Alberta: Changing Face of the Legislature

As part of finalizing my book, Multiculturalism in Canada: Evidence and Anecdote, I have been updating provincial political representation, particularly for Alberta given the recent dramatic change with the election of a NDP government.

The Chart below shows current representation from a diversity lens. Alberta joins British Columbia in being one of two provinces with gender parity in Cabinet, and is the only province with a governing party with gender parity in caucus. Visible minority representation is less than the number of visible minorities who are citizens (9.2 percent of MLAs compared to 14.4 percent):

Alberta Legislature 2015

The previous legislature is shown below:

Alberta_Legislature_2014

Visible minority figures are derived from a combination of names and photos. With the 2015 results, bios are not yet posted so these may not be exact.

Mark Saunders working to overcome ‘carding’ criticism

Saunders really is an impressive communicator, both in terms of the substance of what he says as well as the way he says it:

Chief Saunders also said that while he is committed to halting random police checks of citizens just going about their business, carding suspected gang members is vital to keeping the city safe. “If it’s done right, it protects people.”

To those who say that carding amounts to a form of racial profiling, targeting a disproportionate number of racial-minority residents, Toronto’s first black police chief said: “We’re not sending officers into areas because people are brown or black. We’re looking at the charts. We’re looking at where the violence is occurring and it’s about six per cent of the geographics of the city. And so we’re putting officers in there because that’s where the violent crimes are occurring.”

When critics respond that that amounts to racial profiling by demographics, “Well, I’m, like, going, ‘Can someone help me out here? Like, we’re getting all the problems but can someone give me a solution?’”

Still does not completely explain the weakness of the earlier report he was responsible for (Toronto police Chief Mark Saunders’s secret carding report) but situates carding within an evidence-based approach targeting areas with higher crime rates.

Mark Saunders working to overcome ‘carding’ criticism – The Globe and Mail.

Adil Charkaoui: The angriest man in Montreal

Good in-depth piece by Martin Patriquin on Charkaoui:

So: is Quebec’s self-appointed Muslim spokesperson a simple teacher? Or a dangerous enabler of radical Islam?

Charkaoui effectively wears two hats, says scholar Amghar, and is skilled at tailoring his message for whomever is listening. “Charkaoui’s discourse in combatting Islamophobia isn’t dangerous. He isn’t calling for attacks in Quebec or Canada, and he knows he can’t invoke or invite terrorism or jihad, because Canada’s political context wouldn’t allow for it,” Amghar says. “But there is a sort of split in his personality. His point of view is that it’s totally normal and legitimate that there are groups like [Islamic State] and al-Nusra Front in Syria, if only to fight against Bashar al-Assad’s dictatorship, and for the creation of an Islamic state.”

This double-edged existence—part conciliation, part outrage—is on display on Charkaoui’s own websites. Following the arrests of the 10 would-be jihadists in Montreal this month, Charkaoui’s east-end Muslim community centre quickly published a concerned news release. “The Islamic Community Centre of East End Montreal would like to remind that it takes the question of radicalization very seriously, and reiterates its commitment to contribute to the harmonious integration of the Muslim community in Quebec and Canada,” it reads.

Related: Maclean’s On The Hill politics podcast on terror arrests

Just a few hours later, Charkaoui’s Collective Against Islamophobia issued its own release. The tone was markedly different. “Ten arrests! It’s an unexplained phenomenon that leaves us skeptical, just as the government is adopting harsh security laws like [anti-terror legislation] C-51!” it reads, in part. “What is sure, this can only benefit one governing political party: the Conservatives!”

Give him this: Denouncing radicalism and the arrest of alleged radicals on the same day takes chutzpah that only Adil Charkaoui, with all his apparent contradictions, could muster.

Adil Charkaoui: The angriest man in Montreal – Macleans.ca

La déradicalisation doit passer par la religion, selon un rapport

More on the Vidino report and the challenge for security and other government agencies to engage on the religious side (see Beware of the Muslim Brotherhood, expert warns):

L’équipe de chercheurs à la source de l’étude s’est penchée sur les activités virtuelles de djihadistes nord-américains afin d’en disséquer le contenu. Et selon l’auteur principal, les conclusions qu’ils en ont tirées pourraient s’appliquer aux 10 jeunes Montréalais arrêtés la fin de semaine dernière à Montréal.

Le document de 74 pages analyse les communications sur les réseaux sociaux de sept djihadistes américains arrêtés ou tués dans les dernières années. Les chercheurs soulignent que la plupart de ces individus vivent une première phase de radicalisation pendant laquelle ils « recherchent avidement des connaissances et de l’information » sur l’islam. Ensuite vient une phase où « les affirmations, souvent débordantes de confiance, prennent le pas sur les questions ».

Les djihadistes étudiés s’intéressent notamment au niveau de crédibilité à accorder à différents érudits de l’islam, ainsi qu’à l’« hijra », un terme utilisé pour désigner l’émigration en terre musulmane.

« Tout effort de déradicalisation devrait, sans négliger d’autres aspects, prendre en considération le fait que les enjeux religieux sont au centre de la réflexion de ceux qui embrassent le djihadisme », indique le document. Au téléphone, son auteur principal a insisté sur cet élément.

« C’est très difficile pour des sociétés séculaires comme le Canada ou les États-Unis, mais ce sont des individus qui ont faim de connaissances religieuses. », explique Lorenzo Vidino, directeur d’un programme sur l’extrémisme à la George Washington University.

L’étude souligne aussi l’importance que prennent les théories du complot dans les discussions virtuelles qu’ont les individus radicalisés. « Ceux qui promeuvent des idéologies extrémistes et y adhèrent réfutent souvent les explications officielles ou communément acceptées relatives aux événements historiques importants », indique le rapport. Selon ses auteurs, les djihadistes allaient jusqu’à douter de l’existence de certains chefs terroristes recherchés par les gouvernements occidentaux.

La déradicalisation doit passer par la religion, selon un rapport | Philippe Teisceira-Lessard | Affaires criminelles.

Research-Based Evidence in Public Policy: MRIA Report

Interesting set of observations on government use of research-based evidence in a recent interview-based study by the Marketing Research and Intelligence Association (MRIA). Good cross-section of public servants (mainly former, including myself), politicians, political staff, evaluation experts, representatives of think tanks and NGOs, academics, POR experts and the media.

Flattered to be in included in such a group and the observations and conclusions reinforce many of the same themes as Policy Arrogance or Innocent Bias: Resetting Citizenship and Multiculturalism:

Subordinating evidence to politics was the most frequently identified perceived shortcoming in the way government uses information. This was seen to take various forms, including:

  1. ‘Cherry-picking’ or focussing on information that supports a certain agenda or policy and at the same time ignoring or dismissing information that does not.
  2. Employing a self-serving, partisan bias in the decision- making process (e.g., what will enhance electoral success rather than what constitutes sound policy).
  3. Basing policy on hunches, unfounded assumptions, or anecdotal evidence instead of research-based evidence.
  4. Giving greater importance to the opinions of a certain audience even when the issue relates to a broader population.

Three other perceived shortcomings in the way government uses data were also identified relatively frequently:

  1. Insufficient analysis of data (e.g., focussing on nation-wide findings without examining regional variations).
  2. Focusing on shorter-term considerations (e.g., the electoral cycle, the next budget) instead of longer-term considerations (e.g., the demographics of an aging population and its implications).
  3. Too many restrictions on data linking and sharing which ultimately impedes the government’s ability to collect and use relevant information.

Ashby: Proof of love is not as simple as immigration officials would have it

One of the best pieces of commentary on the CIC bogus marriage training guide (no longer used but no clarity on what the current training tools say):

A Citizenship and Immigration Canada training guide that leaked last week has exposed the inner workings of CIC’s unique perspective on what makes a good marriage.

Apparently, what makes a good marriage is having a lot of money. Money for a diamond ring. (DeBeers must be pleased. Diamonds are forever, which is approximately as long as it takes to obtain a permanent residency card.) Money for a big wedding — more than “small groups of friends.” (That dream elopement with just a handful of friends and family, away from big fat wedding drama? Sorry, lovebirds. Size matters.) Money for a big wedding venue — no restaurants allowed. (Rubber chicken dinners and serviette swans for everyone! It’ll be romantic, just like an annual general meeting!) Money for a honeymoon. And if one of you comes from a country without much money? Well, your marriage might not be valid.

But above all, the CIC is looking for body language (or at least was when the document, dated 2007, was issued.) Like the “body language experts” employed by supermarket tabloids and gossip rags, officials at the CIC believe they can learn the truth about a relationship based on who is smiling, how far apart they stand, and the expressions on their faces. The irony of a group of Canadians judging the citizens of other nations on their ability to emote and show affection is apparently lost on the CIC. Canada is a great country full of wonderful people, all of whom do everything possible to avoid each others’ eyes.

This dependence on photographic evidence is line with the 2014 findings of McMaster University professor Vic Satzewich, believed to be one of only two Canadian researchers in 50 years permitted to investigate CIC’s visa policies up close. Over two years, Satzewich visited 11 of CIC’s overseas visa application sites. From Hong Kong to Colombia, Canadian officials judge marriages by body language, number of guests at a wedding, seeming amount spent on the wedding, and the contents of love letters. His conclusion? That the system was profoundly vulnerable to racist social engineering.

“The system allows racial biases to creep in the selection process. They could use their authority to put it bluntly and crudely, to keep Canada white,” he told the Toronto Star.

This comes at a time when Canada’s rules for family-class immigrants have changed in an attempt to weed out marriage fraud. Marriage fraud is a real problem. But it’s one that’s often associated with conniving “marriage consultants” and “matchmakers,” who fleece both sides of the marriage. It’s akin to human trafficking. Spouses in Canada are promised a loving partner (or just uncomplicated sex), while spouses elsewhere are promised a ticket out of poverty. Both are expected to pay thousands of dollars in consultation fees. Some couples are trying to hack the system, it’s true. But family-class immigrants already make up less than one quarter of Canada’s immigrant population. And now they are regarded with deep suspicion.

Perhaps that suspicion comes from Canada’s history. Between 1663 and 1673, whole sections of Canada were populated by Les Filles du Roi, who closed their eyes and thought of freedom while the men who’d had them imported did their best to increase the tax base of New France. Perhaps the CIC is simply trying to avoid a similar injustice. And it’s important to realize that the CIC does want to protect people, and that it has mandatory acceptance quotas. The concern is how it fills them.

Judging someone else’s marriage isn’t unusual. It’s the favourite sport of mothers-in-law everywhere. But the prevailing truth about marriage is that it, like immigration, is a “black box” process. No one outside it knows what’s going on inside it — and even the people inside it are occasionally mystified. Yearning emails, dirty texts, and smug selfies only tell part of the story. If the CIC really wanted to know about the validity of a marriage, they would ask about who makes the coffee, who does the laundry, who co-ordinates the social plans. Plenty of “real” marriages have depended on far less. And if spouses needed to demonstrate true love in order to share a household, then plenty of us wouldn’t even be here today.

Ashby: Proof of love is not as simple as immigration officials would have it | Ottawa Citizen.

How we can all stand up against carding | Desmond Cole

Desmond Cole, the author of the Toronto Life article on his experiences with discrimination, on the role that all of us can play:

As the realities of police carding become more known in Toronto, the public is increasingly rejecting the practice. Sixty per cent of respondents to a recent Forum poll disapprove of carding, the Toronto police practice of stopping civilians who are not suspected of any crime, and documenting their personal identification. Black voters, who admittedly made up a small sample size in the survey, rejected carding to the tune of 81 per cent. Given that innocent black people are disproportionately the targets of carding, this is no surprise.

Since I wrote a Toronto Life feature on discrimination, in which I documented the many times I have been needlessly stopped or carded by Toronto police, I’ve received hundreds of messages from people asking what they can do to counter this shady practice. I propose a simple but revolutionary intervention that nearly anyone can take up: if you see a black person being stopped in public by Toronto police, simply approach that person and ask, “Are you OK?”

In my experience, this suggestion evokes a curious amount of anxiety in people, particularly white people, the vast majority of whom are never arbitrarily stopped by police. They wonder if they might be putting themselves in danger by intervening in a police interaction.

To this I can only reply that in 2013, black Torontonians were up to 17 times more likely than white residents to be carded by police in certain neighbourhoods, particularly those with a majority of white residents. Those who are not targeted in this way might consider how scary it is for those who live it every day.

How we can all stand up against carding | Toronto Star.

Hero or extremist?: Tables turn on man who helped Canadian government with would-be jihadists

More on the Government’s removal of Hussein Hamdani from the Cross Cultural Roundtable on Security and the limited background information of the organization, Point de Bascule, that made the accusations (see earlier Hussein Hamdani says federal election politics behind his suspension):

Hamdani has also helped CSIS and the RCMP approach sometimes reluctant groups, while intervening with youths showing signs of radicalization on behalf of their parents.

“I’ve probably done more than anyone else in Canada,” Hamdani says. “And because we’re exposed to certain information that’s not public and we work with the RCMP and CSIS, I have security clearance and my background has been vetted. There are no links to anything of concern.”

That was until a Quebec blog, Point de Bascule, re-published some of his student writings in April and alleged he was linked, through his charitable donations, to organizations like IRFAN-Canada, designated a terrorist group by the federal government in 2014 for its links to Hamas.

Point de Bascule, which has been active since 2006, describes itself as an “an independent and non-partisan website describing the means and methods used by Islamist organizations and leaders in order to further their program in Canada.” It is run by Marc Lebuis.

Point de Bascule highlighted the fact that Hamdani urged Muslims to vote against same-sex marriage, for example.

What is curious, Hamdani says, is that none of this information is new. “Islamicization” meant something different in the pre-9/11 world, he explains. Besides, he says, his views on same-sex marriage have evolved.

‘We work with the RCMP and CSIS, I have security clearance and my background has been vetted. There are no links to anything of concern’

The federal government knew about his student activism, as well as his role in organizing a World Muslim Summit in Toronto in 2003, another point raised by Point de Bascule as evidence of his radical nature (and listed on his roundtable bio).

In 2004, Hamdani also wrote openly about studying Islamic movements in the occupied West Bank, where he met with Hamas founder Ahmed Yassin, an article published the year after Yassin was killed in an Israeli air strike, and the year before Hamdani was named to the Roundtable.

Blaney had Hamdani suspended from the roundtable the day the story appeared on TVA, “pending a review of the facts.”

…. So who is Marc Lebuis [and his Point de Bascule website] , and who is behind his website?

Efforts to reach Lebuis through the website, by phone, or through his Twitter account over the last week have been unsuccessful.

Adam Thompson, the clerk for the Senate’s Committee on National Security and Defence, said the committee had no CV or other form of biography on file for Lebuis. Lebuis was presented by the chair of the committee, Conservative Senator Daniel Lang, as the “founding director of the Montreal-based independent research organization Point de Bascule,” but no further qualifications were given.

There is no business or charity listed as Point de Bascule, or under Lebuis’s name, although the website does accept donations.

Seigfried Mathelet, a post-doctoral researcher at the Université du Québec à Montréal, said he knows of Lebuis as a “pseudo-expert” who has worked for years to gain influence with political decision-makers and the mainstream media, even though he has no links to academic research.

His modus operandi, like that of numerous anti-Islam bloggers and organizations based in the U.S., Mathelet explained, is to take anything problematic associated with Islam – like the Boko Haram or ISIS attacks – and link them to people in Canada.

Unlike the U.S. websites, where many are registered charities or funded by foundations that have to declare their donations, it is not known who, if anyone, is funding Lebuis or Point de Bascule, which is said to employ 10 researchers.

Hero or extremist?: Tables turn on man who helped Canadian government with would-be jihadists

Goodbye, citizenship! Australia takes a cynical turn on Muslim radicalisation | Jason Wilson | Comment is free | The Guardian

Some of the initial critical commentary on Australian plans for citizenship revocation and approach to radicalization, along with the perennial values debate. Echoes of C-51 Government messaging and issues:

You may notice if you read the transcript of Abbott’s press conference that this is political communication that doesn’t impart any information. Is “radicalisation” the same as “violent extremism”? Does one cause the other?

Are they linked in a causal chain? What should we be looking for? What is acceptable for citizens in a democracy to say, think, or read and what isn’t? What is the distinction between “extremism” and ordinary Muslim belief that the government keeps insisting that they respect? From whence comes the assumption that this is related to an insufficient inculcation of the virtues and responsibilities of citizenship?

Anyone who looks to the attorney general’s department’s materials will find a lack of clarity on all of this that is either chilling or embarrassing, depending on your point of view.

We’re told that “People can become radicalised to violent extremism due to a range of factors.” We’re also informed that people can get grants for combatting it to provide support for a range of activities, including mentoring, counselling, “case management” and sport, “But we are open to a wide range of ideas!” And we’re also told that the list of organisations offering services in this area will be collated without being made public. All in all, it’s bewildering.

To the observer, it may seem that debate without any specific terms is being had about existing schemes without clear public criteria of success, with the promise of further discussion whose terms are murky. There’s no reference to the extant scholarly and professional discussion about why and how people drift to Islamism, which emphasises the role of perceived injustice.

More cynically, you might say that this all works pretty well to keep terms like “radicalisation” and “extremism” as content-free, flexible terms that do little more than gesture towards the Muslims in our midst as a source of potential danger, and authorise governments to protect us from that danger, whatever it is, and empower them to police deviations from an equally imaginary moderate middle. A lot of reporting is not helping to clarify the situation: it’s simply taking all of this as read.

This effort by government to produce a vague sense of insecurity, then offer to protect us from it, can lead us in strange and alarming directions. Last week Christopher Pyne mooted a “jihadi-watch” scheme for schools, where education authorities would move to train students and teachers “to watch for shifts in behaviour such as students drifting away from their friends, running into minor trouble with the law and arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own”.

Goodbye, citizenship! Australia takes a cynical turn on Muslim radicalisation | Jason Wilson | Comment is free | The Guardian.

Toronto police Chief Mark Saunders’s secret carding report

Unfortunately, The Star’s analysis appears more methodically sound than the internal police report:

The police analysis did not — as the Star has done in four analyses since 2010 — single out people with black and brown skin who had been carded, and compare those figures to the baseline populations for those groups in Toronto.

The police carding database divides people into four skin colours: white, black, brown and “other.” The police lumped all non-white groups together in determining there was no bias. The Star has used neighbourhood-level census data and police carding data to show that blacks in Toronto are more likely than whites to be carded in each of the city’s 70-plus patrol zones. To a lesser extent, the same was true for people with “brown” skin.

The Saunders report included a recommendation that the service react to “deliberate misinterpretation” of carding data by the Star and “misleading, inflammatory” stories. That did not happen.

Saunders, in his first press conference as chief-designate, referred to innocent people who get carded as “collateral damage.” He later admitted it was a poor choice of words, saying the “proper term should be the ‘social cost’ … in which members of the community do not feel that they are being treated with dignity and respect.”

Saunders has said he is open to making sure officers are not conducting “random” stops.

The Star sought comment from both Saunders and Sloly on the early “community engagement” report and on the context of the internal correspondence.

Instead, the service issued a two-page response crafted by the “PACER Team,” on behalf of Saunders. In it, the police say “we have adamantly opposed the (Star’s) analysis” and methodology since 2002 and “stand by” the criticisms of the Star made in Saunders’s secret 2012 report.

Police again criticized the Star’s use of census data, and again said contacts with the public “will never be in proportion to census figures.” The response reiterates a longstanding police statement that officers police where violent crime goes on.

Toronto police Chief Mark Saunders’s secret carding report | Toronto Star.