Australia: Citizenship laws ‘not a bravado issue’ says Malcolm Turnbull

2015/06/04 1 Comment

Observing the polarized debate within the Australian Cabinet over citizenship revocation, I can only wonder whether there was a similar debate behind closed doors in the Canadian Cabinet.

I suspect not. Despite the Harper government’s discipline, some glimmer of internal disagreement would likely have become known had it been major:

[Communications Minister and former Liberal party leader] Turnbull has warned that the fight against terrorism is “not a bravado issue” and emphasised the importance of safeguarding the rule of law in Australia.

The communications minister and former Liberal party leader said terrorists “want to destroy us because they hate the rule of law” and he argued a controversial proposal to strip sole nationals of their Australian citizenship raised “very big legal and practical issues”.

Turnbull’s comments provide an insight into the Coalition’s internal dispute over how to deal with the citizenship of Australians suspected of involvement in terrorism. The government has agreed to introduce a bill to give the immigration minister, Peter Dutton, the power to revoke the citizenship of dual nationals linked to terrorism, but deferred a decision on powers to deal with sole nationals after a cabinet backlash last week. Turnbull was among those cabinet critics.

“What is the essence of a democracy? Some people would say a democracy is one where the majority get to do what they want. That’s not a democracy. That’s a tyranny,” Turnbull said at a media conference in Queanbeyan on Wednesday.

“The genius of a democracy governed by the rule of law, our democracy, is that it both empowers the majority through the ballot box, and constrains the majority, its government, so that it is bound by law.”

Turnbull added: “Why does Daesh [another term for Islamic State] hate us? Why do they want to kill us? Why do they want to kill, destroy our society? They want to destroy us because they hate the rule of law.

“They hate the fact that the government has to stand up – can be stood up by citizens and held to account. They hate the fact that we have freedom of speech. They hate the fact that we are a free society governed by law not just by whatever the direction of one religious leader is from time to time.

“Our freedoms are absolutely critical and it is important that we have a debate about this but I just want to be very clear … some people like to suggest that some people are tougher on terrorism or tougher on national security than others.

“Let me say this to you – honest people, knowledgeable people, really well-informed people can have very different views about what the right measures are on national security and have very different views about the right balance between, say, citizenship and national security.”

Citizenship laws ‘not a bravado issue’ says Malcolm Turnbull | Australia news | The Guardian.

Filed under Citizenship, Revocation Tagged with ,

Mary Campbell: History shows we need a good correctional investigator

2015/06/04 Leave a comment

Former DG of Corrections and Criminal Justice Directorate at Public Safety Canada, Mary Campbell, on the non-reappointment of Howard Sapers, the current correctional investigator:

What is not needed is a “political friend” of the likes of many of this government’s appointments. It’s not just inmates’ safety that depends on this, it’s your safety, ultimately.

Mary Campbell: History shows we need a good correctional investigator | Ottawa Citizen.

Filed under Government Tagged with , ,

Buying Your St. Kitts Citizenship May Get More Expensive Soon

2015/06/04 Leave a comment

The risks of citizenship for sale and who it appears to attract:

While the government’s citizenship-by-investment program, in place since 1984, helped St. Kitts & Nevis weather the global financial crisis, it has earned the country criticism as well. Canada in November revoked St. Kitts & Nevis citizens’ visa-free travel. The U.S., which offers its own residency-for-investment program starting at $1 million, issued a financial advisory against holders of citizenship-by-investment passports, saying Iranian nationals used the St. Kitts program to evade sanctions on their country.

The passport deal “is attractive to illicit actors because the program, as administered, maintains lax controls as to who may be granted citizenship,” Treasury said.

The program injected more than $74 million into the $766 million St. Kitts & Nevis economy in 2013, according to a budget presentation last year by then-Prime Minister Denzil Douglas. The IMF forecast revenue from the program at about $37 million per year from 2015-2017.

The island’s success has inspired governments from Cyprus to Grenada to create similar incentives for investment. For the buyer, the program can offer visa-free travel, a safe haven from political instability or a tool for avoiding taxes.

Newly minted citizens aren’t required to live on the islands, or even visit them, according to the government, whose webpage on frequently asked questions about the program begins with “Where is St. Kitts and Nevis?”

Buying Your St. Kitts Citizenship May Get More Expensive Soon – Bloomberg Business.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

We need skilled footwork around religious freedom, gender equity: Sheema Khan

2015/06/04 Leave a comment

Further to my earlier post (Girl players leave high school soccer game after complaints from Muslim boys’ team), Sheema Khan on religious reasonable accommodation. A somewhat meandering piece, and her conclusion, in calling for “wisdom and aplomb” is harder in practice than in theory. But nevertheless to be aimed for:

In 2007, a Montreal synagogue paid for a neighbouring YMCA to replace its windows with frosted glass, so that the synagogue’s male students would not be distracted by spandex-clad women exercising next door. Once YMCA members found out, a protest ensued, adding fuel to a fiery Quebec debate about religious accommodation that continues unabated to this day.

In the soccer case, teams should abide by ROPSSAA regulations, or forfeit a match from the outset when gender equity is an issue. Teams must accept the forfeit, rather than maximize goal output at the expense of female teammates.

There will probably be further collisions between religious freedom and gender equity. Each should be handled on a case-by-case basis, guided by Charter principles, with wisdom and aplomb, without recourse to incendiary language or political demagoguery.

We need skilled footwork around religious freedom, gender equity – The Globe and Mail.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

U.S. Supreme Court affirms religious rights in Abercrombie & Fitch case

2015/06/03 Leave a comment

Reasonable accommodation example. Will see how the lower court rules in terms of the specifics but at least the general principle has been confirmed:

The U.S. Supreme Court strengthened civil rights protections Monday for employees and job applicants who need special treatment in the workplace because of their religious beliefs.

The justices sided with a Muslim woman who did not get hired after she showed up to a job interview with clothing retailer Abercrombie & Fitch wearing a black headscarf.

The headscarf, or hijab, violated the company’s strict dress code, since changed, for employees who work in its retail stores.

Employers generally have to accommodate job applicants and employees with religious needs if the employer at least has an idea that such accommodation is necessary, Justice Antonin Scalia said in his opinion for the court.

Job applicant Samantha Elauf did not tell her interviewer she was Muslim. But Scalia said that Abercrombie “at least suspected” that Elauf wore a headscarf for religious reasons. “That is enough,” Scalia said in an opinion for seven justices.

U.S. federal civil rights law gives religious practices “favoured treatment” that forbids employers from firing or not hiring people based on their observance of religion, Scalia said. The federal civil rights law known as Title VII requires employers to make accommodations for employees’ religious beliefs in most instances. Elauf’s case turned on how employers are supposed to know when someone has a religious need to be accommodated.

The decision does not, by itself, resolve her case. Instead, it will return to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Denver, which earlier ruled against her.

“While the Supreme Court reversed the Tenth Circuit decision, it did not determine that [Abercrombie & Fitch] discriminated against Ms. Elauf. We will determine our next steps in the litigation,” company spokeswoman Carlene Benz said in an email.

Some business groups said Monday’s ruling will force employers to make assumptions about applicants’ religious beliefs.

“Shifting this burden to employers sets an unclear and confusing standard making business owners extremely vulnerable to inevitable discrimination lawsuits,” said Karen Harned, a top lawyer at the National Federation of Independent Business. “Whether employers ask an applicant about religious needs or not, there is a good chance they will be sued.”

Jenny Yang, chairwoman of the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, praised the court for “affirming that employers may not make an applicant’s religious practice a factor in employment decisions.” The commission had sued on Elauf’s behalf.

As to the protestations of the National Federation of Independent Business, it does not appear to me too difficult to make the assumption that someone wearing a cross, a kippa, a turban or a hijab is likely doing so for religious reasons.

U.S. Supreme Court affirms religious rights in Abercrombie & Fitch case – World – CBC News.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Racial Diversity Grows On Network Television, But Will Quality Lag Behind?

2015/06/03 Leave a comment

For those who watch US network TV, a take on the upcoming season in relation to diversity and quality:

The good news from the big broadcast networks’ upfront presentations earlier this month, where they revealed their new shows for the next season, is that television’s turn toward inclusion seems like more than a passing fad.

Of 42 new shows planned for next TV season on the Big Four broadcast networks, 13 series (or 30 percent), either star non-white actors, feature a mostly non-white cast or feature non-white actors as co-leads. Given that we’re 15 years past a TV season when no new show on the top four networks had any non-white actors in the cast at all, those numbers look like progress.

These numbers also suggest that talk about white actors losing parts en masse to great crowds of performers of color — sparked by a Deadline.com story filled with anonymous sources that read like the dying gasp of Hollywood’s white, male privilege — was overblown.

But there may be bad news: A look at early information and trailers for many of these shows — most pilots aren’t available to critics yet — hint that the new crop of programs may not be nearly as groundbreaking or innovative as the stuff we saw this past TV season.

… Regardless of the economics of television diversity, recent history indicates that networks have to take a more active part in seeking out incisive, groundbreaking shows and roles for non-white stars – in the way Fox has encouraged producers to maintain diversity on its recent shows.

The networks also need to empower non-white producers to create shows, in the way ABC has worked with 12 Years a Slave screenwriter John Ridley to create American Crime, and Fox backed The Butler director Lee Daniels to make Empire.

It’s part of the constant struggle to create television that reflects the racial diversity of America without amplifying its problems with stereotyping and prejudice. And what’s obvious from a look at the new shows coming next season is that the struggle is about to get more complicated than it has ever been.

Racial Diversity Grows On Network Television, But Will Quality Lag Behind? : Code Switch : NPR.

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

English test should be mandatory for people wanting citizenship in Australia, says Liberal MP Sharman Stone

2015/06/03 Leave a comment

Always interesting to see how Canada and Australia look to each other and adopt similar practices. Minister Kenney, early in his mandate as Secretary of State for Multiculturalism, visited Australia to learn from the then Howard government’s approach to multiculturalism, identity and related issues.

Discover Canada‘s approach was influenced by some of the experience of the Australian “history wars,” the debates over their historical narrative. Express Entry was largely modelled on Australia’s equivalent.

Now the Abbott government is taking a Canadian approach to citizenship revocation for treason or terror and this proposal for greater rigour in language testing may be a variant of the Canadian approach of pre-screening for language competency using an equivalency-based approach (rather than a separate test to administer):

People wanting to become citizens in Australia should have to undertake an English language test, Liberal MP Sharman Stone says, in a push to overhaul the current citizenship requirements.

Would-be citizens are currently asked 20 questions in the Australian “citizenship test” about Australia’s beliefs, values, its law system and Australian people. Questions are multiple choice and require a basic knowledge of English and Australian laws to pass it.

But Dr Stone says the requirements are “slack” and not rigorous enough, supporting a suggestion in a government discussion paper released last week that would require new citizens to sit an English exam before they are announced as Australians.

The paper also suggests “standardising English-language requirements, to ensure citizens have adequate language ability, taking into account particular circumstances such as age”.

Dr Stone said it was not a benefit to the individual, nor for Australia, if people cannot speak English in Australia, drawing from experience at citizenship ceremonies in her Victorian electorate of Murray where she estimates a number of new citizens cannot read, write or speak basic English.

“The citizenship service is a mockery,” she told Fairfax Media.

Knowing the basics of the English language is imperative for people to be able to participate in the Australian society, including voting, jury duty or understanding “Australian responsibilities”, she said.

“It makes me very sorry when people who come into my office and say they need an interpreter and are feeling alienated,” she said.

English test should be mandatory for people wanting citizenship in Australia, says Liberal MP Sharman Stone.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Foreign donations to foster extremist ideology fly under Canada’s radar

2015/06/03 2 Comments

More on alleged foreign funding of fundamentalism, and the irony that these are from the same countries that are opposed to ISIS:

It has been widely suspected for years that wealthy Gulf Arabs from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar have been bankrolling conservative Wahhabi and Salafist institutions and teachings in western countries. The strict and puritanical interpretations of Islam have no direct links to terrorism. Still, security experts say the conservative ideologies offer fertile ground for individuals contemplating jihad.

Richard Fadden, the prime minister’s national security adviser, told the committee in April that money is coming into Canada to promote extremist ideology and much of it is going to religious institutions. That followed similar testimony to the committee by an imam who manages 13 mosques across the country.

“I think it’s fair to say, without commenting on the particular country of origin, there are monies coming into this country which are advocating this kind of approach to life,” said Fadden.

“A lot of these funds, I think, are directed to religious institutions or quasi-religious institutions. It’s very difficult in this country to start poking about, if you’ll forgive my English, religious institutions because of the respect that we have for freedom of religion.”

There are no restrictions on non-resident charitable donations coming into Canada, provided they are not from a banned terrorist organization. Most donations arrive by bank wires, which CRA does not have the ability to track because it does not have access to banking transactional records or money services business records.

Instead, non-resident gifts of more than $10,000 must be disclosed by the charities. Beyond that, however, Canada Revenue has no way of knowing how much of that money is directed to Islamic religious and educational programming.

“We know that that’s no ideal and we want to be able to collect better information and we’re looking at that actively now,” Hawara told the committee. (The agency is able to track foreign donations directed for political purposes and routinely audits the appropriateness of all charities’ activities and whether they support the organizations’ charitable objectives, among other things.)

The millions of dollars coming to Canada from wealthy Gulf states are for all sorts of purposes, including to support organizations that may ultimately be determined to be fronts for terrorist organizations, or affiliated with them, said Christine Duhaime, a leading expert on terrorist financing and money-laundering.

“It tends not to be funds directly sent to support overt acts of terrorism in large volumes (here). If we had that happening, terrorist groups in Canada would be more powerful and already causing damage to critical infrastructure. Yet, there is funding for so-called extremist purposes, including for terrorist propaganda.”

Foreign donations to foster extremist ideology fly under Canada’s radar | Ottawa Citizen.

Filed under Radicalization Tagged with ,

Canadians adopting from Muslim countries caught in legal limbo

2015/06/03 Leave a comment

Seems a bit odd given that the US and UK permit adoptions from Muslim countries, and CIC’s rationale is not articulated beyond the usual process reasons:

Canada maintains that kafala does not qualify as adoption, arguing that the arrangement does not sever legal ties with a child’s biological parents.

Other Western countries, including the United States and United Kingdom, have policies allowing kafala arrangements to be legally recognized there.

Canada’s position on kafala can leave families who have received guardianship in Muslim countries caught in a bureaucratic web that appears to be unique to Canada, and unable to bring their children home.

Nusrat Munshi obtained legal guardianship of Aleeza just two months after the little girl was abandoned at a Karachi orphanage. (Submitted by Nusrat Munshi)

Citizenship and Immigration Canada spokeswoman Nancy Caron says it is not Canada’s policy to discriminate against any country when it comes to adoption.

“Eligibility of individual countries for inter-country adoption is determined on a case-by-case basis by the provinces and territories based on Canadian laws, and with respect for international laws as well as the statutes and wishes of the originating country.”

However, Amirzadeh says whether it’s an official government policy or not, the red tape effectively discriminates against Muslim families. “It’s like saying, ‘You’re born there, so you’re doomed.'”

And while a formal ban on adoptions from Muslim countries isn’t currently official policy, Canada hasn’t entirely ruled one out.

Documents obtained through access to information show that in 2013, the provinces and territories debated a ban on adoptions not only from Pakistan, but other Muslim countries, too.

At least two provinces, British Columbia and Ontario, refused the proposal, according to the documents.

“At this time, there is no intention of extending this closure to inter-country adoptions from other countries, although this does not limit such actions being taken in the future if determined to be warranted,” Citizenship and Immigration Canada wrote then.

Michael Blugerman, a Toronto-based adoption agent who was licensed to process adoptions from Pakistan for years until the 2013 ban, says while the government needs to make sure adoptions are legitimate, lumping cases from Muslim countries together isn’t the answer.

“It’s what I’d call a cultural-religious-profiling problem,” he says.

Meanwhile, Canada and Pakistan differ over the reasons for the adoption ban.

Citizenship and Immigration spokesperson Remi Lariviere says that adoptions from Pakistan were suspended through “ongoing procedural evaluations by the Government of Canada with input from the Government of Pakistan.”

But it seems Pakistan is not objecting to adoptions.

“It was a decision of the Government of Canada,” says spokesperson Nazia Khalid of Pakistan’s High Commission in Ottawa. “If they decide not to allow adoption, what can the Pakistani government say about it?”

Canadians adopting from Muslim countries caught in legal limbo – Canada – CBC News.

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Conservative judges, bureaucracy, Senate a likely constraint on future government: Atkin

2015/06/02 Leave a comment

David Akin on the possible constraints facing an incoming new non-Conservative government, using PM Harper’s 2006 language regarding Liberal constraints on an incoming Conservative government:

“The reality is that we will have, for some time to come, a Liberal Senate, a Liberal civil service, at least at the senior levels where they’ve been appointed by the Liberals, and courts that have been appointed by the Liberals,” Harper said. ”These are obviously checks on the power of a Conservative government. That’s why I say … there is certainly no absolute power for a Conservative government and no real, true majority.”

Though all those checks and balances might seem obvious, the Martin Liberals used this comment by Harper as an attack point, to suggest that, absent all those Liberal judges and bureaucrats, Harper would impose a Conservative revolution on the otherwise peaceable kingdom that was Canada in 2006.

The Liberal attacks were successful to a point: They helped keep Harper’s win to a minority.

But now, more than eight years later, as we look at the polls and consider the possibility of another ideologically driven party, the New Democrats, potentially forming government, it’s useful to consider the wisdom of what Harper said at the end of that 2006 campaign.

Right now, we have a Conservative Senate. There is not a single New Democrat senator. That’s a virtue now for NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair, but it could be a liability if he becomes prime minister and needs a Senate full of Conservatives and Liberals to pass his government’s legislation.

If course, the NDP has vowed to get rid of the Senate altogether. Good luck doing that without your own senators, New Democrats!

What about the civil service? Public sector union bosses might prefer a New Democrat government but an entire generation of leaders and managers in the civil service is now in place that were hand-picked by the Harper Conservatives. The Clerk of the Privy Council — the top bureaucrat among the 257,000 federal bureaucrats — is Janice Charette. She cut her political teeth as a former chief of staff to former Progressive Conservative leader Jean Charest and other PC ministers before going into the ‘non-partisan’ public service.

And then there are those judges. When Harper looked at the Supreme Court in 2006, all he saw was Liberals. But now, if Thomas Mulcair becomes PM and looks at the court, he will see 7 of 9 justices appointed by Harper, one — the Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin — appointed by Brian Mulroney and just one appointed by a Liberal PM.

By Harper’s own logic of 2006, between the Senate, the bureaucracy and the judiciary, there would be much to constrain an NDP government should that happen this fall.

Harper made that point in 2006, was attacked for making it, and won a minority government. Will Mulcair make the same point in this election season with the same effect?

Comments on senior officials is of interest. Suspect some may be vulnerable that have appeared to stray the line (but doubt that Charette would be considered among them).

And of course, as others have argued (and I in my book, Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism), the Harper government distrust of the public service never was fully overcome.

Conservative judges, bureaucracy, Senate a likely constraint on future governmen.

Filed under Government Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →