Ontario Legislature bans keffiyehs, premier calls for reversal: Need for consistency

2024/04/22 Leave a comment

This story continues to evolve, with the lack of unanimous support to overturn the speakers decision.

What has been lacking in the various discussions and limited op-eds is how does one decide objectively what should be considered as primarily identity vs what is primarily political in nature and the degree to which context plays a role. And how to apply any criteria objectively given that most identities also have political aspects and vice versa.

Religious symbols, while not without political significance to some, are primarily about identity.

Should members be allowed to have scarves or visible symbols with the colours of the Ukrainian flag? The Israeli flag? The Khalistan flag? The Russian flag etc?

Certainly, in the current political context, all could be argued as being interpreted as being more political in nature than just expressions of identity and the speaker made, IMO, the right call but needs to ensure consistency in any rulings:

The Ontario Legislature has banned the wearing of keffiyehs with its speaker saying the scarves are a “political statement,” while the premier along with opposition leaders are calling for a reversal of the move.

In an email on Wednesday, Speaker Ted Arnott said the legislature has previously restricted the wearing of clothing that is intended to make an “overt political statement” because it upholds a “standard practice of decorum.”

“The Speaker cannot be aware of the meaning of every symbol or pattern but when items are drawn to my attention, there is a responsibility to respond. After extensive research, I concluded that the wearing of keffiyehs at the present time in our Assembly is intended to be a political statement. So, as Speaker, I cannot authorize the wearing of keffiyehs based on our longstanding conventions,” Arnott said in an email.

Arnott’s email did not provide specifics on who drew keffiyehs to his attention or when.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said in a statement on Tuesday night that he doesn’t support the ban and the decision was made by the speaker and nobody else.

“I do not support his decision as it needlessly divides the people of our province. I call on the speaker to reverse his decision immediately,” Ford said in the statement.

Keffiyehs are a commonly worn scarf among Arabs, but hold special significance to Palestinian people. They have been a frequent sight among pro-Palestinian protesters calling for an end to the violence in Gaza as the Israel-Hamas war continues.

NDP, Liberal leaders also call for reversal

Ontario Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie also called for a reversal of the ban on Wednesday night.

“Here in Ontario, we are home to a diverse group of people from so many backgrounds. This is a time when leaders should be looking for ways to bring people together, not to further divide us. I urge Speaker Arnott to immediately reconsider this move to ban the keffiyeh,” Crombie said.

Ontario NDP Leader Marit Stiles urged Arnott to reconsider the ban in an April 12 letter to the speaker, saying she considers it unacceptable.

“The Assembly has always permitted Members, staff and guests to openly celebrate their culture, including wearing traditional clothing that represents their history, culture or faith, and I don’t believe it is your intention to change that precedent,” Stiles said.

Stiles said MPPs have worn kilts, kirpans, vyshyvankas and chubas in the legislature, saying such items of clothing not only have national and cultural associations, but have also been considered at times as “political symbols in need of suppression.”

She said Indigenous and non-Indigenous members have also dressed in traditional regalia and these items cannot be separated from their historical and political significance. 

“The wearing of these important cultural and national clothing items in our Assembly is something we should be proud of. It is part of the story of who we are as a province,” she said.

“Palestinians are part of that story, and the keffiyeh is a traditional clothing item that is significant not only to them but to many members of Arab and Muslim communities. That includes members of my staff who have been asked to remove their keffiyehs in order to come to work. This is unacceptable.”

Stiles added that House of Commons and other provincial legislatures allow the wearing of keffiyehs in their chambers and the ban makes Ontario an “outlier.”

Suppression of cultural symbols part of genocide: MPP

Sarah Jama, Independent MPP for Hamilton Centre, said on X that the ban is “unsurprising” but “nonetheless concerning” in a country that has a legacy of colonialism. “Part of committing genocide is the forceful suppression of cultural identity and cultural symbols,” she said in part. 

Jama added that “state powers” have suppressed Indigenous cultural dress, language, ceremony and beliefs “as tools of genocide” at various points in Canada’s history.

“Seeing those in power in this country at all levels of government, from federal all the way down to school boards, aid Israel’s colonial regime with these tactics in the oppression of Palestinian people proves that reconciliation is nothing but a word when spoken by state powers,” she said.

Amira Elghawaby, Canada’s Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia, said on X that it is “deeply ironic” on that keffiyehs were banned in the Ontario legislature on the 42nd anniversary of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“This is wrong and dangerous as we have already seen violence and exclusion impact Canadians, including Muslims of Palestinian descent, who choose to wear this traditional Palestinian clothing,” Elghawaby said.

Arnott said the keffiyeh was not considered a “form of protest” in the legislature prior to statements and debates that happened in the House last fall.

“These items are not absolutes and are not judged in a vacuum,” he said.

Arnott added that he reminded the legislature in a statement on Feb. 22 of its standard practice of decorum, saying: “It has long been the established practice of this House that members should not use props, signage or accessories that are intended to express a political message or are likely to cause disorder. This also extends to members’ attire, where logos, symbols, slogans and other political messaging are not permitted.

“This Legislature is a forum for debate, and the expectation in the chamber is that political statements should be made during debate rather than through the use of props or symbols,” he said.

Source: Ontario Legislature bans keffiyehs, premier calls for reversal

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

‘The Antisemitism Is Absolutely Disproportionate’ – Intv with UC Regent John Pérez

2024/04/20 Leave a comment

Worth reading:

….UC Berkeley, in particular, is in the national imagination as a place of protests — during the Vietnam War in particular. Do you feel like these current protests on campus are different than protests in the past? And if so, how?

I do think they’re different.

In each of those waves of previous protests, there was a notion from students that engaging in the protest had to serve the purpose of bringing people along in an area of debate, creating space to protest, but also to change minds and bring people in the direction of the justice that they were trying to seek. But there was also a concept of consequences associated with protest. If you want protest without consequence, what you really want is performance. And I think that right now we’re seeing folks engaging in disruption, without an understanding or appreciation for what consequences can come up with it, which I think can sometimes be performative.

Second, it feels like much of the protest now isn’t, at least from my perspective, effective in trying to move debate and create space to find a new common ground that aligns with the justice that the protesters are seeking. When it’s disruption for the sake of disruption, as opposed to civil disobedience to capture attention and create space for debate, I think it serves a fundamentally different [purpose].

When you look at the Free Speech Movement, it was about creating the space for all debate, including debate that one disagrees with. What we’ve seen of late is something very different, which is shutting down debate. Last year, at Berkeley Law School, student groups passed a series of resolutions, essentially banning debate, saying that holders of “Zionist viewpoints” would not be allowed to come [to their events]. That’s very different. It’s one thing to say any given organization shouldn’t be compelled to invite somebody who has a viewpoint that’s contrary to theirs. But to say that we want to ban a whole section of debate is inherently problematic in society. It’s particularly problematic in law school, and particularly problematic in a law school centered in a place that in many ways was the birth of the free speech movement on university campuses.

There has been a horrible spike in antisemitic activity across college campuses across the country, but particularly at elite universities, and there’s been a spike in the community more broadly as well. And I don’t think that we, societally and we, as university leaders, have done enough to push back against this spike in antisemitism.

Source: ‘The Antisemitism Is Absolutely Disproportionate’ – POLITICO

Filed under Antisemitism Tagged with ,

Recent immigrants think Canada’s immigration targets are too high, prefer Tories to Liberals: poll

2024/04/20 Leave a comment

Not that surprising but some interesting variations among different visible minority groups (although the sample size by group may be too small to be definitive):

…Leger vice-president Andrew Enns says the numbers offer an intriguing snapshot into the current state of Canadian politics.

“It sends along a pretty interesting insight in terms of how things might be shifting within ethnic communities, and what people tend to assume and admittedly what we saw over the past couple of elections,” he said.

“The Liberals typically do quite well with the newcomer vote.”

When asked about which political party they support more generally, 24 per cent of those who gave an answer reported agreeing with the Conservatives most often, followed by 22 per cent for the Liberals, and eight per cent for the NDP.

The Conservatives’ biggest share of support came from Chinese immigrants, of whom 30 per cent said they support the Tories, compared to just 10 per cent who said they mostly agreed with the Liberals.

Of the ethnic categories in the poll, all but Latinos, Blacks and Filipinos say they agreed with Conservatives over the Liberals, with Black immigrants reporting 27-per-cent support for the Liberals compared to 13 per cent for the Tories.

Professed support among Southeast Asian immigrants was evenly split between the Conservatives and Liberals at 25 per cent each, while 31 per cent of South Asian immigrants prefer the Conservatives compared to 22 per cent for the Liberals. (Southeast Asian refers to those from nations including Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia, while South Asian countries include India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Bangladesh.)

Thirty-eight per cent said they didn’t know what party they agreed with the most.

A little over a quarter of poll respondents were Canadian citizens, 41 per cent were permanent residents, 15 per cent were here on work permits, 10 per cent were international students and a small number said they were refugees.

….Among poll respondents who said the latest immigration targets are too permissive, Southeast Asian immigrants represented the highest numbers in that cohort at 64 per cent, followed by the Chinese community (55 per cent,) South Asian (50 per cent,) Filipinos (45 per cent,) White (41 per cent,) Latinos (38 per cent,) Middle Eastern/North Africans (32 per cent,) and Black (17 per cent.)

Of those who felt the new policies were too loose, 47 per cent arrived in Canada between six and 10 years ago, compared to the 38 per cent who immigrated within the past five years.

Black respondents were most likely to say the new policies will admit the right number of immigrants (47 per cent,) followed by Filipinos (40 per cent) and those from Latin American nations (39 per cent.)

Less than 10 per cent of respondents from all categories felt the new targets wouldn’t let enough immigrants into Canada.

While margins of error cannot be applied to online panels, a comparable probability sample would yield a margin of error no greater than +/- 2.1 per cent, 19 times out of 20.

Source: Recent immigrants think Canada’s immigration targets are too high, prefer Tories to Liberals: poll

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Australia: Grattan – Ethnic tensions will complicate the Albanese government’s multicultural policy reform

2024/04/20 Leave a comment

On the ongoing Australian multiculturalism review and similar political dynamics with Australian Muslims as in Canada:

When ASIO boss Mike Burgess delivered his annual threat assessment earlier this year, he stressed the rising danger posed by espionage and foreign interference.

“In 2024, threats to our way of life have surpassed terrorism as Australia’s principal security concern,” he said.

But ASIO also remained concerned about “lone actors” – individuals or small groups under the radar of authorities with the potential to “use readily available weapons to carry out an act of terrorism”.

It was a concern “across the spectrum of motivations – religious and ideological”.

With minor variations, Burgess might have been describing what allegedly happened at Sydney’s Wakeley Assyrian Orthodox Church on Monday night, where Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel was attacked with a very “readily available weapon” – a knife.

Monday’s incident would have set off shock waves in ordinary times, especially given it was followed by an ugly riot as an angry crowd converged on the scene, trying to get at the alleged perpetrator, a 16-year-old boy (who has since been charged with a terrorism offence).

In this case, the fear the attack triggered was dramatically heightened by context.

Tensions, especially in western Sydney, are much elevated because of the Middle East conflict. And the Wakeley attack came just two days after the Bondi Junction shopping centre stabbings, which killed six people. While that atrocity did not fall under the definition of “terrorism”, inevitably the two incidents were conflated by an alarmed public.

The mix, further stirred by incendiary social media, increases the difficulty of keeping a sense of proportion about the church incident, which isn’t the first instance of a terrorist act in Australia and presumably won’t be the last.

We don’t know the background of the attack on the bishop. We do know that the wider pressures on our social cohesion – including dramatic rises in antisemitism and Islamophobia – are deeply troubling. Australia’s multiculturalism is enduring unprecedented strains, with all the difficulties that brings for political and community leaders.

When there are security crises, terror-related or not, the default call is, not surprisingly, for authorities to DO SOMETHING. More police (or security guards). Greater law enforcement powers. Tougher penalties. New controls on social media. (After the church incident, the eSafety commissioner ordered tech companies to take down images of the attack. These were widely available, because the church service had been live-streamed.)

Sometimes calls for action may be warranted, but often they’re little more than a knee-jerk response – and can open other debates (for example, over the justification for censoring certain images but not others).

The challenge for political leaders is not just dealing with the immediate increasing threats to cohesion, but with longer term policy.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese recently flagged, when he met a Jewish youth group, that the government planned to appoint an envoy against antisemitism (a post existing in other countries) and a matching envoy against Islamophobia. There’s no timetable for these appointments.

Looking to the future, what’s unclear, given the present tensions, is the likely trajectory of Australia’s multiculturalism.

Will the strains worsen, seriously fracturing the society? Or will they ameliorate in the years to come? Multiculturalism is likely in transition, but what will be its pathway? And what are the political implications?

Labor is particularly worried about the erosion of its support among Muslim voters in western Sydney seats.

The cat was belled on the suburban multicultural vote in 2022, ironically not by a Muslim candidate but a Christian of Vietnamese heritage. Dai Le, whose family fled the Vietnam war, seized the previously safe Labor seat of Fowler in Sydney’s outer south-west.

It remains to be seen whether this is a one-off, or if more strong independent candidates will start to emerge as people from multicultural communities fight for a bigger direct presence in politics, or to exert more influence through strategic voting.

A recently-registered group called Muslim Votes Matter styles itself as “shaping our future through informed voting and collective influence”. It says on its website, “There are over 20 seats where the Muslim community collectively has the potential deciding vote”.

Kos Samaras, from the RedBridge Group, a political consultancy, says “the fire” has been raging for some years in multicultural communities in areas such as north-western Melbourne and western Sydney. The Israel-Hamas war has obviously fuelled it.

Samaras says the Muslim political alienation from the major parties has been strongest among members of the those communities who were born in Australia – people in their 20s, 30s and 40s.

This week, after the church attack, NSW premier Chris Minns called in faith leaders. But it is a moot point whether this consultation with predominantly older people reaches the younger, more alienated generation.

Young Australian Muslims grew up in a post-September 11 world, Samaras says, with a sense of being outsiders in the country. We saw this feeling during the pandemic, in the complaints about the different treatment of people in Sydney’s eastern and western suburbs.

Notably, Muslim community leader Jamal Rifi, speaking this week to Sky on behalf of the 16-year-old’s family, referenced the fact the Bondi Junction killings were not labelled “terrorism” by the authorities while the church incident was. “I understand there is a difference between the two but unfortunately the overwhelming feeling in the community [is] that it is, you know, Tale of Two Cities,” he said.

Andrew Jakubowicz, emeritus professor of sociology at the University of Technology Sydney, highlights the three separate elements of multiculturalism. These are

  • “Settlement policy, which deals with arrival, survival and orientation, and the emergence of bonding within the group and finding employment, housing and education
  • “Multicultural policy, which ensures that institutions in society identify and respond to needs over the life course and in changing life circumstances, and
  • “Community Relations policy, which includes building skills in intercultural relations, engagement with the power hierarchies of society and the inclusion of diversity into the fabric of decision-making in society – from politics to education to health to the arts.”

Australia has been fairly good at the first, not so good on the second and “very poor” on the third, he says.

The Albanese government last year commissioned an independent review of the present multicultural framework. The report has recommendations for the short, medium and long terms. It envisages changes to institutions as well as policies and at federal and state levels.

Although the review is not due for release until mid-year, the May budget is likely to see some initiatives.

But there are differences between ministers about how far and how fast reform should go. A febrile combination of local and international factors is making crafting a multicultural policy for the next decade a much more sensitive operation than might have been envisaged when the review was launched.

Source: Grattan on Friday: Ethnic tensions will complicate the Albanese government’s multicultural policy reform

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Government submits proposal to Parliament on stricter requirements for acquiring Finnish citizenship

2024/04/20 Leave a comment

Of note:

The Government has proposed an amendment to the Citizenship Act that would extend the period of residence required for Finnish citizenship from the current five years to eight years. In addition, only time lived in Finland under a residence permit would be taken into account when calculating the period of residence. The proposal to amend the Citizenship Act was submitted to Parliament in a government session on 18 April.

One of the objectives set in the Government Programme is to tighten the requirements for acquiring Finnish citizenship and encourage immigrants to integrate into Finnish society. The reform will be implemented in stages through three legislative projects.

The first project will extend the required period of residence in Finland, which is one prerequisite for being granted citizenship based on an application. The second and third projects will tighten the requirements related to integrity and livelihood and introduce a citizenship test. The government proposals for the latter projects will be submitted to Parliament in autumn 2024 and spring 2025, respectively.

In line with the proposal now submitted to Parliament, people applying for citizenship would have to reside in Finland for eight years instead of the current five years. This way, the authorities could assess the applicants’ suitability for citizenship over a longer period of time.

The amendments would also concern applicants for international protection, who would no longer have a derogation concerning the period of residence requirement. In other words, once the amendment is in force, it will no longer be possible to derogate from the requirement on grounds of international protection. However, citizenship applications made by beneficiaries of international protection would continue to be considered urgently, with the decision on granting citizenship made no later than one year after the applicant submitted their application.

With the amendment, the residence requirement for children aged 15 or over, spouses of Finnish citizens, stateless persons and applicants meeting the language proficiency requirement would be extended to five years from the current four. The two-year residence requirement for Nordic citizens and spouses of persons working at Finnish missions abroad would remain unchanged.

Changes in determining the period of residence for asylum seekers

With the amendment, only periods of residence with a residence permit would be taken into account when determining an applicant’s period of residence. This means that the time taken to process an asylum application would no longer count towards the period of residence. For beneficiaries of international protection in Finland, the approved period of residence would begin when they are issued a residence permit.

In addition, any stays in Finland without a residence permit would no longer be taken into account, in full or in part, under any circumstances when determining the period of residence. Similarly, the applicant’s age, state of health or other comparable reason would no longer be grounds for approving a period of residence without a residence permit.

The reform would also shorten the periods of absence that could be included in the continuous period of residence. During the entire continuous period of residence, applicants could stay abroad for one year in total, and no more than three months of this period could take place during the year preceding naturalisation. The goal is to ensure that applicants receiving Finnish citizenship are actually living in Finland.

In 2022, altogether 9,509 people were granted citizenship based on an application. The extension of the residence requirement for citizenship would potentially apply to nearly 10,000 people each year.

Source: Government submits proposal to Parliament on stricter requirements for acquiring Finnish citizenship

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with

Le PQ associe Justin Trudeau aux déportations et aux exécutions de francophones

2024/04/20 Leave a comment

Stay tuned. André Pratte also has commentary on the relative extreme positions PSPP: André Pratte: Quebec separatism is resurging, and Trudeau isn’t taking the threat seriously

Justin Trudeau poursuit l’oeuvre de son père et des architectes de la « déportation » et des « exécutions » de francophones par ses politiques migratoires et ses incursions dans les champs de compétence du Québec, a plaidé mardi le chef du Parti québécois, Paul St-Pierre Plamondon.

Mardi, le chef péquiste a accusé le premier ministre du Canada de mener une « charge offensive » contre le Québec. « Justin Trudeau est en continuité avec son père, Pierre Elliott Trudeau », a-t-il soutenu avant de reprocher aux commentateurs de l’actualité de ne pas déceler des « intentions » derrière cela.

« C’est vraiment oublier l’histoire récente, comme le rapatriement unilatéral de la Constitution canadienne sans le Québec, oublier l’oeuvre de Pierre Elliott Trudeau, oublier ce que les francophones ont vécu dans les déportations, les exécutions, l’interdiction d’avoir de l’éducation en français. Ce régime-là a été constant durant toute son histoire », a-t-il déclaré.

Paul St-Pierre Plamondon voit les signes de cette charge dans « l’immigration temporaire, qui est passée de 80 000 en 2016 à 560 000 [personnes] », ainsi que dans les récentes incursions du fédéral dans les compétences du Québec, notamment en logement.

« Radical » et « conservateur »

Lors du conseil national de la fin de semaine dernière, le chef péquiste avait déjà évoqué une « charge frontale » en provenance d’« un régime qui ne sait qu’écraser ceux qui refusent de s’assimiler ». Des propos qui ont beaucoup fait réagir les oppositions à l’Assemblée nationale mardi.

Le chef intérimaire du Parti libéral, Marc Tanguay, a qualifié ce discours de « déconnecté », d’« exagéré » et de « radical ». Ce n’est pas crédible, a-t-il dit « que le fédéral se lève tous les matins pour planifier notre déclin ».

Du côté de Québec solidaire, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois a dit ne pas avoir « souvenir d’un chef du Parti québécois avec un discours aussi conservateur ». « Ce que j’ai entendu, c’est un discours empreint de ressentiment. »

Quant au gouvernement caquiste, il s’est aussi inscrit en faux contre cette lecture. « Nous, on fait des gains concrets », a dit le ministre de la Justice, Simon Jolin-Barrette, en évoquant notamment la loi 96 et après avoir dit ne pas être « résigné ». « On est conscients des risques, mais on agit », a-t-il affirmé.

Source: Le PQ associe Justin Trudeau aux déportations et aux exécutions de francophones

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

“In Demand Yet Unprocessed: Endemic Immigration Backlogs” – Citizenship Government response

2024/04/19 Leave a comment

The section of the government response to CIMM’s study of backlogs, citizenship ceremonies and oath. My understanding, however, is that in practice applicants are assigned the ceremony type automatically (virtual being the default) but can request an in-person if they prefer. Last time I checked based upon public IRCC data, about 90 percent of applicants had virtual ceremonies.

And of course, IRCC’s “seeking to increase the percentage of clients that complete the Oath in-person in 2024-2025” is meaningless unless its open data operational data includes the numbers of new citizens by virtual and in-person ceremonies:

7. That IRCC make clear to all individuals that it is their choice to choose the citizenship ceremonies process best suited to their needs; and that while in-person ceremonies should be the default option, virtual ceremonies should also be allowed; and further, that any self-administered oath of citizenship be subject to robust integrity measures. Agree in Principle

The Government agrees in principle with the recommendation that the Department make it clear to clients that they may choose the citizenship ceremony format best suited to their needs, and that any self-administered oath of citizenship be subject to robust integrity measures. Canada welcomed a record number of 364,166 new citizens in 2022-2023, compared to approximately 248,000 in 2019-2020 (pre-pandemic), enabled in part by the implementation of virtual ceremonies (also called video ceremonies) and related efficiencies.

As of July 2022, IRCC resumed holding in-person ceremonies while maintaining virtual ceremonies, as a stream of service delivery that provides efficiency, timely service, and flexibility to clients as they can accommodate more clients from coast to coast to coast, including those in rural and remote regions. Clients are invited by the Department to either an in-person or virtual ceremony, based on operational considerations, but can request a change of format (e.g. from virtual ceremony to an in-person ceremony or vice-versa) and the Department makes best efforts to accommodate client preference.

Virtual ceremonies have contributed to a significant reduction in grant inventories, while modernization initiatives, such as online electronic applications for most grant of citizenship applications and electronic citizenship certificates, have reduced and continue to reduce processing times with a return to service standards projected for spring 2024.

A number of factors, including volumes of clients served and costs would be impacted if in- person ceremonies were set as the default option. Instead, the Department is seeking to increase the percentage of clients that complete the Oath in-person in 2024-2025 as well as clarify that all individuals have the opportunity to request the citizenship ceremony format that best suits their needs, subject to availability.

In addition, the Department continues work to modernize Canada’s Citizenship Program to improve client service, increase processing efficiencies and enhance program integrity. As the Citizenship Program continues to modernize, the Department will reflect on the feedback received from Canadians, and incorporate this into the assessment of options and decisions on a way forward.

Source: “In Demand Yet Unprocessed: Endemic Immigration Backlogs”

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , , ,

Regg Cohn: Peel school board should learn a lesson in controversy over Nakba Day

2024/04/19 Leave a comment

Peel SB has a habit of controversial policies and stands. Money quote: “A better way for educators to navigate modern times and historical legacies would be to always remain mindful of unity in diversity — and the reality of complexity. Find ways to bring people together rather than drive them apart:”

Nakba Day is coming to schools in two of Ontario’s biggest cities.

Not familiar with the term?

It takes place on May 15, the day after the anniversary of Israel’s founding day in 1948 — not celebrating but commiserating over the Jewish state’s creation.

Al-Nakba is an Arabic term that translates as “the catastrophe.” Yasser Arafat, in his heyday as head of the Palestinian Authority, declared it an official day of mourning across the West Bank and Gaza in 1998.

Now, the Peel District School Board is bringing it from the Middle East into schools it controls across the GTA — in Brampton, Caledon and Mississauga.

The revelation of Peel’s preoccupations has stirred fresh controversy — including demands that the board rescind its move and counterdemands to keep it in place. That very controversy tells the story of why it’s such a bad idea to keep bringing back the world’s problems to the modern multicultural metropolis that is Greater Toronto.

To be clear, there is not much about Nakba Day that is contentious for Palestinians or disputed by historians. It marks the undeniably catastrophic impact of Israel’s creation on hundreds of thousands of people whose lives were ended or upended in 1948.

How you see the world’s epochal events — and historical terminology — depends on who you are, where you live and when you’re talking.

When the late Arafat belatedly proclaimed Nakba Day, I was the Star’s Middle East correspondent, watching him work hand-in-glove with Israel. Their shared goal was two states for two peoples.

Today, on the streets of the GTA, you don’t hear protesters talk much of two states. You’ll hear slogans such as, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” — implying a new Palestinian state should displace the old Jewish state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea, dismantling the so-called colonial enterprise they believe Israel to be.

The world has changed, and political agendas have changed with them. Which brings us back to the Peel school board.

As part of its multicultural mission, it has a committee that curates a long list detailing “days of significance” for “secular and creed-based days.” It begins with Canada Day last year and ends with Boxing Day this year.

In between those bookends, the list catalogues celebrations of relevance and reverence in chronological (not spiritual) order — Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism, Bahaism, Islam, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Wicca, Christianity and so on. And then there are worldly listings for Emancipation Day, Labour Day, Literacy Day and the like.

Since Canada Day is top of the list, let’s consider the Canadian context.

Some bemoan any recognition of Confederation, condemning it as a celebration of colonization; some have absented themselves from July 1 fireworks events in solidarity with Indigenous critics. That said, I cannot imagine the Peel school board voting to recognize a Canada Catastrophe Day on July 1, for it would surely spark disagreement and disunity.

That tension — between celebration and condemnation — reminds us that the creation of one nation can easily diminish another people at home and abroad. The point is that it should be possible to be both pro-Canada and pro-Indigenous, pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian, to be mindful and respectful of people on both sides, all sides.

As for Israel, it emerged from a vote of the United Nations, which partitioned the Holy Land into two nations, Jewish and Arab (retaining special status for Jerusalem). History tells us that Arabs rejected that compromise, and the resulting catastrophe was undeniable; historians have also documented episodes of ethnic cleansing, although Arab minorities endured in Israel and gained citizenship.

In the aftermath, Nakba Day makes perfect sense in Palestinian schools, but it is surely misplaced in Peel schools. For unless the board is about to declare a day of celebration for the creation of Israel on May 14 — and I don’t see it on the list, nor do I foresee it down the line — why must Peel pick a side?

When the UN General Assembly decided in 2022 to formally mark Nakba Day — three quarters of a century after birthing the state of Israel — Canada joined many nations in opposing the gesture. What qualifies Peel’s school board to reach the opposite conclusion?

A better way for educators to navigate modern times and historical legacies would be to always remain mindful of unity in diversity — and the reality of complexity. Find ways to bring people together rather than drive them apart.

Source: Peel school board should learn a lesson in controversy over Nakba Day

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Nicolas | Compétitions traumatiques

2024/04/19 Leave a comment

Good arguments on the risks of avoiding blind spots (which we all have to varying degrees) and the risks of leaving such debates to political partisans or single interest groups with little to no curiosity for other perspectives and experiences:

Je suis d’accord avec Paul St-Pierre Plamondon sur au moins une chose : il est indéniable que le colonialisme britannique et sa violence ont profondément marqué, voire forgé, l’histoire du Canada.

Il y aurait beaucoup de choses à dire sur la maladresse avec laquelle le chef du Parti québécois a fait rejaillir cette question dans l’espace public, appel du pied (dog-whistle) en prime. On y reviendra.

Mais plusieurs observateurs lui ont aussi reproché le simple fait de parler du passé. « Il ressasse de vieilles histoires », « le Québec est rendu ailleurs », lui a-t-on rétorqué. Je comprends et respecte le réflexe. Cette chronique s’adresse à ceux que l’héritage du colonialisme britannique intéresse.

Ma vie professionnelle me donne l’occasion de sillonner le pays. Partout, je cherche à comprendre comment les gens voient le Canada ou leur province, leur histoire familiale, les liens qu’ils font entre leur récit personnel et les récits nationalistes. Et partout, dès qu’on gratte un peu, la question du colonialisme britannique ressort, explicitement ou implicitement, dans les rapports que les gens entretiennent les uns aux autres, avec le territoire et l’État.

Ce que je constate toutefois, c’est que la compréhension qu’on a de l’histoire canadienne est souvent prise dans des angles morts qui suivent à peu près les trous dans les curriculums d’histoire de nos provinces respectives.

Je vais me souvenir toute ma vie d’une conversation surréelle avec une personnalité politique pourtant sénior de l’Ouest canadien qui associait systématiquement le français au Québec — seulement le Québec. Je lui avais demandé si l’agacement des Prairies à l’endroit de la différence québécoise pouvait être un héritage de la violence d’État envers les Métis, les Premières Nations et les francophones de l’Ouest à la suite de la pendaison de Louis Riel. Comme si, après avoir « travaillé » si fort à stigmatiser la différence locale, on s’étonnait qu’une autre partie du pays ose la revendiquer. Elle n’y avait jamais réfléchi.

C’est aussi là une démonstration de la manière dont on peut atteindre les plus hauts postes politiques dans l’Ouest et parler de « l’aliénation » des gens de l’Ouest (en vertu de l’exigence de bilinguisme à Ottawa) sans jamais s’être demandé pourquoi l’Ouest n’est-il pas plus bilingue, ou multilingue, et comment cela est-il advenu 

L’absence de réflexion témoignait d’un important angle mort. En associant la francophonie canadienne exclusivement au Québec, on s’était privé d’une clé de compréhension centrale pour sa propre région. Parce que les gens, fondamentalement, cherchent à se comprendre eux-mêmes, mes questions ne pouvaient être reçues autrement qu’avec beaucoup d’ouverture.

De la même manière, j’espère qu’on a assez de recul pour sourire de la façon dont la génération de leaders qui a mené la saga constitutionnelle des années 1980 et 1990 s’est étonnée de voir la perspective autochtone surgir, un peu comme un cheveu sur la soupe, dans son bras de fer entre « peuples fondateurs ». Quel ne fut pas l’émoi collectif lorsqu’Elijah Harper, leader cri et député de l’Assemblée législative du Manitoba, a bloqué l’adoption de l’Accord du lac Meech, qui n’incluait aucune reconnaissance constitutionnelle pour les Premiers Peuples. On avait cru pouvoir régler la place du Québec dans le Canada sans qu’aucun Autochtone ne lève le doigt pour dire : et nous ?

C’est incroyable, quand même, avec le recul. L’épisode reste un symbole du trou béant dans l’éducation politique et historique de nos dirigeants de l’époque.

Je pourrais donner encore beaucoup d’exemples. Les perspectives autochtones, celles des communautés immigrantes provenant d’autres ex-colonies britanniques, celles des communautés noires et asiatiques qui ont encaissé de plein fouet le racisme de l’Empire, celles immigrant du sud ou de l’est de l’Europe qui ont essuyé le chauvinisme protestant, des familles irlandaises et écossaises qui avaient déjà une longue histoire avec Londres avant de débarquer au Canada viennent compléter les récits familiaux qui continuent de circuler dans bien des familles francophones et acadiennes.

Mais il est rare que l’on considère ces mémoires et ces perspectives comme des éléments qui se complètent. J’ai souvent l’impression que chacun tient à son bout de casse-tête régional, linguistique ou culturel et tente de démontrer aux autres l’importance du morceau qu’il a en main. Très rares sont ceux qui cherchent à développer une vue d’ensemble du casse-tête.

Ainsi, les mémoires traumatiques entrent en compétition : chacune tire la couverture, personne ne s’écoute véritablement. Et on normalise une vision de la politique où la seule manière d’être respecté, c’est de faire la démonstration de sa force, quitte à écraser plus petit que soi comme on craint soi-même de se faire écraser.

Je ne sais pas si on comprend que chaque fois qu’on dit que la seule manière d’être respecté, c’est de redessiner les cartes pour se créer un espace majoritaire, on avoue implicitement ne pas croire qu’il puisse exister un pays où chaque groupe est respecté, peu importe son nombre. Il y a bien sûr plusieurs raisons de vouloir fonder un pays. Mais lorsque l’on justifie son désir par une aspiration à jouir à son tour de la force du majoritaire, le message est bien entendu par les gens qui resteront minoritaires. J’avais dit que j’allais revenir à l’appel du pied.

Je pense qu’un exercice de dialogue sur les cicatrices laissées un peu partout par l’histoire de ce pays est nécessaire pour que chacun puisse mieux se comprendre et mieux se respecter. Il se fait d’ailleurs déjà tranquillement, au fil de rencontres portées par la société civile — souvent loin des parlements, des caméras et des réseaux sociaux. Vous me permettrez toutefois d’avoir peu confiance en la réussite d’un exercice aussi délicat lorsqu’il est accaparé par la politique partisane ou par des gens qui démontrent peu de curiosité pour l’ensemble du casse-tête.

Source: Chronique | Compétitions traumatiques

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Canada’s plan to overhaul its temporary foreign worker program revealed

2024/04/19 Leave a comment

Good overview:

The federal government is looking to roll out a new temporary foreign worker regime starting next year that would add protections for workers and simplify the current program.

The new program would cover more year-round occupations in agriculture and food processing.

It would also allow migrant workers to change employers within the same industry, so they wouldn’t be beholden to a potentially exploitative workplace, according to a copy of the proposal obtained by the Star.

Under the proposal, the four existing worker streams would be reduced to two — for workers covered under bilateral agreements with their home countries and an “open-source” category for those from other places where there are no such government deals with Canada.

Canadian farm owners, fisheries and food processing companies have faced chronic labour shortages and must rely on the import of foreign workers to fill jobs that tend to be physically demanding, sometimes seasonal in nature, and located in rural and remote areas.

The pandemic underlined the importance of securing the country’s food supply chain, and exacerbated and exposed the poor working and housing conditions experienced by some migrant workers….

While details of the plan have to be finalized after consultation with employers, workers, community groups and foreign governments, the proposal says the key features are “likely” to include:

  • Introducing sector-specific work permits that give workers job mobility within a sector for up to two years;
  • Granting employers permits to hire workers to fill reoccurring seasonal work over a two-year period; 
  • Reforming the existing wage and deduction structure to better reflect current housing rates and employer costs;
  • Updating employer-provided housing requirements to ensure greater protections and safety to workers.

The plan also assures agriculture and food processing employers that there continues to be no cap on the percentage of foreign workers at a worksite, and an exemption from the $1,000 processing fee for authorization to hire workers for farm work….

Source: Canada’s plan to overhaul its temporary foreign worker program revealed

Filed under Immigration Tagged with

← Older posts

Newer posts →