…Une source policière québécoise me rapporte que les services fédéraux — sauf, de toute évidence, l’Agence du revenu du Canada — sont timides lorsque vient le temps de mener des enquêtes qui pourraient générer un ressac dans les communautés culturelles et religieuses visées. Une accusation d’islamophobie est si vite arrivée. Et il est vrai que, comme la majorité des communautés culturelles, les musulmans canadiens ont voté en masse (65 %) pour le Parti libéral du Canada l’an dernier. Chacun a aussi bien noté que premier ministre Mark Carney s’est présenté, six semaines après les élections, à un événement de l’AMC.
Cela rappelle l’extrême prudence, sinon la pusillanimité, affichée par les libéraux de Justin Trudeau face à l’ingérence de la Chine au Canada, particulièrement dans sa diaspora. Tout cela est paradoxal, car l’action des Frères musulmans et de leurs alliés nuit considérablement aux musulmans modérés qui forment la majorité des fidèles. Un effort conséquent de vigilance et d’action pour neutraliser l’action des extrémistes est au contraire dans l’intérêt général, et dans l’intérêt particulier de la communauté.
“On est en droit de noter que l’action de la GRC la plus intense contre les réseaux fréristes à Montréal s’est déployée lorsque les conservateurs fédéraux étaient au pouvoir à Ottawa, donc avant l’élection de Justin Trudeau en 2015. Il est difficile de croire que ce sont les Frères qui se sont assagis depuis. Auraient-ils jugé que l’effervescence entourant la cause palestinienne dans les campus l’an dernier ne serait pas une bonne occasion de recrutement et de financement ?
Croire que l’évocation d’une présence toxique des Frères dans nos sociétés est une « théorie du complot », comme on l’a entendu la semaine dernière à Ottawa, est plutôt un signe de l’existence chez les libéraux fédéraux de ce qu’on appelle, dans les milieux subversifs, des « idiots utiles ».
… A Quebec police source tells me that the federal services — except, obviously, the Canada Revenue Agency — are shy when it comes to conducting investigations that could generate a hangover in the cultural and religious communities targeted. An accusation of Islamophobia came so quickly. And it is true that, like the majority of cultural communities, Canadian Muslims voted en masse (65%) for the Liberal Party of Canada last year. Everyone also noted that Prime Minister Mark Carney presented himself, six weeks after the elections, at a CMA event.
This is reminiscent of the extreme caution, if not the pusillanimity, displayed by Justin Trudeau’s liberals in the face of China’s interference in Canada, particularly in its diaspora. All this is paradoxical, because the action of the Muslim Brotherhood and their allies considerably harms moderate Muslims who form the majority of the faithful. A consistent effort of vigilance and action to neutralize the action of extremists is on the contrary in the general interest, and in the particular interest of the community.
“It is right to note that the most intense action of the RCMP against the fraternist networks in Montreal was deployed when the federal Conservatives were in power in Ottawa, so before the election of Justin Trudeau in 2015. It is hard to believe that it is the Brothers who have been tasting each other since then. Would they have judged that the excitement surrounding the Palestinian cause on campuses last year would not be a good opportunity for recruitment and funding?
To believe that the evocation of a toxic presence of the Brothers in our societies is a “conspiracy theory”, as we heard last week in Ottawa, is rather a sign of the existence among the federal liberals of what is called, in subversive circles, “useful idiots”.
« Je pense que cela ressemble pas mal à une théorie du complot », a déploré mercredi le député de la région de Québec et ex-ministre Jean-Yves Duclos.
« La politique la plus facile, c’est celle de diviser. Il faut absolument travailler autrement dans le contexte mondial dans lequel on vit. Il faut qu’on soit unis et que l’on travaille ensemble et éviter de se polariser comme d’autres pays le font », a-t-il ajouté.
Pour sa part, le ministre de l’Identité et de la Culture canadiennes, Marc Miller, a qualifié de « ridicules » les propos du chef péquiste.
Le libéral réagissait aux déclarations de Paul St-Pierre Plamondon qui a affirmé que le « frérisme » – une idéologie prônée par les Frères musulmans qui vise à islamiser les sociétés occidentales – « est une réalité documentée dans plusieurs pays d’Europe », mais que « la seule raison pourquoi on ne la documente pas au Canada, c’est que c’est l’agenda du gouvernement en place ».
« Je suis désolé, mais c’est ça », a soutenu le chef du Parti québécois, qui a ajouté que le « Québec n’étant pas un pays est subordonné à des décisions et à un service de renseignements absolument pas orienté par l’intérêt public à [son] avis ».
Il a tenu ses propos lors d’une assemblée publique (townhall) organisée par Centre consultatif des relations juives et israéliennes, le 15 avril. Il répondait alors à une question de Léo Dupire, du groupe de droite Québec Fier, qui lui demandait de reconnaître « qu’il y a un problème avec l’immigration musulmane de masse ». M. Dupire relaie lui-même l’extrait sur les réseaux sociaux.
Le leader souverainiste apporte rapidement des nuances à la question de son interlocuteur. « Je vise la paix sociale », affirme-t-il. M. St-Pierre Plamondon déplore ensuite « l’immigration incontrôlée » imposée par Ottawa et propose de « revenir à l’immigration planifiée ».
« Je n’irais pas à dire l’immigration musulmane parce que j’ai eu plusieurs discussions avec des gens qui ont fui des régimes iraniens, saoudiens, afghans. Des gens qui disent : “Moi, j’ai vu comment une société peut virer et je suis conscient du totalitarisme religieux, donc j’ai choisi le Québec pour ne pas vivre là-dedans” », explique le chef péquiste, qui dit vouloir « inclure tout le monde » dans la discussion.
Le Conseil national des musulmans canadiens a dénoncé des déclarations qui ne font « qu’alimenter la peur entre les Québécois avec des idées importées d’Europe ».
« Les propos tenus par M. St-Pierre Plamondon sont à l’image de sa rhétorique habituelle qui laisse planer la suspicion envers nos concitoyens de confession musulmane. En tant que prétendant au pouvoir, il doit être capable d’affirmer clairement que les Québécois de confession musulmane ne sont pas une menace pour notre société », a déploré le président-directeur général, Stephen Brown.
Dans un point de presse mardi à Québec, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon a rappelé que le Parti québécois « est capable d’attirer des candidatures de toutes les religions » qui sont « d’accord sur le contrat social qu’incarne » sa formation politique. Les candidats péquistes dans Jeanne-Mance–Viger et Anjou–Louis-Riel sont notamment de confession musulmane.
De « l’aveuglement volontaire »
Le leader péquiste a également précisé ses propos à l’égard d’Ottawa, mardi. « L’agenda, c’est le multiculturalisme et l’aveuglement devant l’ingérence étrangère », a-t-il expliqué.
Selon lui, il y a matière à inquiétude sur le phénomène du « frérisme » : « Ce serait surprenant qu’il n’y ait pas cette forme d’ingérence étrangère au Québec alors qu’on est en train de la documenter de manière assez précise dans plusieurs pays européens. » Il montre du doigt « la doctrine fédérale » qui est « de fermer les yeux » et d’ouvrir les vannes de l’immigration.
« C’est ce que Trudeau appelait le postnational. Le postnational, c’est un peu l’effondrement de l’État national qui surveille ses intérêts, puis qui voit à une planification », a-t-il dit, ajoutant ne pas observer de changement avec l’arrivée de Mark Carney.
Le ministre des Transports, Steven MacKinnon, s’est montré tout aussi cinglant que Jean-Yves Duclos. « L’agenda du gouvernement, c’est d’assurer la prospérité et la qualité de vie de l’ensemble des Canadiens. Mais venant du gars qui a regardé la caméra pour dire aux gens de l’Outaouais : “C’est ça qui est ça. Vous allez perdre votre job, mais vous allez agir en bons Québécois quand même”, cela ne me surprend pas », a-t-il décoché.
“I think it looks a lot like a conspiracy theory,” lamented Quebec City region MP and former Minister Jean-Yves Duclos on Wednesday.
“The easiest policy is to divide. It is absolutely necessary to work differently in the global context in which we live. We must be united and work together and avoid polarizing ourselves as other countries do, “he added.
For his part, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture, Marc Miller, described the words of the Péquista leader as “ridiculous”.
The liberal reacted to the statements of Paul St-Pierre Plamondon who said that “fraerism” – an ideology advocated by the Muslim Brotherhood that aims to Islamize Western societies – “is a documented reality in several European countries”, but that “the only reason why it is not documented in Canada is that it is the agenda of the government in place”.
“I’m sorry, but that’s it,” said the leader of the Parti Québécois, who added that “Quebec, not being a country, is subject to decisions and an intelligence service absolutely not oriented by the public interest to [his] opinion.”
He made his remarks at a public meeting (townhall) organized by the Advisory Center for Jewish and Israeli Relations on April 15. He then answered a question from Léo Dupire, of the right-wing group Québec Fier, who asked him to recognize “that there is a problem with mass Muslim immigration”. Mr. Dupire relays the excerpt himself on social networks.
The sovereignist leader quickly brings nuances to the question of his interlocutor. “I aim for social peace,” he says. Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon then deplores “the uncontrolled immigration” imposed by Ottawa and proposes to “return to planned immigration”.
“I would not go to say Muslim immigration because I have had several discussions with people who have fled Iranian, Saudi, Afghan regimes. People who say: “I have seen how a society can turn and I am aware of religious totalitarianism, so I chose Quebec not to live in it,” explains the Pequist leader, who says he wants to “include everyone” in the discussion.
The National Council of Canadian Muslims denounced statements that “only fuel fear among Quebecers with ideas imported from Europe”.
“The remarks made by Mr. St-Pierre Plamondon are in the image of his usual rhetoric that leaves suspicion towards our fellow citizens of Muslim faith. As a contender for power, he must be able to clearly state that Muslim Quebecers are not a threat to our society, “lamented President and CEO Stephen Brown.
In a press briefing on Tuesday in Quebec City, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon recalled that the Parti Québécois “is able to attract applications from all religions” who are “agree on the social contract that embodies” its political formation. The Péquist candidates in Jeanne-Mance–Viger and Anjou–Louis-Riel are in particular Muslim.
Of “voluntary blindness”
The Pequist leader also clarified his remarks about Ottawa on Tuesday. “The agenda is multiculturalism and blindness to foreign interference,” he explained.
According to him, there is cause for concern about the phenomenon of “frarism”: “It would be surprising if there was no such thing as this form of foreign interference in Quebec when it is being documented quite precisely in several European countries. He points to “the federal doctrine” which is “to close the eyes” and open the floodges of immigration.
“This is what Trudeau called the postnational. The post-national is a bit of the collapse of the national state that monitors its interests, then sees to planning, “he said, adding that he did not observe any change with the arrival of Mark Carney.
Transport Minister Steven MacKinnon was just as scathing as Jean-Yves Duclos. “The government’s agenda is to ensure the prosperity and quality of life for all Canadians. But coming from the guy who looked at the camera to say to the people of the Outaouais: “That’s what it is. You will lose your job, but you will act like good Quebecers anyway,” it does not surprise me, “he said.
Of note, even if small change. But the impact on a number of employees being let go is being reported on:
L’adoption du projet de loi 94 visant à renforcer la laïcité dans le réseau scolaire aura-t-elle fait plus de peur que de mal dans les écoles de la province ? Un récent élargissement de l’accès au droit acquis de porter un signe religieux dont bénéficient les employés embauchés avant le 20 mars 2025 a fait pousser un soupir de soulagement à plusieurs, a constaté Le Devoir. Des centaines de congédiements demeurent tout de même à prévoir dans la grande région de Montréal.
L’adoption du projet de loi 94, le 30 octobre dernier, a semé l’émoi dans le réseau scolaire en laissant présager, en particulier dans la région métropolitaine, une vague de congédiements d’employés refusant de retirer leur signe religieux pour pouvoir garder leur emploi. « Au moins 500 emplois » étaient menacés uniquement dans la métropole, affirmait ainsi en février dernier la présidente de l’Association montréalaise des directions d’établissement scolaire, Kathleen Legault.
Appréhendant des répercussions majeures sur les services offerts aux élèves, des centres de services scolaires (CSS) ont réclamé des précisions au ministère de l’Éducation sur le droit acquis accordé dans la loi aux employés embauchés avant le 20 mars 2025. La loi, telle qu’adoptée l’automne dernier, prévoyait que tout employé admissible à ce droit acquis perdrait celui-ci au moment où il changerait de fonction. Ce qui laissait présager d’importants départs d’employés, notamment parmi le personnel de soutien scolaire et professionnel.
Le 18 mars dernier, cependant, la sous-ministre de l’Éducation, Carole Arav, a fait parvenir aux directions générales des CSS de la province un document apportant des précisions sur l’application de la clause de droits acquis inscrite dans cette loi, qui est venue élargir l’interdiction du port de signes religieux à l’ensemble du personnel scolaire.
La lettre, que Le Devoir a pu consulter, mentionne ainsi qu’une « fonction » ne doit pas se limiter à une classification administrative rigide, mais plutôt être définie par les responsabilités d’un employé. Ce dernier conserve donc son droit acquis s’il change de poste ou obtient une promotion, dans la mesure où ses tâches sont « substantiellement similaires ou analogues » à celles qu’il occupait auparavant, indique le document.
Résultat : des CSS de la province ont défini des regroupements de fonctions assez vastes, qui permettent, par exemple, à une surveillante d’élèves devenue éducatrice en service de garde ou encore préposée aux élèves handicapés dans les derniers mois de conserver son signe religieux. L’effet de cette loi sur le départ de personnel sera donc « beaucoup moins grand » que prévu, soupire, soulagée, Kathleen Legault.
Will the passage of Bill 94 to strengthen secularism in the school network have caused more fear than harm in the schools of the province? A recent expansion of access to the acquired right to wear a religious sign enjoyed by employees hired before March 20, 2025 has caused many to breathe a sigh of relief, Le Devoir said. Hundreds of layoffs are still to be expected in the greater Montreal area.
The adoption of Bill 94, on October 30, sowed a stir in the school network by suggesting, especially in the metropolitan area, a wave of layoffs of employees refusing to withdraw their religious sign in order to keep their jobs. “At least 500 jobs” were threatened only in the metropolis, said last February the president of the Montreal Association of School Directors, Kathleen Legault.
Apprehensive of the major repercussions on the services offered to students, school service centres (SSCs) have requested clarification from the Ministry of Education on the acquired right granted in the law to employees hired before March 20, 2025. The law, as adopted last fall, provided that any employee eligible for this acquired right would lose the right when he changed his position. This suggested significant employee departures, especially among academic and professional support staff.
On March 18, however, the Deputy Minister of Education, Carole Arav, sent to the general directorates of the CSS of the province a document providing details on the application of the acquired rights clause inscribed in this law, which extended the ban on the wearing of religious signs to all school staff.
The letter, which Le Devoir was able to consult, thus mentions that a “function” should not be limited to a rigid administrative classification, but rather be defined by the responsibilities of an employee. The latter therefore retains his acquired right if he changes position or obtains a promotion, to the extent that his tasks are “substantially similar or analogous” to those he previously held, the document indicates.
Result: CSS in the province have defined fairly extensive groupings of functions, which allow, for example, a student supervisor who has become a daycare educator or a disabled student attendant in recent months to maintain her religious sign. The effect of this law on the departure of staff will therefore be “much smaller” than expected, sighs, relieved, Kathleen Legault.
Largely a lost “battle” outside of Quebec but valid reasons to limit some of these accommodationsL
…But freedom of religion has two sides to it — and we have become dangerously comfortable with only one of them.
A secular state means that the state does not favour one religion over another. It also means that the state does not allow religion — any religion — to colonize public institutions funded by the common purse. A school funded by taxpayers is not a cathedral, a mosque, a synagogue, or a temple. It is a public institution, bound by a civic compact: to educate every child, regardless of background, to the best of its ability, for the maximum number of instructional days possible.
Prayer rooms in public schools are a violation of that compact. Not because prayer is wrong. But because prayer belongs in the home, in the house of worship, in the private sphere that a free society zealously protects. When we install prayer rooms in schools, we are not being inclusive — we are blurring a boundary that exists precisely to protect everyone equally, including the believers. The moment the state endorses one form of worship through the infrastructure of a public building, it has taken a side. And the secular state has no business taking sides on matters of faith.
The same logic applies to diamond days. If a school board is scheduling days off to mark religious observances — and doing so more frequently than it schedules days for teacher training — it has drifted far from its mandate. The mandate is education. The mandate is to provide every child in that school with the maximum number of quality instructional hours the calendar allows. Parents who wish their children to observe specific religious holidays have every right to do so. They also have options: religious schools, private schools, charter schools.
The public system should not be bending its calendar to accommodate the liturgical schedules of any faith — including mine.
I say this as someone who will be in church on Sunday, deeply grateful for the freedom to be there. That freedom is real. It is precious. It was won at great cost. But it ends at the doors of public institutions — and that is not a limitation on freedom. That is the very architecture of freedom.
Canada is not a collection of solitudes pressed together in geographic proximity. It is, or aspires to be, a civic nation — a country where what binds us is not ethnicity, not religion, not heritage, but a shared commitment to certain principles. Chief among them: equality before the law, and equality before public institutions.
If we allow those institutions to fragment along religious and cultural lines — accommodating some, ignoring others, pleasing everyone a little and no one fully — we do not end up with a more inclusive country. We end up with a weaker one. A country where the child who shows up to write a test on Greek Orthodox Easter is told there are no exceptions, while the school itself has prayer rooms and religious days baked into its calendar.
That contradiction should bother all of us.
Secularism is not the enemy of faith. It is faith’s greatest protector. It is the guarantee that no religion may dominate the public square — and therefore, that every religion remains free in the private one.
That is why I believe the answer is not complicated, even if it is uncomfortable to say. Public schools should close on statutory holidays — the ones enshrined in law and shared by all citizens. They should schedule PA days as their operational needs require. That is the extent of their calendar obligations to any creed. And there should be no prayer rooms within their walls. Not because faith is unwelcome in the lives of students, but because a public school building is not the place where the state should be making space for worship, any worship. The classroom is not a chapel. The hallway is not a corridor to the divine. Students who need to pray may do so privately, as students have always done, and as the Charter fully protects. But the institution itself must remain neutral ground.
Reasonable recommendations for more education and awareness:
…MAC has long contended that an audit of its activities by the revenue agency’s Review and Analysis Division was fundamentally tainted by systemic bias and Islamophobia.
During court proceedings over the agency’s audit, federal lawyers said preliminary audit findings identified “several serious issues’’ concerning the association’s non-compliance with its charitable registration obligations.
These allegedly included involvement in foreign political activities, buying considerable real estate, providing support to an organization listed as a terrorist entity and issuing improper donation receipts.
Gallant’s report says scrutiny for support of extremism places charities “in the unenviable position of making decisions about what actors, or actions, the administrator of charities law might think are linked to terrorism.”
“Despite the distinctive ambitions of the administrative agency — the effort to police terrorist abuse — in the case of the MAC audit that effort proved seriously deficient.”
Gallant said the agency drew heavily on MAC’s links and ties with others in its analysis.
“Considerable dispute exists over the implications and effectiveness of such ‘links,’ or associational, methods,” she wrote. “It risks capturing innocent activity through associational connections, risks ‘over-inclusion’ and can fail to accurately discern between suspicious activity and authentic legitimate activity.”
Leaders of Muslim charities, volunteers and employees exist within their religious communities, the report adds. “Any anointing of the notion that associations — connections — indicates terrorist abuse risks overidentification and the attraction of ‘guilt’ by association,” it says.
The revenue agency could play a bigger role in educating charities about the possible risks of involvement with certain groups or people, Gallant said in an interview.
“I think that if the charities directorate was a little more forthcoming in educating, specifically — don’t interact, don’t be doing things here, we’re suspicious about these things — then charities can make a choice, right?” she said….
Articles and opinions related to multiculturalism that I found of interest in March:
Racial and Ethnic Disparities
Activisim/Advocacy
Quebec Bill 21
Representation corporate boards and public serice
Disparities
Picard: To address racism in health care, we need to collect data on race
Agree, without data, over reliance on anecdotes:
…It’s important, of course, that data are collected voluntarily and that people’s privacy is respected as it is with all health records.
The public needs to know, too, that the information will not appear on their health card or on medical charts. Rather, it is used in an aggregated fashion to reveal trends and inequalities between racial or ethnic groups, without identifying individuals.
The big barrier to collecting and using race-based data is technical: digital health systems still need to adapt. But we know it’s doable, even on a large scale.
During the pandemic, for example, the Coronavirus Rapid Entry Case and Contact Management System (CORES) included data on race, income and household size. As a result, we learned Black, Indigenous and people of colour in Toronto were over-represented in the tally of COVID-19 cases and deaths. That allowed, among other things, targeted vaccination campaigns.
The data also allowed people who are too often marginalized and ignored to be heard, an important first step in correcting disparities.
Race, culture, language and socio-economic status can all have a profound impact on health, individually and collectively.
Allowing gaps in data collection to persist is bad for our health, and our health system.
StatsCan: Criminal court outcomes of Black accused persons in Canada, 2016/2017 to 2022/2023
Latest useful StatsCan study highlighting disparities
There were 100,450 Black accused persons in adult criminal courts between 2016/2017 and 2022/2023. Black people (6.2%) were overrepresented as accused persons in adult criminal courts over this period, relative to their representation among the adult population of Canada (3.7%).
The proportion of Black accused persons in adult criminal courts has generally increased over time, from 5.7% of all accused in 2016/2017 to 7.1% in 2022/2023.
Between 2016/2017 and 2022/2023, the proportion of Black people in adult criminal courts in Nova Scotia and Ontario was more than two times higher than that of Black people in the total adult population of these provinces. Black people were also overrepresented as accused persons in criminal courts in Quebec, British Columbia, Alberta and New Brunswick compared with their representation in the total adult population.
More than 4 in 10 (42%) cases involving a Black accused person completed in adult criminal courts between 2016/2017 and 2022/2023 resulted in a guilty decision. This was equal to the proportion of cases involving Black accused persons that were withdrawn, dismissed or discharged over this period (42%).
Compared to the rest of the (non-Black) accused population, Black accused persons less often had their case result in a guilty decision and more often had it withdrawn, dismissed or discharged.
Black accused persons most often received a guilty decision for cases where the most serious offence was a Criminal Code traffic offence such as impaired driving (69%) or an administration of justice offence such as breach of probation (49%), and least often for cases where it was a violent offence (33%).
Between 2016/2017 and 2022/2023, just under half of violent crime cases (47%) and property crime cases (46%) involving Black accused persons were withdrawn, dismissed or discharged.
Similar proportions of Black and non-Black accused persons were sentenced to custody upon being found guilty in adult criminal courts (29% versus 27%). Probation was the most common sentence handed down to both Black and non-Black accused persons.
It took nearly two months longer for court cases involving Black accused persons to be completed in adult criminal courts between 2016/2017 and 2022/2023, compared to non-Black accused persons (219 versus 165 days).
CMA: Black Canadians more likely not to fill prescriptions because of financial constraints, study finds
Another insightful study:
Black adults in Canada are more likely not to fill prescriptions because of financial constraints than white adults, according to a new study that highlights disparities in prescription medication coverage as a major barrier to equitable health care.
The study was published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal on Monday. Its authors concluded that the prevalence of cost-related prescription non-adherence – defined as the inability to fill a prescription or delaying, splitting or skipping doses because of financial pressures – was 75 per cent higher among Black adults than white adults.
Coverage for prescription medications was also lower among Black adults, the study showed. In 2022, for example, 72.5 per cent of Black adults were covered compared with 80 per cent of white adults.
One of the study’s authors, Oluwabukola Salami, a Canada Research Chair in Black and racialized peoples’ health at the Cumming School of Medicine at the University of Calgary, said this study is the first of its kind and broadens the understanding of how Black Canadians experience health inequities.
“We know that Black people are more likely to have cardiovascular disease, to have certain types of cancer and to die from any of these conditions. But we always looked at how access to care is a challenge to Black people,” Dr. Salami said.
“This study presents new findings related to medication specifically.”…
Jamie Sarkonak: The crusading judge who helped Liberals build a race-based sentencing regime
Sarkonak appears to be following judges with activist backgrounds as seen in her previous column on Justice Go.
There is a judge on the Ontario Superior Court of Justice whose signature move is letting violent men walk free because of racism. One of the architects of race-based sentencing, his name is Faisal Mirza, and he was appointed to the bench by former prime minister Justin Trudeau in 2022.
Mirza’s flourish of race-based acquittals is not a case of a judge gone rogue: indeed, it’s perfectly on-brand. He was writing about the need for more racial considerations in the Canadian justice system in 2001, before he even became a lawyer. Back then, he argued in the Osgoode Hall Law Journal that mandatory minimum sentences for drug and weapons offences would be racist because of the disproportionate impact they’d have on Black people.
Toronto police, he asserted, were racist because of the arrest statistics they produced: in 1988, Black individuals comprised 51 per cent of drug arrests, 82 per cent of mugging arrests and 55 per cent of purse snatching arrests. This, he said, was evidence of over-targeting. He concluded that more mandatory minimums would exacerbate the effect, because the threat of being convicted on a charge with a guaranteed jail term would disproportionately pressure Black accused persons to make plea deals and forfeit the opportunity to expose racist police at trial.
This became a career pursuit. When the Supreme Court was deciding whether to strike down the mandatory minimum for illegally possessing a loaded firearm in 2014, he argued as an intervener in the case that its disproportionate impact on Black individuals needed to be taken into account. The court ultimately ruled that this mandatory minimum was unconstitutional.
In 2018, Mirza laid the foundation for Ontario’s racial sentencing regime. He was the defence lawyer of Kevin Morris, a Black man who was convicted of various firearms offences. They were lucky to draw the hyper-progressive, destructively lenient Shaun Nakatsuru for a judge. Mirza filed two racial context reports about Morris and Black people as evidence, and the judge emphatically agreed to consider them. He settled on a 15-month sentence to account for the racial factors, even though three years was considered the starting point. On appeal, the Ontario Court of Appeal made racial considerations in sentencing the province-wide rule in 2021….
To his credit, there have been instances where Mirza refrained from applying a racial discount, and from tossing out evidence because of racism, but it doesn’t excuse the other times when he let his biases reign. It’s undeniable that he has a habit of projecting racism in assessing any interaction with the state and undermining public safety with his assumptions. One day, it’s going to end up getting someone hurt — if it hasn’t already.
Dummit: How accommodation hollowed out Canadian nationalism
Not an easy country to govern given differing regional and group interests. Will be interesting to see how the (still) forthcoming revision to the Harper era citizenship study guide provides a cohesive and coherent national perspective:
….Taken as a whole, this legacy of national hesitation makes governing difficult. Is it any wonder that Carney spends so much time abroad signing international agreements? Foreign policy is one of the few areas where a Canadian government can still act as a single whole with relative clarity about the national interest.
But Carney’s real test will come when he finally returns home.
Canada’s genius has always been accommodation. But accommodation, repeated often enough, can gradually hollow out the idea that the country itself even has a single political purpose.
When Carney eventually tries to move forward with projects deemed nationally significant—whether mining developments, high-speed rail, or (God forbid) a new pipeline—he will run directly into Canada’s familiar pattern of internal division.
That’s when we’ll truly find out who is willing to embrace an “Elbows Up” style of nationalism. Until then, we’re left wondering: whose elbows? Defending which nation?
This woman is suing Canada for its ban on adoption under Muslim law
Inevitable that the ban would be challenged. Of course, this predominant affects Muslim families but perhaps a more appropriate challenge would be with respect to Pakistan’s application of kafala:
A Toronto woman is being denied the right to reunite with her adopted children because Ottawa does not recognize adoptions from Pakistan under Islamic rules, a court has heard.
Jameela Qadeer is the maternal aunt of Salman, Umme and Umm; she and her husband raised them as their own in Pakistan after her sister died of a brain hemorrhage in 2012. The Pakistani court has granted them guardianship of the kids and authorization to travel after their biological father, who was absent in their lives, abdicated his responsibility for their care.
An Ahmadiyya Muslim, a sect of Islam deemed heretical in Pakistan, Qadeer fled to Canada in 2017 and was granted asylum. However, her adopted kids have not been allowed to join her. Since 2013, Ottawa has stopped accepting adoption from Pakistan because it says the Islamic rules known as kafala only allow for guardianship of children, but do not sever biological ties as required by Canadian law.
In a fight to reunite the family, Qadeer and her sister’s children, along with two Muslim organizations, have taken the federal government to court, challenging the refusals of permanent residence to the children, and the constitutionality of Canada’s ban on recognizing adoption from Pakistan.
They contend that Canada’s immigration policy has disproportionately affected Muslim families and denied them equality rights under the Charter, even when a guardianship arrangement following traditional kafala is permanent and sanctioned by a foreign court.
“That categorical refusal does not only affect the individual applicants,” Armaan Kassam, lawyer for the National Council of Canadian Muslims told the opening of a three-day Federal Court hearing this week. “It affects Muslim families across Canada who adopt through foreign court-supervised guardianship processes.”
Warda Shazadi Meighen, lawyer for the children, said her clients’ biological father officially abdicated his responsibility in 2013 to Jameela Qadeer. Before leaving for Canada in 2017, Qadeer and her husband were granted judicial guardianship by a Pakistani court under national guardianship laws, giving them exclusive custody. ,,,
Khan: In Quebec, laïcité has become its own kind of religious orthodoxy
Ironic but accurate:
…In the meantime, there is no legal recourse to challenge laws that are clearly discriminatory. Those primarily affected by these bills are veiled Muslim women – whom Quebec ostensibly wants to liberate, while strengthening gender equality. In its oxymoronic quest to impose freedom, then, the government is excluding those very women from the job market and impeding their financial independence. And it’s so 1950s to hear the high priests of laïcité – François Legault, Bernard Drainville – tell women what they can and cannot wear.
Given the situation, it’s time to tell the world about Quebec’s laïcité mission. Canadian embassies, high commissions and consulates should be clear to prospective immigrants (especially from la Francophonie) that their religious freedoms and expression will be curtailed in la belle province. Here at home, the federal government, along with the governments of Ontario, New Brunswick and Manitoba, should help those adversely affected by Quebec’s laws resettle in francophone communities in the rest of Canada, if they wish to leave. They deserve an opportunity to thrive without compromising their faith.
And finally, something must be done about the notwithstanding clause. Governments show no slowdown in its use, while the wider public seems unaware of its fundamental threat to basic freedoms. Perhaps a jarring public education campaign is in order, using the spectre of Donald Trump. After all, his administration has overseen attacks on domestic human rights, circumvented judicial warrants, tried to suspend legal protections to immigrants and denied equality before the law. Little wonder he wants to absorb Canada: The notwithstanding clause would allow him to do all that legally.
Kutty | When parents are shut out of classrooms over what they wear, we have a problem
Absurd and unreasonable:
Two mothers in Quebec were recently told they could no longer volunteer at their children’s elementary school unless they removed their hijabs. For one of them, it meant being shut out of a classroom she had supported for years — not because of anything she did, but because of what she wears.
They are not alone. Across Quebec, people of faith — including Muslim women who wear hijabs, Sikhs who wear turbans, and Jewish Canadians who wear kippahs — are being pushed out of classrooms and public life unless they conceal visible expressions of their identity. In a separate incident, twelve Muslim women reportedly lost their teaching jobs because they refused to remove their hijabs. These are the lived consequences of Quebec’s secularism law, Bill 21, which prohibits many public-sector employees — including teachers, police officers and government lawyers — from wearing visible religious symbols while performing their duties.
The constitutionality of this law is now poised for its most consequential test. Canada’s Supreme Court is now hearing arguments in a landmark case examining whether Bill 21 violates fundamental rights, including freedom of religion and equality under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Quebec has invoked the notwithstanding clause — Section 33 of the Charter — a rarely used constitutional mechanism that allows governments to override certain fundamental rights, including freedom of religion and equality, for renewable five-year periods….
StatsCam: Representation of women on boards of directors and in officer positions, 2023
Useful study with breakdowns:
Statistics Canada is releasing new data on the gender composition of leadership and strategic decision-making roles within publicly traded corporations, privately held corporations and government business enterprises operating across a variety of industries in Canada.
This data helps inform the objective “More company board seats held by women, and more diversity on company boards” and the indicator “Proportion of board members who are women, by type of board” in the Leadership and democratic participation pillar of the Gender Results Framework.
Additional information and other studies and statistics related to gender and enterprises can be found in the Gender, diversity and inclusion statistics hub, the Business performance and ownership statistics portal and in the Representation of women on boards of directors and in officer positions: Visualization tool.
Women hold just under one-quarter of director positions
In 2023, women occupied just under one-quarter (23.2%) of seats on boards of directors, increasing 0.5 percentage points over the proportion of women recorded in 2022 (22.7%).
Just over half of boards (50.3%) did not include any women directors in 2023. In addition, 25.8% of boards had one woman director, while boards with two or more women directors accounted for 23.9% of the total.
Educational services has the highest representation of women directors, followed by the utilities and finance and insurance industries
Educational services had the highest proportion of women directors in 2023, with women holding 35.3% of board seats. This reflects an increase of 4.9 percentage points from 2022.
The utilities industry recorded the second-highest share in 2023, at 34.1%. Corporations in finance and insurance followed, with women representing 28.2% of board members.
The agriculture industry had the lowest proportion of women directors, with women occupying 8.8% of board seats….
Treasury Board not tracking impact of public service job cuts on equity groups
Will be curious to see the respective numbers of hirings, separations and promotions in the forthcoming TBS EE report. Hopefully, TBS will continue to provide the breakdowns by visible minority groups.
Slides from last year’s EE report.
Advocates are raising concerns about how job cuts will affect public servants in equity groups — something the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat says it’s not tracking.
The federal government has committed to cutting the number of public service jobs by about 40,000 from a 2023-24 peak of 368,000 as it looks to find savings.
Departments and agencies across the public service have started notifying staff of coming job cuts.
Barb Couperus, a spokesperson for the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat — which oversees government operations — said the office does not collect information centrally on the impact of workforce adjustment on employment equity designated groups.
Equity groups include women, Indigenous people, people with disabilities and members of visible minorities.
Couperus said heads of departments are responsible for managing their workforces.
She said departments will continue to pay “close attention” to maintaining representation and meeting their obligations under the Employment Equity Act.
The act requires federally regulated employers, including the government itself, to take steps to eliminate employment barriers and maintain proportional representation in the workplace for members of equity groups.
During layoff periods, Couperus said, departments can prioritize keeping staff from equity groups if there are gaps in representation.
Nicholas Marcus Thompson, president and CEO of the Black Class Action Secretariat, said he is “disturbed” to learn the Treasury Board isn’t tracking the impacts of job cuts.
“What that suggests is that this is not a priority for this government,” he said.
Over the past five years, the government has hired approximately 5,000 Black workers throughout the entire federal public service, said Thompson. It also has increased the number of Black executives from around 99 in 2020 to more than 220, he said.
“What we’re seeing now is that those gains are being lost as a result of workforce adjustment,” said Thompson, adding his organization has started tracking data on workforce adjustment. “Many folks have reached out to us to find out what their rights are.
“Usually with workforce adjustment, the first to go are folks that were the last to come … So far our data is showing that, despite these equity gains, it’s now turning out to be equity losses.”
Thompson said his organization wants to see the government require equity impact assessments before workforce adjustment decisions are made. It also wants the government to be transparent about the process and publish data on which demographics are being affected.
Rabia Khedr, national director of Disability Without Poverty, said people with disabilities working in the public service will be feeling anxious.
“Generally speaking, a lot of times people with disabilities may be at an entry level position, so that makes them vulnerable,” said Khedr.
The most recent employment equity report for the public service says that as of March 2024, 9.7 per cent of federal executives were people with disabilities, up from 4.6 per cent in March 2019.
Khedr also said she’s unhappy about the lack of central tracking of the impacts of job cuts on equity groups.
“That then leaves it to the individual leadership within departments to make those critical decisions,” she said.
“It really depends on the leadership and their commitment to diversity and inclusion … There’s a risk that equity-denied groups might be more vulnerable in terms of who gets cut and who stays.”
…But Mr. Roberge said police are reluctant to act when people use prayer as a form of protest, for fear of being seen as infringing on their Charter rights. “The guidelines are not clear enough in situations involving religious demonstrations,” he told the committee. The minister declined an interview request.
The scope of the new legislation is wide-ranging. In addition to tackling public prayer, it would extend the province’s workplace ban on religious symbols to anyone working in daycares, colleges, universities and private schools. Quebec’s original secularism law, which is now being challenged at the Supreme Court of Canada, banned religious symbols for some public-sector employees, including elementary and high school teachers, police officers and judges.
The new bill would also prohibit prayer and other religious practices in public institutions, effectively banning prayer rooms at Quebec colleges and universities.
Critics say the legislation is a thinly veiled attempt to exploit anti-Muslim sentiment for political gain. In a brief presented to the committee, the National Council of Canadian Muslims said Quebec Muslims “feel less and less that they belong” in the province.
Bishop Poisson said there’s no reason to treat religious demonstrations any differently from other public events. “We must be careful not to build a society where the laws prohibit everything except what is permitted,” he said.
“I want to live in a country where everything is permitted except what is prohibited. There’s a big difference.”
…I unequivocally support Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state, but I have also written repeatedly and critically about Israel’s tactics in its war on Gaza, which I believe have prolonged the conflict and created extraordinary and unnecessary human suffering.
Jewish lives aren’t more precious than Palestinian lives, and any form of advocacy for Israel that treats Palestinians as any less deserving of safety and security than Israelis isn’t just un-Christian; it’s anti-Christian. It directly contradicts the teachings of Scripture, which place Jews and Gentiles in a position of equality.
Second, internal Christian debates about whether the modern state of Israel is a fulfillment of biblical prophecy — as interesting as they can be — should be irrelevant to American foreign policy, which should be based both on American interests and American commitments to international justice and human rights.
But historic Christian antisemitism is rooted in a historic Christian argument, and it requires a specifically Christian argument in response.
Put in its most simple form, Christian antisemitism is rooted in two propositions — that Jews bear the guilt for Christ’s death (“Jews killed Jesus”), and that when the majority of Jews rejected Jesus (who was a Jew, as were all his early apostles), that God replaced his covenant with the children of Abraham with a new covenant with Christians. This idea of a new covenant that excludes the Jewish people is called “supersessionism” or “replacement theology.”
Put the two concepts together — “Jews killed Jesus” and “Christians are the chosen people now” — and you’ve got the recipe for more than 2,000 years of brutal, religiously motivated oppression.
Boller isa recent convert to Catholicism, and she — like Candace Owens — wields her newfound faith like a sword. But perhaps they both need to spend a little more time learning and a lot less time talking.
First, let’s put to rest the indefensible idea that “the Jews” killed Christ. As the Second Vatican Council taught, “The Jewish authorities and those who followed their lead pressed for the death of Christ; still, what happened in his passion cannot be charged against all the Jews, without distinction, then alive, nor against the Jews of today.”
This isn’t a statement of high theological principle as much as basic common sense. Convicting an entire people, for all time, of the crimes of a few religious leaders is a moral monstrosity that runs counter to every tenet of Christian justice.
Second, Boller’s own church teaches that there is a deep bond between Christians and Jews. Last year, Robert P. George, a noted Catholic political philosopher at Princeton, wrote a powerful essayin Sapir, a Jewish journal of ideas, in which he described the relationship between the Jewish people and the Catholic Church as an “unbreakable covenant.”
As George writes, Pope Benedict XVI explicitly rejected the idea that the Jewish people “ceased to be the bearer of the promises of God.” Pope John Paul II said that the Catholic Church has “a relationship” with Judaism “which we do not have with any other religion.” He also said that Judaism is “intrinsic” and not “extrinsic” to Christianity, and that Jews were Christians’ “elder brothers” in the faith.
Indeed, paragraph 121 of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that “The Old Testament is an indispensable part of Sacred Scripture. Its books are divinely inspired and retain a permanent value, for the Old Covenant has never been revoked.”
I don’t believe for a moment that the Catholic view is the only expression of Christian orthodoxy. I know quite a few Protestant and Catholic supersessionists who are not antisemitic, but I highlight the words of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI because they starkly demonstrate the incompatibility of antisemitism with Christian orthodoxy.
But one doesn’t have to agree with Catholic teaching (or its Protestant analogues) to be fairly called a Zionist — a Christian Zionist, even — because one believes in the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state.
The reason is rooted in Scripture’s commitment to equal dignity for all people, regardless of ethnicity, class or sex. As an extension of that commitment, no group of people should be subjected to abuse or persecution — much less genocide.
In this formulation, a so-called Christian Zionist would also likely be a Christian Kurdist (not a phrase you hear every day) or have a Christian commitment to Palestinian statehood. Kurds and Palestinians have also been historically oppressed, denied a home and deprived of the right to defend themselves.
In those circumstances, statehood isn’t a matter of fulfilling prophecies; it’s about safety and security. It’s about self-determination and the preservation of basic human rights. And if you think that can be done without supporting statehood, then I’d challenge you to consider the long and terrible historical record.
A consistent Christian Zionist would oppose both the heinous massacre of Jews on Oct. 7, 2023, and the aggressive, violent expansion of settlements in the West Bank. He would stand resolutely against Iranian efforts to exterminate the Jewish state and against any Israeli war crimes in Gaza.
Embracing the idea that the modern state of Israel is a direct fulfillment of biblical prophecies and therefore must be supported by the United States for theological reasons can lead us to dangerous places — to a belief, in essence, in permanent Israeli righteousness, no matter the nation’s conduct and no matter the character of its government.
But the opposite idea — that Christians have replaced the Jews in the eyes of God, and there is no longer any special purpose for Jews in God’s plan — has its own profound dangers. It creates a sense of righteousness in religious persecution, and it has caused untold suffering throughout human history.
The better Christian view rejects both dangerous extremes, recognizes the incalculable dignity and worth of every human being, and is Zionist in the sense that it believes that one of history’s most persecuted groups deserves a national home.
And since Christians have persecuted Jews so viciously in the past (and some still do today), we have a special responsibility to make amends, to repair the damage that the church has done. That begins by turning to the new Christian antisemites and shouting “No!” Ancient hatreds born from ancient heresies have no place in the church today.
“Neuf ans se sont écoulés depuis la tuerie de la grande mosquée de Québec, mais des séquelles se font encore sentir, ravivées par les lois sur la laïcité adoptées par le gouvernement caquiste, qui « encouragent la xénophobie et le racisme », selon les leaders de la communauté musulmane de la capitale.
Le 29 janvier 2017, au moment où Alexandre Bissonnette faisait irruption au milieu de la prière pour ouvrir le feu sur les fidèles, une fillette se tenait entre le tireur et ses victimes. « C’est ma fille. Elle avait huit ans », a raconté mercredi Nizar Ghali, blessé par deux balles à l’abdomen lors de la tragédie.
Le père de famille, ce soir-là, a frôlé la mort sous les yeux de son enfant. Dans les jours qui ont suivi l’attaque, pendant que la ville se recueillait, consternée, et pleurait les six défunts, Nizar Ghali, lui, luttait pour sa vie à l’hôpital, plongé dans le coma.
Aujourd’hui tiré d’affaire — « le corps va bien, l’esprit va quand même assez bien aussi », précisait-il mercredi au Devoir à la veille des commémorations —, il travaille à combattre les « amalgames » qui font le lit, à son avis, du racisme et de la xénophobie.
“Et il en a long à dire sur la vision de la laïcité promue par le gouvernement caquiste. La loi 21 sur l’interdiction des signes religieux et son expansion dans les garderies subventionnées par l’État prévue par le projet de loi 9 passent mal. « Les femmes voilées se sentent lésées par ces lois-là parce qu’elles estiment qu’[elles] sont faites spécifiquement pour elles », explique le docteur diplômé de l’Université Laval. « Pour nous, ça envoie le message que l’État ne veut pas que la femme musulmane prenne de l’expansion dans la société. »
Sa fille, aujourd’hui âgée de 17 ans, a décidé de porter le hidjab. Le père, lui, craint que ce choix ne constitue un obstacle à son épanouissement. « Ce n’est pas le passé qui nous inquiète, c’est l’avenir, confie Nizar Ghali. Elle arrive à l’âge où tout le monde commence à entrevoir un petit peu son avenir. Il est encore trop tôt pour savoir quel genre de job elle va chercher ou quel domaine d’études elle va poursuivre, mais si elle rencontre des embûches, c’est sûr que ça va être de plus en plus difficile pour elle. Si, au contraire, elle trouve une société qui l’accueille comme elle est, je présume que ça va la soulager après ce qu’elle a vécu. »”…
“Nine years have passed since the killing of the Great Mosque in Quebec City, but sequelae are still being felt, revived by the laws on secularism adopted by the Caquist government, which “encourage xenophobia and racism,” according to the leaders of the capital’s Muslim community.
On January 29, 2017, when Alexandre Bissonnette broke into the middle of prayer to open fire on the faithful, a girl stood between the shooter and his victims. “She’s my daughter. She was eight years old, “said Nizar Ghali on Wednesday, wounded by two bullets in the abdomen during the tragedy.
The father of the family, that evening, come close to death before the eyes of his child. In the days following the attack, while the city was gathering, dismayed, and mourning the six deceased, Nizar Ghali was fighting for his life in the hospital, immersed in a coma.
Today out of trouble – “the body is fine, the mind is still quite well too,” he said Wednesday at Le Devoir on the eve of the commemorations – he is working to fight the “amalgams” that make the bed, in his opinion, of racism and xenophobia.
“And he has a lot to say about the vision of secularism promoted by the Caquist government. Bill 21 on the prohibition of religious signs and its expansion into state-subsidized daycare centers provided for by Bill 9 is doing badly. “Women with veils feel aged by these laws because they believe that [they] are made specifically for them,” explains the doctor graduated from Université Laval. “For us, it sends the message that the State does not want Muslim women to expand in society. ”
His daughter, now 17 years old, decided to wear the hijab. The father, for his part, fears that this choice will be an obstacle to his development. “It’s not the past that worries us, it’s the future,” says Nizar Ghali. She reaches the age where everyone begins to see a little bit of her future. It is still too early to know what kind of job she will look for or what field of study she will pursue, but if she encounters pitfalls, it is certain that it will be more and more difficult for her. If, on the contrary, she finds a society that welcomes her as she is, I assume that it will relieve her after what she has experienced. “…
…Some white people use the N-word, despite the fact that doing so is deeply offensive to Black people. Black people are entitled to call such individuals racists. By the same token, anti-Zionists may think it’s legitimate to call for the destruction of the Jewish state in Israel. However, most Jews are entitled to call such people antisemites because, for them, support for the existence of the Jewish state is part of what it means to be a Jew.
Finally, based on the results of a 2024 survey, Lewis and Balsam assert that 49 per cent of Canada’s Jews are not Zionists. This claim is misleading. The poll found that 51 per cent of Canadian Jews consider themselves to be Zionists, 15 per cent express ambivalence about referring to themselves as Zionists, seven per cent say they “don’t know” and 27 per cent say they are not Zionists. However, the survey also found that 94 per cent of Canadian Jews support the existence of Israel as a Jewish state.
According to standard dictionaries and general encyclopedias, Zionists are people who support the existence of a Jewish state in the Jews’ ancestral homeland. Such supporters remain Zionists even if, like me, they favour the creation of a demilitarized Palestinian state, oppose the extent of Israel’s military actions in Gaza, express outrage at Jewish settler attacks on Palestinian civilians in the West Bank and support equal rights for all citizens of Israel, including Arabs.
What, then, does it mean when 94 per cent of Canadian Jews are Zionists by the dictionary definition yet 49 per cent of them decline to call themselves Zionists?
I decided to find out by conducting a follow-up survey in 2025 asking the participants in the 2024 poll to clarify the matter. The follow-up revealed that many participants are reluctant to call themselves Zionists because the term has developed a strongly negative connotation, under the weight of frequent and often extreme attacks against everything connected to Israel in the media, schools, universities, workplaces and in the streets.
Nearly all Canadian Jews are Zionists by the dictionary definition, but nearly half of them don’t want to be called Zionists because the term has become a pejorative. According to the poll, a mere one per cent of Canadian Jews say they are anti-Zionists like Lewis and Balsam.
It seems clear that Lewis and Balsam’s interpretations are guided by ideological animus. Antisemitism is a major problem in Canada. Rhetoric and actions denying the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish state are antisemitic according to the great majority of Canadian Jews. With the exception of a tiny minority, including Lewis and Balsam, Canadian Jews remain steadfast in their support for a Jewish state in the Jews’ ancestral homeland.
Multicultural Meanderings 