John Ivison: Tolerating the glorification of terror and slaughter is societal suicide

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

Of note:

Sukhdool Singh, an alleged gangster, was gunned down in Winnipeg last month, in a tit-for-tat killing between rival gangs.

Singh was wanted in India for extortion and murder, and was alleged to have links to the Khalistan Tiger Force, which has been designated a terror organization by the Indian government. He is said to have escaped to Canada on a forged passport in 2017 and India has been trying, unsuccessfully, to extradite him ever since.

Singh’s case is instructive because it is at the heart of the dispute between Canada and India. The Indians say Canada has offered a safe haven for Khalistani terrorists in return for votes from the Sikh community.

Canada says that its hands are tied because freedom of speech is protected under the Charter of Rights.

By its actions, the Canadian government has also endorsed the recent findings of the House of Commons justice and human rights committee that concluded suspects could be abused and tortured if returned to India and a host of other countries. Only six people were extradited to India between 2002 and 2020 and none of them were suspected Khalistani terrorists.

Canada is seen as being soft on terror, with some justification.

Its record on clamping down on terror financing is abysmal, as noted by B.C.’s Cullen commission into money laundering, which found that the federal Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre (FINTRAC) is ill-equipped to share intelligence with law enforcement. Proof of FINTRAC’s impotence is the lack of any charges laid between 2009 and 2016, even though it uncovered 683 transactions linked to terror financing

The government is in the process of beefing up its efforts against money laundering and terror financing, with a number of proposed legislative changes aimed at giving FINTRAC and law enforcement more powers.

But Canada’s perennial balancing act with rights and freedoms leads to much hand-wringing. For example, the Canada Revenue Agency has been accused of unfairly targeting Muslim-led charities, leading to calls for the agency to suspend its terror-financing investigative unit. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau expressed his sympathy for what he called the systemic Islamophobia in the CRA.

However, the atrocities that the world has witnessed over the course of the past weekend in Israel may tilt that balance away from the indulgence that has prevailed.

The scenes that played out on Saturday night in Mississauga, with joyous crowds cheering and honking horns, as if their team had just won the World Cup, were abhorrent. This was the glorification of the mass murder of children, such as the 40 dead babies discovered at the Kfar Aza kibbutz in southern Israel. This was celebration of Hamas’ deliberate and systemic targeting of civilians to kill as many as possible.

To his credit, Trudeau renounced such scenes in his remarks at a Jewish community centre in Ottawa. “The glorification of death and violence and terror has no place anywhere, especially here in Canada. Hamas terrorists aren’t a resistance, they’re not freedom fighters, they are terrorists and no one in Canada should be supporting them, much less celebrating them.”

Canada has a law against displaying hate — Section 319 of the Criminal Code, which says that anyone who incites hatred against an identifiable group where incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of an indictable offence.

But such is the power of section 2b of the Charter when it comes to freedom of expression, it has been used sparingly — just 20 times between 2001 and 2019.

That is a good thing. I am proud to live in a country where truth cannot be put down by persecution. As John Stuart Mill said about free speech, conflicting doctrines often share the truth between them.

But it is quite another thing to witness fellow citizens lionize rape and murder.

In 2015, the Senate committee on national security and defence released a report in the wake of the terror attack on Parliament Hill.

It made a number of recommendations that were never enacted, including establishing a “no visit” list of identified ideological radicals and working in Muslim communities to create an effective counter-narrative to Islamic fundamentalism.

But one conclusion that it drew has special resonance today — that our hate laws should be updated to ban the glorification of terrorists, terrorist acts and terrorist symbols. The committee said it recognized issues with the Charter of Rights but noted that France and U.K. have similar laws.

There are clearly issues with what constitutes “glorification” — a grey zone where there may not be specific calls for action. France’s law appears to go too far: one 25-year-old man was handed a suspended sentence for scribbling “Vive Daesh” (aka ISIL) on a toilet wall.

Yet, antisemitic chants calling for the destruction of Israel, or in the case of Canada’s Khalistanis, building a carnival float that celebrates the assassination of Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi (as happened in Toronto in 2023) create the conditions for violence. The British law includes a clause that specifically says the offence occurs when members of the public might reasonably be expected to infer that what is being glorified is being proposed as conduct that should be emulated.

The introduction of such legislation may go a long way to healing the rift with India — and that cannot be done quickly enough.

We are entering a period of what historian Niall Ferguson has predicted will be a “cascade of conflict,” where Russia, Iran and China will do their best to overturn the international order by testing a fiscally overstretched America in three theatres: Eastern Europe, the Middle East and the Far East. It will be no surprise to anyone if China makes an illegal move in the South China Sea in the coming weeks.

Canada needs to recognize that, in W.B. Yeats’ words, anarchy is loosed upon the world and innocence is drowned; that “the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

We need to stand with our allies, even if we don’t often like what they do. India’s Narendra Modi is a thin-skinned chauvinist; Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu may be corrupt and is certainly incompetent.

As the former Shin Bet chief, Ami Ayalon, told Le Figaro, the Netanyahu government is largely responsible for the divisions that created an opportunity for Hamas, with its controversial push for justice reforms and a policy that marginalized the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

But these flaws pale in comparison to the what the great autocracies would have in store for us.

I’m haunted by a quote in Avi Shavit’s superb history of Israel: My Promised Land, where he talks about the vitality of the nation. “And yet, there is always the fear that one day, daily life will freeze like Pompeii’s.”

For too many Israelis, life did indeed freeze this weekend. The existential threat there is palpable. Canada cannot allow pluralism and reasonable accommodation to plant the seeds of our self-destruction.

Source: John Ivison: Tolerating the glorification of terror and slaughter is societal suicide

Filed under Multiculturalism, Radicalization Tagged with , , , ,

Kaczorowski: Reforming Canada’s public service can’t be done superficially

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

Hard not to agree:

In September, Clerk of the Privy Council John Hannaford announced the creation of a five-member task force of deputy ministers to lead a “broad conversation” on the values and ethics of the federal public service. A “milestone” report is expected by year’s end.

Upon hearing of this initiative, I could not help but think of the famous line by Capt. Renault in the classic film Casablanca: “Round up the usual suspects!”

I have no doubt about the clerk’s good intentions. That the public service is in serious need of thorough examination and renewal is beyond debate. What is in question is how a committee of busy senior bureaucratic “insiders,” working off the side of their desks, and with a very tight deadline in the latter months of the government’s mandate, can possibly address the many and substantial issues that require serious review.

As others have argued in these pages, including former clerk of the Privy Council Kevin Lynch, the issues are many, from service delivery to recruitment and renewal; from institutional timidity to the public service-political relationship; from the degradation of ministerial responsibility to the weakening of departmental autonomy as a source of policy advice and innovation versus the all-powerful Prime Minister’s Office.

It is hardly surprising that, in the face of these formidable challenges, the clerk’s announcement was greeted with puzzlement by some observers. How and why did public servants’ “values and ethics” become the central issue? Why does the clerk believe that a strictly “in-house” study is the answer? A “conversation” with public servants does not scream action.

Whatever the rationale, this review is a far cry from the kind of root-and-branch overhaul that critics have been demanding for some time.

The federal public service has historically been the subject of royal commissions, which have injected the kind of fresh thinking that only an outside perspective can bring. The last such commission —  the Royal Commission on Financial Management and Accountability — was established more than 40 years ago (1976) and reported in 1979. Known as the Lambert Commission, after its chair, TD bank executive Allan Lambert, this commission came about as a result of fears of a breakdown in  financial management and accountability.

Prof. Donald Savoie, the dean of Canadian public administration, and others have acknowledged that nothing less than a Royal Commission on the Future of the Public Service, independent of senior public service managers, is required if there is to be genuine change. An independent and wide-ranging examination of the federal public service is long overdue.

Such a commission must be led by an outsider and so provide for sweeping inquiries into key public service reform issues that cannot be done by those within the system.

It is true that initiating a royal commission comes with its own risks.  Such commissions can be expensive as well as unpredictable, sometimes delving into matters beyond their mandate, and so put their efforts in danger of being shelved and ignored by unreceptive governments.

A royal commission, of course, cannot be initiated by the clerk of the Privy Council. Only the prime minister can make that happen.

It took a shot across the bow by then-auditor general of Canada J.J. Macdonell to kickstart the Lambert Commission when he warned that “Parliament — and indeed the government — has lost or is close to losing effective control of the public purse.” Crisis can be the spur of creative thinking and innovation, but only if decision-makers are willing to concede that the crisis is real.

To do so, however, requires bold thinking and decision-making at the political level, as well as a willingness to take a “beau risque.” To expect that from any government in the twilight of its mandate may be too much to ask. But that does not make the need any less urgent.

Ottawa resident Michael Kaczorowski is a retired senior policy adviser with the federal government.

Source: Kaczorowski: Reforming Canada’s public service can’t be done superficially

Filed under Government Tagged with ,

Lisée: Les expulsions barbares

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

More Quebec commentary on the need for Quebec to exercise the same control over the IMP, whose numbers have ballooned as elsewhere in Canada, as it does for TFWP:

De mauvaises langues accusent le député Sol Zanetti d’avoir atteint le summum de l’exagération en gonflant, puis dégonflant, une balloune depuis son siège de l’Assemblée nationale jeudi dernier. Je ne suis pas d’accord. Juste avant, en point de presse, un autre député solidaire avait fait pire.

Au cas où on déclare atteinte, voire dépassée, la capacité d’accueil du Québec et qu’on veuille limiter le nombre d’immigrants temporaires au Québec, passés de 47 000 en 2007 à 470 000 cette année, il a dit ceci : « Si on définit qu’elle est remplie [la capacité d’accueil], on coupe qui ? On va commencer à faire des déportations massives ? On va commencer à dire que ces 100 000 là, qui sont de trop, peut-être, qui ont déménagé ici, qui ont eu des contrats, qui ont eu un logement, qu’on leur a donné un permis, qui travaillent dans le réseau de la santé et dans l’éducation… On va leur dire : “C’est terminé ? […] Vous savez quoi, là, on s’excuse, on vous a fait venir pour rien, on s’est trompé, finalement, on n’a pas la capacité de vous avoir” ? »

Je vais vous étonner. Il s’agit d’un député qu’on estimait jusque-là crédible et posé : Guillaume Cliche-Rivard. Il est avocat, expert en immigration. Comment peut-il ne pas savoir qu’on parle ici des temporaires qui, comme leur nom l’indique, sont bien temporaires. L’immense majorité des étudiants étrangers qui peuplent McGill et Concordia et anglicisent le centre-ville prennent la poudre d’escampette dès qu’ils ont leur diplôme en poche. L’immense majorité des travailleurs agricoles volent retrouver leur famille latino-américaine une fois la récolte terminée. Les autres savent tous que leur séjour affiche une date de péremption, ce à quoi ils ont librement consenti.

Bref, si on décidait, selon le chiffre évoqué, d’admettre désormais 100 000 personnes de moins, ce qui nous maintiendrait toujours à un niveau historiquement excessivement élevé, il suffirait d’attendre que ceux qui souhaitent repartir repartent et de ne donner des autorisations qu’à 370 000 candidats, plutôt que 470 000.

L’introduction du terme « déportation » dans un débat sur l’immigration qui se déroulait depuis quelques mois dans un contexte apaisé est simplement honteuse. S’il tient à sa crédibilité, Cliche-Rivard doit faire amende honorable.

Sur le fond, il affirme ne pas savoir si, oui ou non, notre capacité d’accueil est atteinte. Il voudrait qu’une équipe d’experts se penche sur la question. C’est une idée tellement bonne que je la proposais en 2018 lorsqu’on ne comptait sur le territoire que le quart du nombre de temporaires actuel.

On peut bien, comme le fait la ministre de l’Immigration, Christine Fréchette, par un appel de projets de recherche, en obtenir une analyse plus fine et régionalisée. Mais refuser d’admettre aujourd’hui que l’ajout depuis cinq ans de centaines de milliers de personnes supplémentaires aggrave les crises du logement, de la santé et des garderies me rappelle ceux qui, face aux méfaits du tabac ou du réchauffement climatique, réclamaient davantage d’études.

Heureusement, un grand nombre de Québécois ont entendu parler de la loi de l’offre et de la demande. Début octobre, 71 % d’entre eux (comme 68 % des Canadiens) ont déclaré au sondeur Ipsos qu’imposer un plafond d’admission aux étudiants étrangers serait une bonne façon de réduire la pression sur les logements abordables. Logiques, 75 % des Québécois (71 % des Canadiens) pensent qu’il faut revoir à la baisse les cibles d’immigration le temps que se résorbe la crise du logement. (Mémo au politburo de QS : ce sentiment est partagé par 66 % des 18-34 ans, votre électorat principal.)

Qui, parmi nous, à part les élus solidaires, figure parmi les dissidents de la loi de l’offre et de la demande ? Le gouvernement fédéral, bien évidemment. L’inénarrable ministre de l’Immigration, Marc Miller, a redit récemment qu’il fallait davantage d’immigrants pour construire davantage de logements. (Marc, ça ne marcherait que s’ils les bâtissaient avant d’arriver ou s’ils les emmenaient avec eux. Un pensez-y-bien.)

Plus terre à terre, son collègue Pablo Rodriguez, qui semble admettre l’existence d’un problème, a prétendu que l’augmentation du nombre de temporaires était la faute du Québec. Mme Fréchette affirme au contraire que c’est la faute du fédéral. Peut-on savoir qui remporte la palme de cet édifiant concours de Ponce Pilate ?

Mardi, dans ces pages, la spécialiste Anne-Michèle Meggs a mis clairement la responsabilité sur les épaules du Québec.

À l’exception des demandeurs d’asile, le Québec a indubitablement le pouvoir de réduire le nombre d’étudiants étrangers, qui comptent pour 44 % des temporaires, mais il ne le veut pas ; il a indubitablement le pouvoir de limiter le nombre de travailleurs temporaires (17 %), mais il ne le veut pas.

Sur le reste, les 36 % du Programme de mobilité internationale, Québec a omis d’exiger un droit de veto lors de sa création pendant l’ère Harper. Le gouvernement Legault — au pouvoir pendant l’explosion des temporaires et en possession depuis avril 2022 d’un rapport des experts Pierre Fortin et Marc Termotte l’avisant de sa « perte de contrôle » du dossier — a choisi de ne pas utiliser le levier à sa disposition : réclamer, comme le lui permet l’entente Canada-Québec, l’ouverture de discussions qui lui permettraient d’en reprendre le contrôle.

Bref, alors que 7 Québécois sur 10 savent que l’explosion du nombre d’immigrants rend intenable — et probablement insoluble — la crise du logement, entre autres, nous sommes en présence d’une opposition solidaire fantasmant sur des « déportations » massives et d’un gouvernement caquiste qui se prétend nationaliste, mais refuse d’utiliser les pouvoirs que détient déjà la nation.

Bref, bienvenue au Québec.

Jean-François Lisée a dirigé le PQ de 2016 à 2018. Il vient de publier Par la bouche de mes crayons, aux éditions Somme toute/Le Devoir. jflisee@ledevoir.com

Source: Les expulsions barbares

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

HESA: Canada’s Internationalization Strategy [spoiler, not a strategy]

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

Another insightful analysis by HESA that applies to other areas of government than Global Affairs:

A couple of months ago, I was invited to participate in a Global Affairs Canada (GAC) stakeholder roundtable on its Strategic Plan for the next five years.  It was very kind of them to invite me and a few others to be part of the consultation.  It was an interesting window into how the federal government thinks about policy and – especially – strategy.

It seems to me that GAC is in the education business for three reasons.

  1. It has a commercial function in that it exists to make things easier within the limits of existing provincial and federal legislation to assist in increasing educational imports. 
  2. It has a diplomatic/soft power function in that it is, in conjunction with institutions, meant to generate ongoing goodwill towards Canada with current and future world leaders through programs of educational and cultural exchange. 
  3. It has an immigration function is there to promote immigration via education.  That’s been the policy of the Government of Canada for a decade and a half now. 

But instead of talking about goals and the role of GAC in these three areas, the department chose to jump straight into talking about four “pillars”: digital marketing, diversification (in the sense of widening the international student base beyond India and China), scholarships and education agents. The background papers for those four pillars are available here (there are also another 9 or so background papers here, and kudos to the folks at GAC for making all of this public…it would be normal in other countries, but in Canada, this counts as a major act of transparency).

I don’t want to dismiss these pillars – they are all important – but they don’t really amount to a strategy.  They are more like issue management.  And as a result, what pervaded the discussion was a mixture of presentism and mission confusion.  By presentism, I mean that the conversation tended to focus on “how do we make minor changes to things we do now” rather than “what should we be trying to achieve in this area”?  This was most evident in the discussion about the small suite of scholarships that that GAC runs such as the Canada-ASEAN Scholarships, the Canadian International Development Scholarships Program, and the CARICOM Faculty Leadership Program.  All the questions were about “how can we make these work better?”, where “better” means “in line with educational objectives with respect to student recruitment diversification.  This was disappointing.   The possibility of aligning these with actual foreign policy objectives, like, say, our vaunted turn to the Indo-Pacific?  Not on the table.

Similarly on the question of digital marketing – the Government of Canada spends $5 million year, spread across 25 countries (not India and China), on “promoting the benefits of studying in Canada as they relate to the primary drivers influencing international students’ choice of study destination” (which,  apparently do notinclude immigration – more on that below).  What was at issue was not “is spending this money a good idea?” either in the sense of “is there any evidence that this advertising is working” or “is there any evidence that there is a market failure here given how much institutions themselves spend on marketing?”.  Just, again, “how could we do it better” in the sense of more “efficiency”, not “should we be doing this at all”?

The issue of agents was a bit more intriguing.  As a host of recent news stories have suggested, there are some serious cases of study permit fraud in Canada and we could certainly stand to gain from being more pro-active and adopting stricter controls on agents as other countries have done through the London Statement (which is a good policy in theory, though I suspect over-rigorous enforcement of such policies are a potential nightmare).  But tucked into the paper is a sentence which suggest that from GAC’s perspective the problem is not fraud per se, but “the wrong kind” of students, to wit:

This advising fee model [among student agents] has led to a lack of quality control with respect to study permit applications, resulting in a huge increase in applications from students who have no chance of being approved for a Study Permit, increasing IRCC workloads and contributing to the backlogs in the system, negatively impacting genuine, high-quality prospective students. [emphasis added]

The sharp-eyed will see links here back to the whole “trusted provider” approach that IRCC is taking, only for some reason it’s taking aim at agents rather than institutions.  In any event, we see here that a group of Ottawa officials have a very clear idea in their heads with respect to “genuine” students vs. fake ones, “high-quality” students vs low-quality ones, etc.   And I’m guessing once again it has something to do with the use of the immigration tack.

Why do I think this?  Well, one very intriguing moment in the consultation happened when a fairly senior GAC employee recounted an event he had recently witnessed in Dubai.  At this event, an unnamed university President said something to the effect “come study at my university and you’ll be on a path to Canadian citizenship”.  This was deeply distressing to the GAC employee.  “That’s not what this program is for”, he huffed (he presumably meant both the PGWP program and pathway to Permanent Residency that follows). 

It was on Zoom and most everyone was muted, but I could still hear a lot of jaws dropping at this.  This is of course exactly what IRCC policy is meant to be for.  GAC might not like the policy that IRCC developed, but since it is responsible for selling the policy overseas, you’d think GAC would understand it.  The fact that not everyone there does, combined with the fact that – as noted above – GAC seems determined to ignore the evidence that immigration is a major factor in student choice, suggests some major communications gaps between Ottawa departments.  Maybe not the most auspicious conditions under which to launch a new strategy.

In short, I found this whole exercise to be well-meaning but not particularly strategic.  The strategy focuses on scholarships for students from other countries but refuse to link these scholarships to broader diplomatic or soft power goals.  The strategy wants to attract students from other countries using digital marketing and so forth but refuses to look at the link to immigration, because GAC and IRCC appear to be at cross-purposes on the subject.  It’s the kind of process that might lead to some tiny little improvements but never seems to have even considered the possibility of a strategy that was genuinely transformative.  I don’t feel that’s GAC’s fault, particularly: rather, boldness and ambition just aren’t in a lot of governments’ DNA these days.  Too bad.

Source: Canada’s Internationalization Strategy

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Revealed: thousands who bought ‘golden passports’ through Dominica’s $1bn scheme – The Guardian

2023/10/12 Leave a comment

Good detailed analysis and example of how these programs invariably attracting nefarious characters:

The Caribbean state of Dominica has sold citizenship to thousands of individuals including a former Afghan spymaster, a Turkish millionaire convicted of fraud and a former Libyan colonel under Muammar Gaddafi, the first detailed examination of the country’s controversial “golden passports” scheme has found.

The findings are from Dominica: Passports of the Caribbean, an investigation by the Guardian and 14 other international news organisations, in partnership with the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project(OCCRP).

Dominica’s golden passports scheme – one of the world’s biggest – has according to official declarations raised more than $1bn (£822m) through its citizenship by investment scheme since 2009.

Its passports are in demand around the world, and a series of international agreements ensure its citizens travel visa-free to 140 countries, including most EU member states.

However, until now, the names of the individuals who have paid the price tag of at least $100,000 (£82,000) a head to acquire Dominican nationality – in many cases without setting foot on the island – have been difficult to obtain.

By working with the Government Accountability Project, a US-based advocacy group that scoured archives and libraries across the Caribbean for copies of official public documents, and by reviewing leaked material, the project was able to compile lists of names of thousands of people who became citizens.

The first ever tally of names published in Dominica’s official government gazette shows an island state with a population of just over 70,000 has granted citizenship to 7,700 individuals since 2007 – although our research suggests there may be thousands more. Some were naturalised through immigration or marriage, but the vast majority bought their citizenship.

Any government has the legal right to set its own standards on who becomes a citizen. And for many people living under oppressive regimes, a second nationality can provide security. Names that appeared to be of Iranian, Chinese and Russian heritage were among the largest groups of people who became citizens.

For individuals from these countries, a Dominica passport can also mean less red tape when crossing borders, doing business or opening a bank account abroad.

Some of the findings raise questions about the transparency and governance of the scheme, and some are potentially embarrassing for Dominica.

One buyer had publicly been accused of war crimes before obtaining citizenship, while another had been a colonel and senior security official under Muammar Gaddafi. Citizenship by investment applicants are barred if they have a criminal record but, in one example, a buyer appears to have been jailed for fraud before he secured citizenship. Others have run into trouble since acquiring Dominican citizenship, including one named on Interpol’s wanted red list.

Dominica has become heavily reliant on selling citizenship to fund its public services, with this source of income accounting for about half of all government revenues.

Concerns about the scheme have led to consequences for natural-born Dominicans. The UK government in July stopped visa-free travel from Dominica and four other countries.

Dominica’s government did not respond to detailed requests for comment. However, the prime minister, Roosevelt Skerrit, who has overseen the expansion in citizenship sales since taking office in 2004, defended the programme during press conferences on 18 September and 3 October, apparently in response to this investigation.

He said: “We have professed to have a robust system that we go through in different layers of due diligence, and if somebody were to become a citizen of today and tomorrow morning the person goes and does something and finds himself in problem with the law, you can’t blame the programme for that.”

Skerrit compared the Dominica scheme to the US’s green card, which gives permanent residency rights. He said nobody blames the US when people commit crimes after it grants residency.

He also made a series of outlandish and false claims that reporters on the investigation had been paid by opposition politicians in Dominica to try to “destroy” the scheme, and likened reporters to arsonists and “terrorists”.

Dominica’s national archives are housed in a modern concrete structure, set among the pastel-painted colonial buildings of the small town of Roseau, the island’s capital. Here, string-bound issues of the weekly Dominica Official Gazette can be found.

The gazette is the only official public source of information about the thousands of individuals who have become Dominican citizens. Published only on paper, with no official digital copies, the information the gazettes contain is not easily accessible.

Last year, the Government Accountability Project took action to improve transparency. It viewed dozens of gazettes from libraries, private collections and from the University of the West Indies in Jamaica, and drew up a list of every naturalised citizen from 2007 to 2022.

Other names were found in documents leaked from a hotel developer licensed to accept passport buyers as investors

Among the names brought to light is that of Asadullah Khalid, who served as governor of two provinces of Afghanistan, as the country’s spy chief, and latterly as defence minister. He held these senior positions during the years of turmoil after the invasion by the US and allies in 2001, until the Taliban took over in 2021.

Khalid has been accused by UK and Canadian officials of responsibility for human rights abuses, including allegations, widely reported in 2012, that there was a torture chamber under his guest house. He obtained citizenship in 2017, at a time when these allegations were already public.

The allegations against Khalid have never been tested in court. He has previously said there was no evidence for allegations that were “just propaganda”. Khalid did not respond to requests for comment.

Another investor was Sasi Milud Sasi Grada, a former colonel under the Gaddafi regime in Libya.

Grada obtained citizenship in 2015, having fled Libya after the civil war that overthrew Gaddafi, before returning. In a telephone interview, Grada said although he knew Gaddafi personally from the 1960s onwards, when they trained in the military together, he did not discuss politics with Gaddafi. He said he left the military in 1989 at the rank of colonel, before running government security for facilities such as banks, universities and oilfields until the civil war.

Under Dominican regulations, citizenship by investment applicants are barred if they have a criminal record. However, one individual seems to have been able to purchase citizenship despite appearing to have a conviction for fraud.

The Turkish businessman and former government minister Cavit Çağlar bought citizenship in 2011, seven years after he was given a prison sentence and a fine for fraud relating to Interbank, a bank he owned until it was taken over by Turkish regulators in 1999. In 2010 his sentence was suspended, and reduced to one year and nine months in prison, as well as a fine, the Turkish newspaper Hürriyet reported.

In a 2019 interview, Çağlar said he served nine and a half months in prison, and that he was not a criminal. A representative of Çağlar’s newspaper company, Olay, said he did not wish to comment when approached by the Guardian and OCCRP.

Others appear to have run into trouble after obtaining their passports.

One investor who has faced allegations of wrongdoing since obtaining citizenship is Mehdi Ebrahimi Eshratabadi, an Iranian wanted in Iran for alleged fraud, according to an Interpol red notice.

Eshratabadi, who also goes by the name Tony Newman, obtained Dominican citizenship in 2015. His lawyer described Iran’s addition of him to Interpol’s wanted list in February 2020 as an “abuse of red notice system by the Iranian” government. The lawyer said he was vigorously denying allegations by the Iranian regime and is defending himself in criminal proceedings in Iran.

Oday Nadir Abdulkareem al-Quraishi, an Iraqi, obtained a Dominican passport in 2012, before moving to Dubai, according to previously leaked property records. In 2016, media reports alleged that, while working as an engineer at an Iraqi-state owned oil company, he had accepted bribes between 2009 and 2011 to steer lucrative contracts to clients of Unaoil, an oil services company. The following year Iraq issued a warrant for his arrest in connection with the allegations.

He denied any wrongdoing, and said he left Iraq because of “security and ethnic problems” and “long before any of this start[ed]”. By email, he said he would settle the matter “once the security situation and the time is appropriate”.

Kyle Davies, a leading player in cryptocurrencies, appears to have obtained a Dominican passport in 2009. He co-founded the Three Arrows Capital hedge fund in 2012. However, the fund collapsed in 2022, one of a string of financial failures caused by the crash in cryptocurrencies, leaving investors claiming losses worth billions of dollars.

Teneo, the liquidators of the fund, said in a statement last month that Singapore had issued a “committal order” for four months in prison for Davies for failing to cooperate with the liquidation process, “but his whereabouts remain unknown at this point in time”.

Contacted by the Guardian, Davies’s lawyers criticised the liquidators. They did not address questions about his citizenship.

Golden passport and residency schemes have multiplied in recent years. Dominica’s scheme is one of the cheapest, requiring a direct donation of $100,000 to the government or an investment of $200,000 in a government-approved real estate project.

A former French and then British colony, located in the eastern Caribbean, Dominica gained independence in 1978. Since 1993, it has sold citizenship. Sales began to really take off after 2015, when a treaty signed with the EU guaranteed its citizens visa-free travel in the Schengen area for up to 90 days a year.

Anti-corruption campaigners and politicians have long expressed concerns about golden passport regimes.

Eka Rostomashvili, the campaigns lead at Transparency International, an anti-corruption watchdog, said: “It’s no secret that visa-free travel to the EU and the UK has been one of the main selling points of the Caribbean citizenship by investment programmes. Both the EU and UK have had their fair share of troubles with such schemes, leading several EU countries and the UK to completely shut down their [own] programmes.”

The UK scrapped its golden visa scheme last year, while Cyprus stopped selling citizenship in 2020.

However, golden passports play a central role in Dominica’s economy. The country’s leaders say the money is needed to replace its once dominant banana exports, damaged by changes in trade rules.

Revenues – estimated at more than $1bn since 2009 – have become the main source of income for the Dominican government, helping to fund schools, healthcare and other public services.

Defending the scheme at last month’s press conference, Skerrit said it “underwrites a significant part of economic and social development” on the island, and “has been used to build thousands of homes, improve healthcare, help with national security, help you diversify the economy and grow the economy in agriculture and tourism, with the building of hotels”.

Revenues – estimated at more than $1bn since 2009 – have become the main source of income for the Dominican government, helping to fund schools, healthcare and other public services.

Defending the scheme at last month’s press conference, Skerrit said it “underwrites a significant part of economic and social development” on the island, and “has been used to build thousands of homes, improve healthcare, help with national security, help you diversify the economy and grow the economy in agriculture and tourism, with the building of hotels”.

Source: Revealed: thousands who bought ‘golden passports’ through Dominica’s $1bn scheme – The Guardian

Filed under Citizenship, citizenship-by-investment Tagged with ,

Petition e-4511 – Opposing self-affirmation of the #citizenship oath “citizenship on a click” – Final number

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

The chart below breaks down the final count of 1,549 signatures. No significant change but small overall uptick. Less than I would have hoped but the petition and related commentary and media did increase the visibility of the proposed change and perhaps prompt some reflection at political and official levels.

Thanks to all who supported this petition.

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , ,

Meggs: Le Québec peut contrôler l’immigration temporaire, et voici comment

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

Former Quebec immigration official on the need to include the IMP in the immigration Accord Canada-Québec:

Il est facile de se perdre dans la répartition entre Ottawa et Québec et on peut se demander qui est responsable de l’explosion de l’immigration temporaire. En fait, les deux gouvernements y contribuent, mais grâce à l’Accord Canada-Québec relatif à l’immigration et à l’admission temporaire des aubains de 1991, le Québec peut la réguler sur son territoire.

Il y a quatre sources légales d’immigration temporaire — les demandeurs d’asile et trois programmes de permis, un pour les permis d’études et deux pour les permis de travail, soit le Programme des travailleurs étrangers temporaires (PTET) et le Programme de mobilité internationale (PMI). Selon les données sur le nombre de titulaires de ces trois programmes au 31 décembre 2022, les permis d’études représentaient 46,3 % du total, le PTET 17,5 % et le PMI 36,3 %.

En ce qui concerne les demandeurs d’asile, la situation géopolitique du Canada le rend unique parmi les pays développés. Depuis l’application de l’Entente sur les tiers pays sûrs à l’ensemble de la frontière canado-américaine, le seul moyen d’arriver au Canada pour demander l’asile est par avion. Le Canada se sert des visas et des permis temporaires pour essayer de limiter l’arrivée des personnes demandant l’asile.

Au début de l’année, une décision du gouvernement fédéral visant à réduire rapidement le nombre, considérable, de demandes de visas de visiteurs semble avoir donné lieu à une augmentation importante de demandeurs d’asile aux aéroports, surtout à Toronto et à Montréal. Le Québec régule, par les seuils d’immigration permanente, le nombre de ceux qui seront admis à terme pour rester au Québec, mais pas le nombre de ceux qui arrivent.

Pour le Programme des étudiants étrangers, les provinces, compte tenu de leur compétence en matière d’éducation, peuvent adopter les politiques visant à réduire le nombre de jeunes de l’étranger qui s’inscrivent dans leurs systèmes. Elles ont aussi la responsabilité de désigner les établissements d’enseignement pour les fins d’un permis d’études.

Au Québec, grâce à l’Accord, le fédéral ne peut délivrer un permis d’études sans le consentement du ministère québécois responsable de l’immigration. Pour signaler son consentement, le Québec délivre un Certificat d’acceptation du Québec pour études. Il établit les conditions afférentes et peut décider d’en limiter le nombre qui sera accordé annuellement. À ce jour, il n’y a pas eu de plafond sur le nombre de CAQ-études délivrés.

Il est évident que c’était l’intention des négociateurs de l’Accord que le Québec régule l’ensemble des admissions, permanentes et temporaires. On le voit dans le titre même de l’Accord et dans le préambule, ainsi que dans le titre et la substance de l’Entente Couture-Cullen (1978) sur laquelle l’Accord a été basé, ainsi que dans l’Accord du lac Meech.

En ce qui concerne les travailleurs, au moment de la signature de l’Accord, le PTET était le seul programme visant les travailleurs étrangers temporaires. Il s’agissait d’un programme relativement mineur incluant surtout les travailleurs agricoles saisonniers. Il servait réellement et uniquement de dernier recours pour les employeurs souhaitant pouvoir des postes d’une durée limitée et ayant fait la démonstration que tout effort a été fait pour trouver de la main-d’oeuvre locale.

Il n’est donc pas très surprenant que l’article de l’Accord sur le consentement du Québec pour l’admission des travailleurs étrangers fasse référence à ceux « dont l’admission est régie par les exigences du Canada touchant la disponibilité de travailleurs canadiens ». Il n’y avait pas non plus de politique visant à offrir la résidence permanente aux travailleurs temporaires. Pour demander la résidence permanente, il fallait le faire de l’étranger, une stipulation qui demeure dans l’Accord, mais ne s’applique pas depuis plus de vingt ans.

En ce qui concerne donc ce PTET, la source des fameux « permis fermés », le Québec détermine quels employeurs seront autorisés à embaucher combien d’effectifs et à quelles conditions, et il délivre un CAQ-travail aux personnes embauchées dans le programme. Encore une fois, il établit les conditions du CAQ-travail et peut en limiter le nombre. À ce jour, le gouvernement n’a pas mis de plafond annuel sur le nombre de CAQ-travail.

En 2014, le gouvernement Harper a divisé le PTET en deux pour pouvoir resserrer les règles concernant l’embauche de main-d’oeuvre de l’étranger pour les besoins du marché du travail. Il a créé un autre programme, le Programme de mobilité internationale, pour les personnes étrangères travaillant temporairement au Canada pour d’autres raisons. Normalement, la création de ce programme aurait dû être abordée par le Comité mixte, l’instance bilatérale créée par l’Accord pour gérer son application et résoudre les différends en matière d’immigration, mais on ne sait pas si cela a été le cas. Il suffit de dire que le Québec ne délivre pas de CAQ-travail dans le cadre du PMI.

Deuxième programme en importance après les permis d’études, le PMI a connu une croissance fulgurante dans les dix dernières années et est devenu le chemin principal pour la transition d’un statut temporaire à un statut permanent.

Si le Québec voulait réguler l’ensemble de son immigration, dans le cadre quasi constitutionnel qu’offre l’Accord, il suffirait de donner les instructions au Comité mixte de négocier les démarches nécessaires pour assurer le consentement du Québec aux permis de travail du PMI. Cela étant dit, même avec un tel contrôle, le gouvernement sera-t-il prêt à s’en servir pour inclure l’immigration temporaire dans sa planification pluriannuelle d’immigration ?

Source: Le Québec peut contrôler l’immigration temporaire, et voici comment

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Sean Speer: Shocking pro-Hamas, anti-Israel rallies lay bare the limits of Canadian pluralism

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

Expect to see more similar commentary. The formal limits are essentially our laws and regulations with informal limits even harder to enforce consistently. Without getting into “both side-ism,” the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and repression of Palestinians draws insufficient coverage and commentary. But the barbarism of Hamas needs to be condemned without reservation:

As Palestine supporters continue to organize themselves in different Canadian cities to effectively demonstrate in favour of Hamas’s abhorrent attacks on the State of Israel, the inherent tensions and limits of pluralism have been laid bare for everyone to see. 

Pluralism is a key part—arguably the key part—of Canada’s conception of itself and our common citizenship. The country’s basic promise is one of peaceful co-existence. Our institutions, norms, and practices are set up to accommodate a multiplicity of viewpoints and persuasions concerning the most fundamental questions about justice, human flourishing, and what constitutes the good life. 

Pluralism is also a key—arguably the key part—of my own worldview. Although, as I’ve grown older, I’ve become more comfortable in my own thinking about these questions, I’ve also grown less comfortable with the idea of imposing my answers on others. Our own limitations (what Kant referred to as our “crooked timber”) invariably constrain the individual pursuit of truth. The public square should therefore be a crowded, complicated, and contentious marketplace of ideas. The state must resist imposing a singular conception of truth on the society. 

Yet pluralism cannot be an open-ended promise either. Just because our ability to discern the truth may be imperfect and incomplete doesn’t mean that we should give into an empty relativism. Some ideas are bad and wrong. We cannot permit our pluralistic commitments to provide license for those who reject our society’s basic values or even wish to do it harm. Pluralism cannot be a one-sided surrender to illiberal and reactionary forces. 

We’ve witnessed in recent days these tensions and limits inherent to Canadian pluralism. While most of us mourned and lamented the inhumanity of Hamas’s terrorist attacks on Israel, a small minority among us have defended and even celebrated them. These individuals and organizations have relied on Canada’s promise of freedom to countenance and glorify the indiscriminate violence of a group designated as a terrorist organization by our own government. 

There have been pro-Palestinian demonstrations across the country that have effectively affirmed Hamas’s terrorism. The videos from these pro-Hamas rallies in cities such as Mississauga and Montreal have been shocking. It must be said that rallies in support of a terrorist organization that has carried out a systematic campaign of killing women and children are incompatible with Canadian values.

Meanwhile, groups such as the Muslim Association of Canada and National Council of Canadian Muslims (which according to online records have received more than $1.34 million in federal funding between them since 2018) may be more careful in their messaging, but they’re still ultimately equivocal about what the world has witnessed. Their tendency towards “two-sideism” and other prevaricating devices have obscured the extent to which they implicitly affirm Hamas’ narrative. If in the face of overwhelming evidence of brutality and cruelty against Israelis your first instinct is to lament “the tyranny and terrorism of the Zionists” or criticize Israel’s democratic leadership, you’ve for all intents and purposes exposed your true character. 

Which it must be said is fair enough as far as some pluralistic protections go. One can oppose the current Israeli government or even critique the State of Israel itself and of course still find him or herself able to avail Canada’s protections of freedom of conscience or expression. We cannot and should not police one’s thoughts per se. But it certainly doesn’t mean that radical groups are entitled to taxpayer dollars or that individuals who cross the line from reasonable disagreements to the promotion and glorification of violence shouldn’t face sanction. 

These basic observations shouldn’t in and of themselves be controversial. Our commitment to pluralism must be uncompromising up and until it comes to undermine the basic security and stability of our own society. As my former boss Brian Lee Crowley has often said: “[we cannot permit] our list of freedoms to become our suicide note.”

Drawing these lines is of course complicated. Our default assumption must be highly permissive. Just because an idea is controversial or at odds with the majority’s views isn’t a reason to exclude it from the public square. The health of our society is measured in part by our willingness to protect ample space for such views. Imposing parameters around the public square therefore comes with great risk. Those parameters can be misapplied, misread, or even wielded by those whose primary goal is to constrain ideas that don’t match their own preferences. Just because it’s hard, however, doesn’t mean that it’s a task that we should shrink from. 

There are perspectives that should rightly be denounced, marginalized, and precluded from receiving public dollars. Even if one is squeamish about laws and policies that criminalize acts like the glorification of terrorism, there ought to be a minimum agreement that we have a collective responsibility to condemn such behaviour in order to effectively raise its social costs and signal to those inside and outside of our society that our pluralism isn’t a license for depravity or violence. 

Canada has essentially bet its future on pluralism. As our population gets more and more diverse, the multiplicity of views will grow and pluralism will be crucial for managing our diversity. I think it’s a good bet. Unlike some conservatives, I’ve tended to disagree with the instinct to mock Prime Minister Trudeau’s assertion that “diversity is our strength.” I think it’s broadly true. But if our pluralism isn’t principled, if it doesn’t involve some limits, then diversity will cease to be our strength and may eventually become the source of our undoing. 

Source: Sean Speer: Shocking pro-Hamas, anti-Israel rallies lay bare the limits of Canadian pluralism

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Participation in Canadian society through sport and work

2023/10/11 Leave a comment

Some interesting gender and population group differences. Male participation in sports higher than female, and considerable differences among different groups. Cost of participation is a greater issue among visible minorities.

Overall, most felt that cultural differences were appreciated in the workforce, with significant lower numbers of Black, Korean and Chinese persons. Black and Korean persons also reported higher levels of discrimination and racism:

With more than 450 ethnic or cultural origins reported in the 2021 Census, the rich diversity is reflected in all spheres of Canadian life, where people in Canada live, play and work. New data from the Survey Series on People and their Communities (SSPC), collected from May 5th to July 25th 2023, provide insight into this diversity, with information on sport and political engagement, as well as workplace cultures and shared values.

This release focuses on participation in sport and experiences at work, which are key indicators in Canada’s Quality of Life Framework and the Social Inclusion Framework. Together with information on the experiences of different population groups, these data help provide a valuable understanding of social inclusion, equity and diversity within different aspects of Canadian society.

About half of Canadians participate in sport

Involvement in sport is just one example of participating in Canadian society, and represents a key well-being indicator in the Quality of Life Framework. While playing a sport is consistently ranked as the most common form of civic engagement, the prevalence, motivations to play, and barriers to participate vary by gender, racialized group, and immigration status.

Throughout Canada, people from all walks of life participated in some type of sport in the 12 months preceding the survey, with slightly more than half (55%) of people aged 15 years of age and older reporting participating in sports such as soccer, ice hockey, swimming and running. Overall, men (62%) were more likely to participate in sports than women (49%).

Across the majority of all population groups, the participation rates of men were higher than those of women, but the difference was most pronounced among Filipino (55% of men versus 29% of women) and Black (66% of men versus 42% of women) populations where men were much more likely to play sports than women. The Arab population also showed discrepancy between men and women’s sports participation, with high rates for men. Indeed, 7 in 10 Arab men played a sport compared with just under one-half of Arab women (48%).

Overall, for both women and men, the Korean (62%) and Chinese (62%) populations were among the most likely to have played sports, and this remained true for men and women in these groups (69% for both Korean and Chinese men, and 55% for both Korean and Chinese women). Meanwhile, the least likely groups to report sport participation were South Asian (46%) and Filipino (41%) populations.

What is the most popular sport? It varies!

Among those who participated in some type of sport over the previous 12 months, swimming was the most common, reported by over one-third (35%) of people. This was closely followed by cycling (33%) and running (27%).

The popularity of specific sports varied across racialized groups. Swimming topped the list overall but was the leading sport for only the non-racialized population (37%), West Asians (36%) and Koreans (36%). Running was the favourite sport among the greatest number of racialized groups. Chinese (40%), Japanese (35%), Southeast Asian (35%), South Asian (33%) and Black (32%) populations participated in running, more than any other sport, as well as people belonging to two or more racial or cultural groups (i.e., multiple racialized groups) (37%).

Soccer was another popular sport among racialized groups. It was most common among the Arab population (40%) and was the second most common sport for Black respondents (31%).

In general, the Canadian-born population was more likely to have participated in winter sports such as ice hockey, skating, skiing and snowboarding, compared with immigrants, who were more likely to have played soccer, tennis or basketball.

Most people play sports for health and fitness

Playing sports can be done recreationally or competitively, though most people played recreationally over the previous 12 months. Overall, 83% of sports players reported playing sports recreationally, outside of a club or league. This was sometimes done in combination with more structured recreational programs, through a club or league, such as group fitness, intramural sports, or sport clubs. Almost one-quarter (24%) played recreational sports, while a smaller share (11%) said they were registered in a competitive sport.

When asked what motivates them to participate in sports, 82% of people who took part in sports cited physical health and fitness, followed by fun, recreation or relaxation (70%), mental health benefits (65%) and doing activities with friends (54%.)

Cost of participating is a common barrier to sport participation for racialized groups

Overall, a lack of interest (35%) was the most often cited by respondents as a reason for not playing sports over the previous 12 months. This was the case for both men and women, and was seen across all racialized groups. Two other commonly cited reasons for not playing sports were lack of time (33%) and age (24%).

The cost of participating was reported as a barrier by 11% of people who did not play sports. This was more often cited by Koreans (20%), West Asians (20%) and Latin Americans (17%), who were nearly twice as likely as non-racialized Canadians (10%) to cite this barrier.

Immigrants were more likely than their Canadian-born counterparts to indicate lack of time (37% for immigrants versus 30% for Canadian-born people) and age (28% versus 24%) as barriers to participating in sports.

Women more likely to say cultural differences enrich their workplace

Work constitutes a significant domain of life, characterized by connections that can profoundly impact health, economic well-being, job satisfaction, and career advancement. Just as engaging in physical activity can positively influence overall well-being, experiences at work play a pivotal role in fostering feelings of inclusion and respect within the workplace.

Just under half of those who worked over the previous 12 months stated they felt that cultural differences enrich their workplace (46%). Women (49%) were more likely than men (44%) to say they felt that cultural differences enriched their workplace.

For nearly all racialized groups, more than half felt that cultural differences enrich the workplace (ranging from 41% to 65%). While 43% of those not belonging to a racialized group indicated that they felt cultural differences enriched the workplace, this group was the most likely to indicate that there were no cultural differences in their workplace (16%).

More than half (54%) of immigrants said they felt that cultural differences enrich their workplace, compared with 43% of the Canadian-born population. Additionally, immigrants (10%) were less likely than Canadian-born respondents (15%) to indicate that there were no cultural differences in their workplace.

Around 85% of Canadians feel cultural differences are respected in the workplace

Around 85% of Canadians who have worked at a job or business in the previous 12 months felt that cultural differences were respected in their workplace. Racialized groups (81%) were less likely than non-racialized Canadians (86%) to feel that cultural differences were respected in their workplaces. Japanese (87%), Latin American (86%) and Arab (86%) people, in addition to those who do not belong to a racialized group, were most likely to say that they felt that cultural differences were respected. However, Black (74%), Korean (74%) and Chinese (81%) people in Canada were least likely to believe that diversity was valued in their workplace. Immigrants (82%) were less likely to indicate that cultural differences were respected in their workplace than the Canadian-born respondents (86%).

More than one-fifth of Black and Korean people in Canada report having experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination while at work

Around 12% of those who worked in the previous 12 months indicated that they had experienced unfair treatment, racism or discrimination while at work. Women (15%) were more likely than men (10%) to report having experienced some type of unfair treatment.

Among those reporting experiences of some type of unfair treatment in the workplace, race or skin colour was the most common reason (29%), followed by sex (27%) and age (23%). Among women, the top basis of unfair treatment in the workplace was sex (37%), followed by race or skin colour (25%). For men, race or skin colour was the top reason (35%) followed by ethnicity or culture (27%).

All racialized groups were more likely than the non-racialized group (10%) to report having been subjected to some type of unfair treatment in the workplace. However, Black (26%) and Korean (20%) people in Canada were most likely to experience some type of unfair treatment. Immigrants (15%) were also more likely than the Canadian-born (11%) to experience some type of unfair treatment while at work.

Race and skin colour was one of the top reasons for reporting some type of unfair treatment at work for those belonging to racialized groups, ranging from a high of 78% among Black people to 28% for Latin American people. Ethnicity or culture was another common reason, especially for South Asian (50%) and Arab (48%) groups. Another commonly reported reason for some type of unfair treatment among Arab people in Canada was religion (45%). Having an accent was a top reason cited by Latin American people, which was as common for this group as ethnicity or culture (40% for both reasons). 

For immigrants in Canada, the main reasons reported for experiencing some type of unfair treatment while at work was race or skin colour (46%), and ethnicity or culture (38%), followed by accent and language (28% each).

The analysis of sports and cultural diversity in the workplace only covers two of the many facets of Canadian society that can be examined. Future analysis using the SSPC on topics such as shared values and political engagement will continue the contribution to a greater understanding of the experiences of different groups of Canadians.

Source: Participation in Canadian society through sport and work

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Ottawa reviewing virtual citizenship ceremonies as petition calls on government to pull the plug – CBC News

2023/10/10 Leave a comment

Latest article on “citizenship on a click.” Petition closes today at 3 pm:

Source: Ottawa reviewing virtual citizenship ceremonies as petition calls on government to pull the plug – CBC News

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with , , , ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →