitudes Toward Hospice Care – The New York Times.

The [US] Foreign Service is too white. We’d know — we’re top diplomats.

Good article on the need for diversity within the US foreign service by former senior diplomats:

Like Wall Street and the medical and legal professions of the mid-20th century, the diplomatic corps long drew its members from traditionally elite, exclusive institutions, not themselves very diverse at the time. Moreover, college students of color rarely knew that diplomacy was a professional option for them.

That’s changing. Today, our diplomats are more representative. But we haven’t made nearly enough progress. According to the latest statistics, 82 percent of Foreign Service officers (the commissioned career officers serving in embassies and consulates abroad as well as some policy positions stateside) are white. Seven percent are Asian American, 5.4 percent are African American, and 5 percent are Latino. About 60 percent are men. In contrast, the U.S. population is more than 50 percent female, more than 17 percent Hispanic and more than 14 percent African American.

U.S. foreign policy is informed and improved by a wider range of experiences, understandings and outlooks. To represent America abroad and relate to the world beyond our borders, the nation needs diplomats whose family stories, language skills, religious traditions and cultural sensitivities help them to establish connections and avoid misunderstandings. For some of our international allies that are themselves facing diversity issues, American diplomats of diverse backgrounds can help them build bridges. For others, diversity in the American diplomatic corps makes the United States seem more approachable.

….How can the Foreign Service draw upon the country’s total talent pool? The challenge isn’t only eliminating the last vestiges of discrimination but also actively recruiting the most talented and dedicated people from every segment of society, especially those of great ability but limited means.

When the Foreign Service drew upon a narrow swath of the population, most future diplomats already knew people who had represented the country overseas. As part of their upbringings, these young people acquired the mannerisms that would make them at home in the Foreign Service. To diversify the diplomatic service, we must recognize that promising young people from less privileged backgrounds do not enjoy these advantages and assurances. They need to know that the Foreign Service welcomes their skills and experiences. They need role models with whom they can identify. And they need the reassurance that diplomacy can be rewarding and remunerative.

Not sure what the Canadian numbers are. Anecdotally from my time there, things were starting to change.

The Foreign Service is too white. We’d know — we’re top diplomats. – The Washington Post.

How do tech’s biggest companies compare on diversity? | The Verge

How_do_tech’s_biggest_companies_compare_on_diversity____The_VergeSome good comparative data. Chart above highlights Asian Americans given other minorities are relatively small (Amazon rates higher given the number of people who ship product):

Key takeaways [for overall employment]:

  • Amazon sets the bar for female employment with 37 percent of its US workforce. Microsoft lags the pack with just 24 percent (sampled average is 29 percent female) — far below the 47 percent of the US workforce that’s female.
  • Apple employs a higher percentage of people claiming hispanic / Latino origin than its peers in the US. At 12 percent of its US workforce, it’s well ahead of Twitter’s 2 percent (sampled average is 8 percent Hispanic or Latino).
  • Amazon employs far more people that identify as Black or African American than the other companies sampled. At 15 percent, it is well ahead of Facebook’s 1 percent and the 2 percent employed by Google and Twitter (sampled average is 7 percent).
  • Amazon (13 percent) and Apple (16 percent) lag the others in the percentage of employees who identify as Asian (sampled average is 23 percent).
  • The sampled average for people that identify as Asian is 23 percent of the workforce even though they compromise just 4.7 percent of the US population.

And what about the leadership composition of some of the world’s most powerful and profitable companies?

Key takeaways [for leadership]:

  • Facebook (23 percent) and Twitter (22 percent) are the best at promoting women into leadership roles among the companies sampled. Microsoft is the worst at 13 percent (sampled average is 18 percent).
  • While women represent an average of 29 percent of all employees in the US tech firms sampled, that number quickly falls to 18 percent of leadership positions (Women make up 47 percent of the US workforce).
  • Amazon’s leadership is the whitest at 90 percent followed by Apple at 87 percent, far above Twitter’s 68 percent (sampled average is 79 percent white).
  • Amazon (75 percent) and Apple (72 percent) promote the greatest percentage of white males into leadership positions (sampled average is 65 percent).

As dire as these charts appear, the tech industry is advancing toward the goal of greater inclusiveness and transparency. Apple, Microsoft, Facebook, and Intel have all released customized reports showing mid-2015 progress globally, beyond the 2014 US data provided in the EEO-1. Progress is slow, but it is happening.

How do tech’s biggest companies compare on diversity? | The Verge.

Un leader musulman veut que Québec interdise les moqueries sur la religion

One of the more conservative voices of Islam in Quebec, arguing for limiting freedom of expression with respect to religion:

La loi devrait explicitement interdire à quiconque de se moquer de la religion, a soutenu jeudi un des leaders de la communauté musulmane du Québec, Salam Elmenyawi.

En commission parlementaire qui étudie le projet de loi 59 sur le discours haineux, le président du Conseil musulman de Montréal a tenu des propos qui ont fait sourciller les partis d’opposition, estimant que M. Elmenyawi cherchait en fait à brimer la liberté d’expression au Québec.

Il a plaidé pour que Québec adopte la ligne dure avec son projet de loi 59, affirmant qu’il pouvait tolérer qu’on l’insulte, lui, mais jamais qu’on insulte sa religion.

Le mémoire présenté par le Conseil musulman de Montréal exhorte Québec à inclure notamment dans son projet de loi «la prévention de la dérision et le dénigrement de toute religion et de ses personnalités».

Car la liberté d’expression ne devrait pas inclure le droit de tourner en dérision une religion, a insisté M. Elmenyawi, qui ne s’exprimait qu’en anglais. Ses propos étaient traduits en français par un interprète.

La députée caquiste de Montarville, Nathalie Roy, lui a fait remarquer que son discours allait totalement à l’encontre des Chartes des droits, québécoise et canadienne, qui garantissent à toute personne le droit de s’exprimer librement.

«Vous allez loin, a commenté Mme Roy. Si on ne peut pas se moquer, si on ne peut pas rire d’une religion, quelle qu’elle soit, ça va à l’encontre de notre liberté d’expression. Ca va très, très loin ce que vous demandez.»

Le leader musulman en a rajouté, en faisant valoir que lorsqu’on tourne en dérision l’islam, «vous vous moquez de moi, vous vous moquez de ma femme, vous vous moquez du prophète, de la mère du prophète».

Et il a dit que si une personne ose insulter la mère du prophète, «c’est comme si on insultait ma mère, ça me touche, moi, personnellement».

«Vous pouvez m’insulter, moi, mais n’insultez pas ma religion!», a lancé le leader musulman aux élus réunis dans le Salon rouge de l’Assemblée nationale.

Un leader musulman veut que Québec interdise les moqueries sur la religion | Jocelyne Richer | Actualités.

The “Ethnic Vote”: All Over the Map – Adams and Griffith

Further to our earlier op-ed in the Globe (Why Canada’s politicians fixate on the ethnic vote), Michael and I expanded it to include more information of visible minority representation and comparisons to the US:

Remarkably, the immigrants who were elected to Canada’s parliament in 2011 had not only become citizens, gotten themselves nominated, and then won election—but they represented all five main political parties and included many visible minorities: 18 Conservatives (15 visible minorities, of 166 elected), 18 New Democrats (12 visible minorities, of 103), four Liberals (2 visible minorities, of 34), and one each in the Bloc (1 visible minority, of 4) and the Green Party (no visible minority).

The Green Party is 100 per cent foreign-born: Elizabeth May is from Hartford, CT.

Another “only in Canada” fact is that our most right-wing party, the Conservative Party of Canada, attracts a substantial contingent of candidates born abroad.

The Bloc is dedicated to dismantling the country, but managed to be inclusive of the foreign-born and visible minorities. Only in Canada!

With respect to visible minorities (defined in the U.S. as non-white races and Hispanic), the U.S. has worse representation than Canada: 20 per cent in the House of Representatives compared to their population share of 37 per cent, only six per cent in the Senate), the vast majority of these are American-born visible minorities, mainly African Americans and Hispanic/Latinos, not immigrants.

Only 16 foreign-born members sit in either of the two houses. But many of these were born abroad to American parents, the most famous being John McCain and Canada’s Ted Cruz.

But even if we include all of these legislators as foreign born, they are still less than three per cent of Congress, where demographic parity would suggest that almost 70 foreign-born “should be” in both houses (to match the 13 per cent of “legal” Americans who are foreign-born).

Another “only in Canada” fact is that our most right-wing party, the Conservative Party of Canada, attracts a substantial contingent of candidates born abroad. In most countries, right-wing parties are anti-immigrant and would be unlikely to either attract or accept foreign-born candidates.

The “Ethnic Vote”: All Over the Map – New Canadian Media.

Adler won’t apologize for Holocaust reference

Questionable judgement. May be valid to note in a bio but on a sign?

Conservative candidate Mark Adler is defending a reference to the Holocaust on his campaign signage, which has led to claims that he’s exploiting an atrocity to win votes in the Toronto riding of York Centre.

A photo of one of Adler’s campaign signs has been making the rounds online; the sign makes the observation that he is “the son of a Holocaust survivor.” It caught the eye of The Walrus’ editor-in-chief Jonathan Kay, who posted photos of the sign on Twitter Sunday.

“Who needs Yad Vashem when Holocaust awareness is now being promoted on partisan Conservative signage?” Kay wrote on Twitter.

http://ipolitics.ca/2015/08/17/adler-wont-apologize-for-holocaust-reference/ (paywall)

As Robyn Urback notes:

The problem is that his message still only speaks to a proportion of his constituents, and it loses all tact when it’s blown up to 30-inch text. What’s more, with the spotlight now pointed in his direction, Adler’s other claims have become the subject of scrutiny, including his long-held assertion that he is the first Canadian MP born to Holocaust survivors. According to the Canadian Jewish News, the designation actually belongs to former Liberal MP Raymonde Falco. None of this really matters, of course, except maybe to show how easily experiences are cheapened when they’re turned into mere talking points.
I have no doubt that Adler didn’t intend to trivialize the experience of the Holocaust by using it for partisan gain, but that also doesn’t really matter. In politics, perception trumps intention, and in this case, the delivery was about as tactful as listing colitis on the “about me” section of a dating profile. The fact that your parents were viciously persecuted during the Second World War isn’t exactly on the same level as a pledge to keep the “economy strong,” which is why they look so strange sharing space on a campaign billboard. Some things simply do not lend themselves to bullet points.

Were your parents chased by Nazis? Vote Tory

I never felt the fact that my maternal grandparents were killed during the Holocaust made me more or less qualified to represent the Government at the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance.

How to correctly engage with Catholicism and Islam in public commentary

Useful piece providing some guidance on how to discuss religion in public (leave it to my more religiously-literate readers to comment and correct):

Whether it’s same-sex marriage, Pope Francis’ encyclical on the environment, deradicalisation programs or Islamic State (IS), academics and commentators have found a need to engage with religion. Some do so with an ease built from familiarity, others less smoothly.

The problems begin with a common view that those who study religion do so based upon faith requiring belief rather than scholarship. This misguided view encourages commentators who would otherwise hesitate to reach beyond their areas of expertise to weigh in on religion.

Yet the approaches used for the study of texts such as the Quran or Bible are no less rigorous than those employed in other legal and literary fields. Similar methodologies from anthropology, sociology and the political sciences are adapted to undertake research on religion.

But the allure to ignore this complexity appears too strong for some who borrow a few verses from the Quran to argue that Islam is a religion of peace or, vice versa, point to other verses suggesting it to be a religion of war. Others, upon hearing Pope Francis’ teachings on the environment, demand Catholic politicians’ adherence yet ignore the more authoritative teachings on abortion or same-sex marriage.

Left to the private sphere, as a spiritual belief, such mistakes would be the burden of the individual and the business of an imam or priest. But when public policy is being shaped it is incumbent upon public figures to be better versed. The below list responds to common mistakes that emerge when discussing Catholicism and Islam.

Roman Catholicism

  1. Quoting scripture in an effort to reinforce your argument.
  2. Referencing a pope’s encyclical as dogma for all Catholics.
  3. Quoting the Old Testament as a reference for Catholic dogma.

Islam

  1. Generalisations.
  2. Reading the text outside of the context.
  3. Confusing ideology with religion.
  4. Talking in a vacuum.

How to correctly engage with Catholicism and Islam in public commentary.

Canada’s ethnic enclaves more diverse than you think, study finds

Toronto Star coverage of the Dan Hiebert IRPP study:

The report by the Institute for Research on Public Policy found neighbourhoods with a dominant ethnic population are actually places of cultural diversity rather than cultural isolation. In fact, the average number of cultural backgrounds represented, even in enclaves, is close to 15, the study found.

And surprisingly, it also found that members of visible minorities who live in modern-day enclaves in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal are less likely to experience poverty than their counterparts who live outside them.

“The accelerated development of enclaves in Canadian metropolitan areas does not pose a threat but should instead be seen as an opportunity and a challenge,” said the study to be released by the Montreal-based think tank on Wednesday.

“Any assumption that enclaves are monocultural is decidedly incorrect. We see that in Montreal, enclaves are more diverse than other parts of the city, and in Toronto they are just as diverse as other parts of that city. Even in Vancouver, enclaves tend to be highly diverse social settings.”

Based on census data for 1996 to 2006 and the 2011 National Household Survey, University of British Columbia professor Daniel Hiebert examined whether enclaves are becoming more prominent in Canada’s urban landscape, the demographics of residents of these enclaves, and their relationship with poverty.

Greater Toronto’s social landscape changed rapidly between 1996 and 2006, when nearly two-thirds of the visible minority populations lived in areas where more than half of the population identified with a visible minority background.

In all, 3 million people in the GTA live in white-dominant areas, 1 million in mixed and visible-minority-dominant areas and 1.4 million in enclaves.

Canada’s ethnic enclaves more diverse than you think, study finds | Toronto Star.

Link to the study: Ethnocultural Minority Enclaves in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver