CBA: Restoring lost citizenship – S-245

Of note, like other witnesses, raising the first generation cut-off:

The CBA’s  Immigration Law Section supports retroactively restoring citizenship to individuals who lost theirs under s. 8 of the Citizenship Act. In a letter to the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, the Section makes two recommendations to improve Bill S-245, An Act to amend the Citizenship Act (granting citizenship to certain Canadians). The CBA Section appeared in front of the Committee to present its recommendations on March 27.

Clarify the date of citizenship

Until Parliament enacted Bill C-37 in 2009, individuals born outside Canada to Canadian citizen parents in the second or subsequent generations between February 15, 1977 and April 17, 2009 had until their 28th birthday to apply to retain their Canadian citizenship. After Bill C-37, the retention requirements were repealed but only for individuals who had not yet lost their citizenship.

“The CBA Section supports eliminating the requirement to meet the retention requirements by age 28 and retroactively restoring citizenship to their date of birth. However, it is unclear if Bill S-245 will restore citizenship as of the date the Actcomes into effect, or retroactively to the date citizenship was lost. We recommend that this be clarified.”

This is important, the letter adds, because it affects an individual’s ability to pass on citizenship to their children.

Pre-empting potential Charter challenges

S. 3(4) of the Citizenship Act inadvertently treats people differently based on their grandparent’s gender and marital status and Bill S-245 is liable to make that problem worse. The Section therefore recommends either amending S-245 or introducing a new bill to pre-empt a potential Charter challenge to s. 3(4) of the Citizenship Act.

The second potential Charter issue is that current legislation does not allow people who live abroad but have significant ties to Canada and who are born in the second or subsequent generations to become Canadian citizens. “Parliament may wish to consider changes to the Citizenship Act, to permit those born in second and subsequent generations to also become Canadian citizens,” the CBA letter reads.

Source: National – Restoring lost citizenship

The safe-third-country amendment paves a balanced road to refugee protection, The deaths in the St. Lawrence River show that border ‘control’ is a fallacy

Two contrasting perspectives, Michael Barutciski of York University, praising the agreement as being balanced, Christina arguing that it will result in significant hardship, human smuggling and deaths.

I find Barutciski more realistic and his arguments more convincing.

Starting with Barutciski:

After years of controversy, the Trudeau government is putting an end to the unofficial crossings at Roxham Road, which were undermining public confidence in border integrity. While all migrants must be treated with dignity, we should also recognize that effective protection is about balancing the rights of asylum seekers with legitimate state concerns. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears aware, at last, that asylum is a two-way street and that the situation was leading to a backlash. He announced last week with U.S. President Joe Biden that the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) will extend across the entire Canada-U.S. border. This can lead to a balanced overall policy if there is a genuine commitment to a comprehensive regional approach.

Although commentators insisted the U.S. would never agree to remove the loophole in the STCA that allowed the Roxham Road situation, the timing was right for a renegotiation. The Biden administration is leading a collaborative strategy to establish orderly migration in the Americas, and the recent scandalous revelations that U.S. officials were encouraging irregular migrants to cross at Roxham Road provided Ottawa with the additional impetus to take a broader, hemispheric approach to migration.

Even before these revelations, the application of the STCA was undermining public trust. It left the impression that the government was unable to control the border; illegal entry at Roxham Road became so easy that it was almost an invitation for undocumented migrants to try their chances at obtaining asylum in Canada. It also gave the appearance of an incoherent system favouring irregular migrants over those who present themselves at official crossings. The latter were generally turned back to the U.S. in accordance with the STCA, which stipulates that they should seek protection in the first “safe” country they enter. No protection principle could justify such a double standard, one that treated asylum seekers differently based on which part of the land border they used to enter.

The additional protocol announced recently follows the most rational option: By extending the STCA to the entire border, it guarantees that collaboration between the U.S. and Canada is not limited to official crossings. Neither country is obliged to return migrants, although they now have the formal structures to proceed this way if they so choose. The dissuasion element will make irregular migration more complicated, so the logic is that fewer migrants will choose this path. Refugee advocates and their academic allies have countered by claiming that migrants will now start to cross at more remote places, implying border control is futile. This is essentially an argument for open borders.

By amending the STCA, Ottawa has backtracked from its previous position that the 1951 Refugee Convention automatically grants every asylum seeker at Roxham Road the right to a hearing. Indeed, the word “asylum” was deliberately omitted from the convention’s 46 articles, and following a failed endeavour to adopt an asylum treaty in 1977, no further attempts have been made to codify a legally binding right to seek asylum. Just as international treaty law does not stipulate such a right, the Supreme Court’s landmark Singhdecision never determined that every asylum seeker automatically has the right to a hearing once they set foot in Canada.

Yet the government’s previous position played well to activists and academics who continue to prefer the status quo, which has an understandable appeal if the issue is simply about handling irregular migration at the border in a somewhat predictable and semi-orderly manner. However, this view remains tone-deaf to the symbolic impact of the RCMP’s credibility-sapping participation in border theatre: Until recently, border agents tried to dissuade migrants from entering illegally by yelling out that they will be arrested, even though everyone knew they would be immediately released to pursue their asylum claims in Canada.

Last month’s diplomatic development should stop this situation from continuing. It appears to be a simple version of a quid pro quo arrangement previously suggested to advance negotiations: Washington has agreed to amend the STCA, while Ottawa has committed to resettling at least 15,000 asylum seekers from Latin America. But as migration flows stabilize, the Canadian contribution should expand well beyond 15,000 resettled refugees. By tending to humanitarian needs, Canada’s labour shortages could also be addressed by new legal pathways for migrants, who have much to contribute to the economy.

Instead of the current undignified status quo that forces migrants to enter illegally at Roxham Road, ambitious collaboration could bring us closer to a humane model for orderly migration not just between Canada and the U.S., but around the world. The crucial question is whether there will be a long-term commitment.

Michael Barutciski is co-ordinator of Canadian Studies at York University’s Glendon College. He was previously director of the diplomacy program at the University of Canterbury Law School and fellow in law at Oxford University’s Refugee Studies Centre.

Source: The safe-third-country amendment paves a balanced road to refugee protection

Following with Clark-Kazak:

The recent deaths of eight people at the Canada-U.S. border are the tragic but predictable consequences of policies that fail to account for the realities of global migration.

Last week, police reported that eight bodies – including an infant and two-year-old child – were found in the St. Lawrence River near the Kanien’kehá:ka community of Akwesasne. Six adults holding Indian and Romanian citizenship, along with two Canadian children of the Romanian couple, were reportedlytrying to cross irregularly into the United States. Casey Oakes, an Akwesasne resident, is still missing.

What may surprise Canadians is that the victims appeared to be heading from Canada into the United States. But the issue of irregular migration has long cut both ways – and recently changes by both parties only make matters worse.

This tragedy occurred less than a week after U.S. President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced changes to the Safe Third Country Agreement. While most of the media and political attention has focused primarily on the resulting closure of the irregular border crossing at Roxham Road in Quebec, the deal also requires, with limited exceptions, anyone claiming asylum after arriving by land to make their refugee claim in the first country they reach, either the U.S. or Canada.

The Canadian government’s primary objective appears to be to limit the overall number of refugee claims in Canada. The deal allows Canada to turn back refugee claimants at official land ports of entry, and to deport people who cross irregularly from the U.S. and subsequently make an asylum claim.

While they are small in number compared with the 2.4 million encounters by U.S. Customs and Border Protection on the country’s southern border with Mexico in 2022, Mr. Biden faced domestic political pressure to address the increasing numbers of people crossing irregularly into the U.S. from Canada. These irregular crossings, typically motivated by family and community networks and employment opportunities in the U.S., required the Americans and Canadians to publicly co-operate on the issue.

Many migrant fatalities over the past year have involved people crossing north to south. In January, 2022, the Patel family from India died while attempting to enter from Manitoba. Fritznel Richard, a Haitian man, died trying to reach his family in the U.S. from Quebec in December, 2022. In February, 2023, Jose Leos Cervantes, from Mexico, died shortly after crossing into New York State in sub-zero temperatures. These deaths occurred because there was no option like Roxham Road to allow for relatively safe, irregular passage from Canada to the U.S.

However, the resulting STCA amendment actually reduces overall immigrationpathways, thereby increasing the chances of irregular crossings and death.

Research shows that the securitization and militarization of borders has only driven up human smuggling and risky journeys on the land and sea borders of the European Union and at the U.S.-Mexico border, which the International Organization for Migration deemed “the deadliest land crossing in the world.”

While rich countries in Europe and North America benefit from globalization and the free movement of capital, many also attempt to close their borders – administratively and physically – to people seeking safety, security and a better life. These are not evidence-based policies. They are political measures to try to reassure domestic constituencies that they are “in control.”

But controlling borders – especially one as long and geographically complex as the Canada-U.S. border – is an impossible proposition. For as long as desperation remains the driver, irregular border crossings will continue, in both directions, no matter the risk.

Last month, in keeping with its decades-long patterns, Washington budgeted US$25-billion for border control, immigration detention and deportation. But despite such spending, the U.S. is estimated to have the largest undocumented population in the world, at more than 10 million. These people are often then driven into precarious employment that can lead to exploitation.

These resources would be better invested in clearing massive immigration backlogs – another problem Canada shares with the U.S. – and in creating more legal pathways to residency and citizenship. Funding could also be redirected to supporting communities along the border that are negatively affected by increased securitization and surveillance, but are otherwise neglected and marginalized. The Kanien’kehá:ka community of Akwesasne, for instance, has to contend with colonially imposed complications associated with its territory straddling Ontario, Quebec and New York State, which makes access to services (including health care) a challenge.

By following the U.S.’s lead on migration and border policies, Canada is making a costly mistake – in terms of how it is failing to invest in solutions that address the root causes of irregular migration, but also in terms of the impact their short-sighted policy making will have on human lives.

Christina Clark-Kazak is an associate professor at the University of Ottawa.

Source: The safe-third-country amendment paves a balanced road to refugee protection, The deaths in the St. Lawrence River show that border ‘control’ is a fallacy

Trudeau says orderly immigration system is needed, after deaths of eight migrants

Confidence might also be increased if the government could demonstrate a more prudent and realistic approach to immigration levels. Arguably, the rapid increase in temporary workers and students, significantly more than Permanent Residents, uncapped and not in the annual levels plan, is by itself another manifestation of less than orderly immigration:

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is reiterating the importance of an orderly immigration system as police investigate the deaths of eight migrants, including two toddlers, in the Mohawk territory of Akwesasne last week.

Last month, Canada negotiated a deal with the United States to turn away asylum seekers at unofficial border crossings like Roxham Road, closing a long-standing loophole in the Safe Third Country Agreement.

The deal means people will be turned away from the border no matter where they try to cross. The aim is for people to make their asylum claim in the first country they land in, whether it be Canada or the United States.

Migrant advocates warned the new rules would push people to take even greater risks in their efforts to cross the border, like using smugglers and moving to even more remote crossings.

A week later, the bodies of eight people were pulled from the St. Lawrence River after they tried to make it into the U.S. from Canada by boat.

The prime minister called the deaths a tragedy, but said Canada needs to maintain public confidence in the immigration system.

“When people take risks to cross our borders in an irregular fashion or if they pay criminals to get them across the border, this isn’t a system we can have confidence in,” Trudeau said in French at a press conference in Val-d’Or, Que.

Canada is prepared to welcome more immigrants than ever, he said, “but we’re going to make sure that it’s done in the right ways, appropriately.”

The government’s immigration plan says between 410,000 and 505,000 people will become permanent residents this year, which would be the highest number in recent history.

But since COVID-19 border restrictions lifted in 2021, the number of asylum claims has significantly surpassed pre-pandemic levels. Cities and provinces, particularly Quebec, have said the number of families claiming asylum have put pressure on local services.

Despite the recent clampdown at the border, the federal government set aside $1 billion for temporary shelter and health-care coverage for asylum seekers.

NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan called on the government to suspend the Safe Third Country Agreement Monday, saying it was negotiated in secret and without consultation.

“I do fear that people will die,” said Kwan at a press conference at the irregular border crossing near Emerson, Man.

She was joined by Seidu Mohammed, a bisexual man from Ghana, whose asylum claim was rejected in America. He spent a year in immigration detention before he crossed into Canada through an irregular border crossing.

If he didn’t, he fears he would have been deported to Ghana where sexual acts between consenting people of the same gender is against the law and people who identify as LGBTQ face discrimination and violence.

Mohammed said he was terrified when he heard about the new policy.

“It’s going to put a lot of immigrants and refugees in danger, and they’re going to lose their lives from this,” he said.

Immigration Minister Sean Fraser called the deaths of the migrants in Akwesasne horrific, and said they have caused him to think about changes.

“I don’t have an announcement on a policy change today, but I can reassure you that I’m thinking very deeply about what shifts we ought to be making in Canada,” he said, reflecting specifically on the fact that the two children who died had Canadian passports.

The children were one and two years old.

Fraser said the government is looking at putting money toward some of the root causes that push people to make perilous journeys through irregular border crossings in the first place, but repeated the prime minister’s message about the importance of an orderly system.

“We want to do what we can to promote opportunities for people to come through regular pathways so they know that they’re going to be able to arrive in Canada safely, whether that’s through our refugee programs, whether that’s through our economic programs to be reunited with their families,” Fraser said at a press conference in Calgary.

Source: Trudeau says orderly immigration system is needed, after deaths of eight migrants

Daphne Bramham: Muslims and Sikhs of Indian descent want Canada to do more to protect them

Of note:

Like Canadians of Chinese, Uyghur, Tibetan, Russian and Iranian descent, organizations representing the Indian diaspora say their members have been subject to foreign intimidation and have seen evidence of India attempting to interfere in elections here.

They’re urging Canada to set up a foreign agents registry and add India to the list of governments exerting undue influence here.

“Canada’s racialized communities are simultaneously some of the most targeted — and vulnerable — for foreign interference, intimidation and harassment in pursuit of securing the policy objectives of foreign states,” says a March report released by the B.C. Gurdwaras Council and the Ontario Gurdwaras Committee.

That’s echoed in a joint report by the National Council of Canadian Muslims and the World Sikh Organization of Canada, also released in March.

While the reports are aimed at raising awareness, they also underscore just how complicated the issues of foreign interference and diaspora politics are.

The World Sikh Organization has been linked to the Sikh separatist movement. As recently as 2018, “Sikh extremism” was mentioned in the Canadian Security Intelligence Service annual assessment of domestic terror threats. The reference to Sikh extremism was later removed because it “unintentionally maligned certain communities.”

During Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s visit to India in 2018, concerns were repeatedly raised about Sikh separatists in Canada, and included the four Sikhs in his cabinet.

It’s a link so deeply embedded in the Indian consciousness that after a father was stabbed to death outside a Vancouver Starbucks last week and Inderdeep Singh Gosal was arrested, a Delhi-based journalist tweeted — without evidence — that it was “a shocking murder by a Khalistani radical.” Other Indian media websites posted similar descriptions.

The two March reports blame the continued stereotyping of Sikhs and Muslims on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Hindu-first policies and its attempt to spread its message to the Hindu diaspora through a network of organizations aligned with the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party.

Since the Bharatiya Janata Party came to power in 2014, human rights groups have raised concerns about the erosion of civil rights, arbitrary detention of activists, journalists and critics, and the use of counterterrorism laws to silence dissent.

In 2022, Amnesty International reported that the Indian government “selectively and viciously cracked down on religious minorities, and explicit advocacy of hatred by political leaders and public officials towards them was commonplace and went unpunished.”

It noted that “punitive demolitions of Muslim family homes and businesses were carried out with impunity.” Peaceful protests were treated as a threat to public order, and minority and marginalized communities continued to face violence and entrenched discrimination.

The joint Muslim and Sikh report alleges the Indian government — through its diplomats and an expanding network of aligned organizations — is attempting to spread the message through “bold and often public stereotyping of Muslims and Sikhs as anti-Indian, anti-Canadian, and Hindu-phobic terrorists working to discredit the BJP’s reputation and accomplishments across the world.”

The gurdwaras report echoes that concern, alleging that Indian diplomats and intelligence agencies are trying to “persuade Canadian policymakers to criminalize and prosecute Sikh political advocacy in Canada under the guise of ‘countering extremism.’”

Among the evidence cited of Indian government interference is a CSIS document filed in a 2018 immigration case. Global News reported in 2020 that CSIS said the Indian citizen, an editor known only by his initials, was involved in espionage.

It said he attempted to sway politicians into supporting Indian government interests following more than two dozen meetings in Canada with agents from India’s two main intelligence branches.

Since 2014, the joint Sikh and Muslim report says, there has been a rapid expansion of both the radical Hindu nationalist network called the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and the Overseas Friends of the Bharatiya Janata Party, which is listed on the American’s registry of foreign agents.

In 2018, the Canadian Overseas Friends of the Bharatiya Janata Party and its chapters in B.C., Alberta, Manitoba and Ontario changed their name to Canada India Global Forum.

According to the forum’s website, its mission is to “utilize the Indo-Canadian diaspora in Canada to help promote and strengthen the economic, bicultural and political ties.”

The Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh played a key role in Modi’s party winning successive majorities in 2014 and 2019. Quotes from its founders and early leaders citing Nazi Germany as an inspiration are included in the report. It warns that the Indian government’s nationalist policies pit Hindus against other religious minorities and that message is being exported here.

It also says that the “sectarian, discriminatory, and often hateful antipathy toward those framed by RSS and Hindutva ideology as enemies … pose a direct threat to Muslim and Sikh communities, as well as to the social fabric of Canada.”

It singles out Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh as part of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s Canadian network, noting that photos on the group’s Facebook page include images of some of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh’s earliest leaders “often strewn with flowers.”

Hindu Swayamsevak Sangh is a tax-exempt charity with 25 Canadian chapters or shakhas including some operating out of public schools in Ontario.

According to the its website, it encourages “maintaining Hindu cultural identity in harmony with the larger community” through structured programs of regular athletic and academic activities that develop leadership skills “emphasizing values such as self-discipline, self-confidence and a spirit of selfless service for humanity.”

Coincident to foreign interference in Canada widely discussed last month, hundreds of people gathered in Vancouver outside the Indian consulate and rallied in Prince George to protest mass arrests, internet and mobile phone shutdowns in Punjab as police hunt for activist Amritpal Singh.

Singh has been described as the leader of a renewed Sikh separatist movement and is being sought by police for attempted murder, obstruction of law enforcement and creating disharmony.

If this is a harbinger of rising Sikh separatist sentiment in Canada, Canada will have to respond, adding a further complication to the knotty problem of protecting Canadians from foreign interference, while also ensuring all citizens’ right to speak freely and be free from discrimination.

Source: Daphne Bramham: Muslims and Sikhs of Indian descent want Canada to do more to protect them

Is the government doing enough to help these ‘lost Canadians’?

Interesting that committee hearings focussed on the narrow changes related to a gap in coverage of “lost Canadians” (S-245) turned into a broader discussion of the first generation cut-off (children born to Canadians themselves born abroad are not  Canadian citizens).

As for the analysis of the relative restrictiveness of generation limits, the more relevant cohort are immigration-based countries, where citizenship at birth is the general rule, and countries in Europe and elsewhere, where blood line is the basis of citizenship.

The previous retention provisions were complex and largely unworkable and developing a”connection test with simple and clear criteria” is neither simple nor clear:

Carol Sutherland-Brown’s family is part of a sprawling military legacy that began here even before Canada became a country.

Born in 1955, her father, Colonel John Orton, was born in Alberta and served as an artillery officer during World War II.

Her husband’s family settled in the country in the 1840s. His father, too, served in the war as colonel commandant of the Canadian Royal Engineers.

Sutherland-Brown says she’s a proud and loyal Canadian who would love to pass on that identity for generations, and it pains her that her two grandchildren, Findley, 5, and Sloane, 3, are being “robbed” of their citizenship just because they were born in the U.K.

“My daughter is an only child. I’m an only child. So that’s the end of the line for Canada,” said the 68-year-old Ottawa woman, a retired civil servant for the federal government.

What led to the lost Canadians in her family can be traced back almost four decades when Sutherland-Brown gave birth to her daughter, Marisa, in Saudi Arabia in 1985 while she and her husband were working overseas. The family moved back to Canada permanently when Marisa was 2.

Little would she have known the citizenship law would change, apply retroactively and upend her family history in Canada.

“I wish I could have gone back. But you can’t go back and choose where someone’s born,” she lamented.

In 2009, the previous Conservative government changed the citizenship act and imposed the so-called “second generation” cut-off that denies the transmission of citizenship by descent to foreign-born kids if both their Canadian parents also happened to be born overseas.

The change was to discourage “Canadians of convenience,” individuals with Canadian citizenship who live outside of Canada without “substantive ties” to Canada but were part of the government liability.

An amendment to the citizenship act is currently under review by the parliamentary immigration committee, which will go through it clause by clause in April before reporting back to the House of Commons for final reading.

However, critics say the proposed change in the law doesn’t go far enough to help the tens of thousands of lost Canadians now and in the future. And it unfairly penalizes women who choose to travel for work opportunities during their child-bearing years.

Bill S-245, as it is, will only restore citizenship for those who lost it as a result of an administrative gap under the previous amendment to the “age-28” rule, which required Canadians born abroad to apply to retain their citizenship before they turned 28. Unaware of the rule, they became lost Canadians on their 28th birthday.

“It’s a very small group of people who, during a particular historical time, lost their citizenship as a result of a technicality. And Bill S-245 is attempting to remedy their situation,” said University of Victoria professor emeritus Donald Galloway, who studied citizenship laws.

“But there is a larger group who are suffering a similar injustice and will continue to do so in the future because the law actually denies them citizenship, even though they may have well entrenched connections with Canada.”

Galloway said it’s a “mystery” why Canada uses one’s place of birth as a device to identify the deserving Canadian from the non-deserving, and arbitrarily limits the passage of citizenship by decent to the first generation born abroad only.

People are more mobile than ever before, study overseas and work for international companies and non-governmental organizations — and have children while abroad, he said.

“A rule that focuses on place of birth will in fact have more significant impact on women. If you are pregnant and you know that your child’s place of birth is going to be determinative of their future citizenship, then you’re not going to make choices about going overseas that might be required for your employment,” said Galloway.

“That, in my eyes, is discrimination.”

The Canadian Citizens Rights Council studied the rules of citizenship by descent in 55 major countries in the world and found Canada is among the most restrictive. 27 have no restrictions at all; 14 require only a simple government registration; six ask the child or parents and grandparents to show establishment; the rest, including Canada, have cut-and-dry rules such as generational cut-offs in place.

“There’s nothing in the Canadian Charter that says you cannot exercise your mobility rights during child-bearing years and you can’t be gone for a long time and come back. So this is where people really get caught up,” noted Randall Emery, the council’s executive director.

The existing second-generation cut-off includes limited exemptions for children born overseas if their parents are abroad serving in the Canadian military and for the government. Short of repealing that rule, said Emery, Canada should at least adopt an objective “connection test” to allow lost Canadians to re-establish their citizenship.

Lisa Schubert was born in Belgium in 1976 when her father, a Canadian-born citizen, was working there in the nuclear power industry before returning home six years later. Schubert spent her formative years in Canada and joined the Canadian Armed Forces in military reserves in 1996 while studying at the University of Guelph.

After graduating with a master’s degree in education, she had a tough time finding a teaching job in Canada and was forced to go overseas to pursue her career and ultimately landed a position in Belgium.

Still, she’s kept her Scotiabank account and condo in Ottawa and continues to pay her Canadian income taxes every year. She returns home in the summer or during school breaks with her daughters, Maya and Naomi, who were born in Belgium through fertility treatment after she retired from the military.

“While my daughters are not Canadian citizens or passport holders, I want them to know Canada and to know their Canadian family and make those connections with my parents, with my brothers and their children,” Schubert said in an interview from Brussels.

“It really was important that we spent as much time in Canada as possible between those school year moments.”

She said her daughters, now 7 and 5, are raised as proud Canadians and cheer for Canada at every occasion, and poutine and Timbits are their favourites during their visits.

“It’s not like I got a Canadian passport through a lucky break and then I’ve lived overseas my entire life and I’ve never contributed to Canada. I’ve lived over 20 years in Canada and I served in the Canadian military for ten years,” said Schubert, 46.

“I love Canada. I’ve proven that I love it enough to serve in the military and go above and beyond in my devotion and commitment to the country.”

Currently, one option for lost Canadians such as Schubert’s daughters is to ask the immigration minister for a discretionary grant of citizenship “in exceptional cases”where a person is stateless or faces “special and unusual hardship” or proven to be “an exceptional value” to Canada.

Alternatively, Canadian parents can sponsor their foreign-born children to the country through family reunification if they are still underage.

Critics say both pathways are tortuous and unprincipled with little transparency, and decisions are rendered at the whim of a government bureaucrat.

Having a connection test with simple and clear criteria that’s based on a person’s family ties to Canada would be a practical compromise to address the situation of those who fall through the cracks of the two-generation cut-off, said Majda Dabaghi, whose daughters Louise, 9, and Adele, 8, were born in France where they now reside.

Herself born in Tunisia to Canadian parents, Dabaghi and her family returned home when she was three weeks old. She grew up and remained in Canada until 2007 when she left for a job in international law in the U.K., where she met her French husband.

She said, as someone born outside Canada, she shouldn’t be treated like a second-class citizen and have less rights to travel abroad during child-bearing years to pursue an international work experience.

“It really goes to the heart of your identity as a Canadian. It’s not really just about being able to pass on citizenship. This is to me a very hurtful response for the government to say, ‘Actually, you are not Canadian enough. You do not have the full rights of every other Canadian,’” said Dabaghi, 43.

“I was somehow in Canada as a passerby, that I didn’t have my roots. Trying to process all of that is incredibly upsetting.”

Opposition MP Jenny Kwan, the NDP immigration critic, said the citizenship law has been amended so many times with exceptions layered with exceptions that the regime has become so complex and it’d be much simpler and better just to bring in a brand new act.

“It was the conservatives who actually took out the passing on of citizenship to future generations, so there is a reluctance for them to get into this because they have to admit that they were wrong,” said Kwan.

“It’s a mystery to me why the Liberals wouldn’t want to fix it, other than to say that the Liberals are true to form, always says the right thing but they can never follow up with action.”

Any amendment to Bill S-245 involving the two-generation rule such as establishing a connection test will be ruled out of the scope of the committee in its current form, said Kwan, unless the government would make a royal recommendation to endorse it.

“I am very hopeful that we can come to an arrangement where this could be done so that we can address these issues,” she said.

Sutherland-Brown said the pandemic really brought home the importance of having Canadian citizenship for her grandchildren, who were prevented from visiting Canada because of the travel ban against non-citizens during the pandemic.

It was only after the border reopened and travel restrictions were lifted first in the U.K. that she was able to travel to England to visit Findley and Sloane in the fall of 2021 after two years of not seeing each other.

“We are living at a time of political upheaval and the emergence of the next pandemic is just a matter of time,” Sutherland-Brown noted.

Source: Is the government doing enough to help these ‘lost Canadians’?

Le nom des immigrants francophones, source d’erreurs bureaucratiques

Understand the frustration but how is this different from passport limitations which have to conform to international standards? Errors are, of course, another matter:

Plusieurs immigrants africains rencontrent des problèmes bureaucratiques en arrivant au Canada parce que leur nom est mal inscrit sur leurs cartes officielles par les autorités gouvernementales, déplorent des intervenantes du milieu communautaire. Ces dernières dénoncent l’« inconsidération culturelle » des autorités canadiennes.

Les cartes d’identité canadiennes, comme dans plusieurs autres pays, utilisent le modèle « nom et prénom ». Mais certains États, dont le Djibouti, en Afrique francophone, y font exception. Les Djiboutiens ont trois prénoms sur leur passeport : le premier est le leur, le deuxième est celui de leur père et le troisième appartient à leur grand-père. Lorsque certains obtiennent leur première carte de résidence permanente au Canada, l’espace prénom est manquant ou leur nom est inversé. Ainsi, une femme peut se retrouver avec un nom masculin, par exemple.

L’erreur peut causer plusieurs maux de tête. Si un résident permanent devient citoyen canadien, il devra par exemple changer son nom légal afin d’obtenir un passeport en raison de l’erreur sur la carte. Dans d’autres cas, une erreur est introduite dans le deuxième ou troisième permis de travail obtenu par un demandeur d’asile, disent des intervenantes. Lorsque la personne se présente au comptoir de Service Canada, permis en main, pour renouveler son numéro d’assurance sociale, sa demande est refusée en raison de l’erreur, expliquent des intervenants.

La solution pour les immigrants djiboutiens est souvent de modifier leur nom auprès des instances provinciales, ce qui leur permet, par la suite, de changer leur nom sur leur carte de résidence permanente et d’autres documents officiels. Mais le processus est coûteux : un adulte doit débourser 137 $ pour le faire, tout comme un enfant, à moins que ce dernier le fasse en même temps que son parent. La nouvelle carte de résidence permanente, elle, coûte 50 $.

Le ministère ontarien des Services au public et aux entreprises ne recense que quatre changements de nom officiels faits par des Djiboutiens en 2021 et 2022. Mais Sana Khalil, une agente de la Clinique juridique francophone d’Ottawa, qui vient en aide à des Djiboutiens, estime que les données provinciales « n’ont aucun sens » et que le nombre de changements de nom est plus élevé. L’une de ses collègues à la clinique, dit-elle, a fait « plein de demandes ».

Immigration, Réfugiés et Citoyenneté Canada affirme faire de son mieux pour s’assurer de l’exactitude du nom sur les documents qu’elle délivre, mais que des erreurs peuvent survenir. L’agence utilise le nom tel qu’il apparaît sur la zone de lecture automatique du passeport — la section au bas de la photo de l’individu — pour créer des documents tels que la carte de résidence permanente. Au Canada, le nom de la famille du citoyen y est inscrit en premier, mais au Djibouti, c’est souvent le premier prénom de la personne qui y figure.

Source: Le nom des immigrants francophones, source d’erreurs bureaucratiques

NFB implements self-declaration questionnaire to respectfully collect data on community of creators and creative partners

Interesting wording to address potential sensitivities:

As part of its commitment to equity, diversity and inclusion, the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) recognizes the need for accurate data to ensure equitable representation of voices that have been historically marginalized, underrepresented and misrepresented in the film industry.

The NFB’s self-declaration questionnaire is voluntary and confidential, and data will only be used in aggregate. It will not be used in the selection of NFB collaborators or submitted projects. The information collected includes Indigenous identity, racial/ethnic identity, disability status, gender identity/expression, 2SLGBTQI+ status and official-language minority status.

As a public producer and distributor, the NFB has a mandate to reflect the lives, experiences and perspectives of all Canadians in its works. Diverse voices and perspectives are crucial to its success and to the success of Canadian storytelling. The NFB is committed to following best practices and policies to ensure equitable representation, both on screen and behind the camera.

Source: NFB implements self-declaration questionnaire to respectfully collect data on community of creators and creative partners

Lisée: «Nègres blancs d’Amérique» 55 ans après

Lisée on the history and the context of when the book was written, and its questionable relevance today in terms of current challenges:

L’auteur était le plus souvent debout. En l’absence de chaise ou de table, il écrivait penché sur le lit superposé du haut. Il n’avait pas de stylo, c’était interdit. Il usait ses bouts de crayon à mine, sans rien avoir pour les aiguiser. En haut de chaque page subtilisée à la cantine, il écrivait, en anglais, « Notes for my lawyer », seule façon d’avoir le droit de mettre quoi que ce soit sur papier. Il ne savait pas d’où venait sa soudaine fluidité d’écriture. D’autant qu’il sortait d’une grève de la faim d’un mois qui lui avait soustrait 25 kilos. Il pouvait écrire de jour comme de nuit, l’ampoule ne s’éteignait jamais.

« La fatigue provenait moins de la faim que du bruit infernal qui régnait dans la prison, a-t-il raconté. À toute heure du jour, il se trouvait des détenus pour taper à corps perdu sur les murs métalliques des cellules ou pour improviser des rythmes assourdissants de tam-tam. D’autres hurlaient jusqu’à épuisement leur terreur ou leur désespoir. D’autres encore s’ouvraient les veines et déclenchaient par leur acte un tumulte ahurissant. Un Noir mit le feu à ses vêtements et chercha ainsi à s’immoler. Un autre se jeta tête première du deuxième étage de notre section. Un troisième fut battu à mort par les surveillants dans sa cellule. »

C’est ainsi qu’est né l’essai québécois le plus lu au monde. Celui qui fit scandale, lors de sa publication il y a 55 ans. Celui dont le titre seul, aujourd’hui, peut mettre fin à des carrières journalistiques ou universitaires, scandaliser le CRTC, pousser une commission scolaire anglophone de Montréal à apposer un autocollant pour cacher le mot offensant dans chaque exemplaire d’un manuel.

Pierre Vallières et son camarade Charles Gagnon occupaient cette cellule de la prison des hommes de New York, surnommée The Tombs, Le sépulcre, en septembre 1966, pour avoir « troublé la paix » en manifestant devant l’édifice de l’ONU en faveur de l’indépendance du Québec. Les deux prisonniers sont surtout accusés d’avoir organisé, plus tôt cette année-là à Montréal, des attentats du Front de libération du Québec.

Vallières noircit donc les pages « avec la fébrilité de celui qui sait qu’il peut être déporté à tout instant et qui profite de chaque minute de libre expression qu’il lui reste encore ». Il pond donc en deux mois 90 % d’une oeuvre qui fera 540 pages chez l’imprimeur. Les deux tiers des feuillets sont déjà sortis de la prison lorsque l’extradition vers Montréal se produit.

Paniqué à l’idée que le dernier tiers sera saisi par des policiers québécois, qui eux lisent le français, Vallières offre un troc aux agents américains de l’immigration venus le saisir au sortir de sa prison : il ne résistera pas physiquement à cette nouvelle arrestation si les agents remettent les pages restantes à son avocat. Si ces agents n’avaient pas tenu parole, rapporte Vallières, le livre n’existerait pas. L’auteur est absent du lancement, le 14 mars 1968, car emprisonné et en procès pour les attentats qui lui sont attribués.

Vallières tenait à son titre, mais l’idée n’était pas neuve. Comme le rappelle Daniel Samson-Legault dans sa méticuleuse biographie de Vallières, Le dissident, chez Québec Amérique (que je recommande chaudement), l’expression avait été utilisée avant lui par Marie-Victorin, les journalistes Jean Paré, Yves Michaud et quelques autres pour décrire la condition des Canadiens français.

Vallières la reprend à répétition dans l’ouvrage et s’en sert comme d’un synonyme d’« opprimé ». Il l’associe d’ailleurs à toutes les victimes du capital, y compris aux ouvriers blancs américains. « C’est en anglais que ce concept se formula spontanément dans ma tête. White Niggers of America. Les Noirs américains furent les premiers, et pour cause, à saisir ce que pouvait être, sur les rives du Saint-Laurent, la condition particulière des Québécois francophones. »

Il ne dit pas à quels Noirs il fait référence, mais on sait que le leader noir américain de l’époque, Stokely Carmichael, qui viendra à Montréal, n’a rien à redire sur cette appropriation sémantique. De même, après avoir trouvé le titre très drôle, Aimé Césaire, inventeur du concept de « négritude », dira que Vallières avait bien compris qu’il ne s’agissait pas que de couleur de peau. Vallières use avec autant de liberté du terme « esclavage », une condition qu’il dit retrouver chez tous les dépossédés. On est dans l’hyperbole, pas dans la nuance.

Le livre fait fureur. Environ 50 000 exemplaires vendus au Québec, presque autant aux États-Unis, sans compter les versions allemande, espagnole et italienne. Brusquement, en 1969, l’auteur, l’éditeur — le poète et futur ministre péquiste Gérald Godin pour la maison Parti pris — et même la dactylo sont accusés d’avoir, en publiant l’ouvrage, fait oeuvre de sédition. Un crime passible de 14 ans d’emprisonnement.

Le ministre de la Justice de l’Union nationale, Rémi Paul, fait saisir tous les exemplaires en circulation, y compris celui du dépôt légal à la Bibliothèque nationale du Québec. L’accusation n’aura pas de suite. Le livre reprendra sa carrière en 1972, une fois passée la crise d’Octobre (pendant laquelle les felquistes le font lire à leur otage britannique, James Cross).

Faut-il le relire aujourd’hui ? Seulement si on veut prendre la mesure de la dépossession dans laquelle étaient plongés les Québécois du début des années 1960. Vallières décrit le délabrement et l’insalubrité de son quartier, Jacques-Cartier, sur la Rive-Sud (en forçant le trait, nuance son biographe, mais même…). Le récit biographique du jeune révolté reste poignant, celui de sa recherche intellectuelle, entre Teilhard de Chardin, Sartre, Marx et le Che, est fastidieux, mais ne manque pas de sincérité. Son appel à la violence révolutionnaire, au moment du formidable essor du Québec social, syndical, laïque, culturel et politique de 1966, était, même à l’époque, une erreur et un leurre.

Le problème n’est pas que Nègres blancs d’Amérique ait mal vieilli. Il fait simplement partie de l’histoire. Il est dans notre rétroviseur. Il a peu — rien ? — à nous dire sur le Québec d’aujourd’hui ou de demain. Son titre, seul, résonne comme un cri de liberté, comme l’audace de dire des choses avec des mots forts, en les détournant ou en leur faisant violence. Un doigt d’honneur aux censeurs d’hier et d’aujourd’hui.

Source: «Nègres blancs d’Amérique» 55 ans après

Shia Muslim scholars denied entry into US suspect religious bias

Of note, particularly given that the persons quoted had made frequent trips to the US:

It took the US consulate seven minutes to reject Nabil Ahmed Shabbir’s visa application.

Shabbir, a British Shia scholar, had applied for his US visa to assist with the birth of his first child. His wife, an American Shia Muslim, wanted to have the birth in the US.

Shabbir hadn’t even left the embassy gate after handing in his visa application when he got a text message saying it had been rejected.

Shabbir, whose work has brought him to the US dozens of times prior to this rejection in 2020, did not think obtaining a visa would be an issue.

Instead, he had to watch his firstborn’s birth via WhatsApp video.

Shabbir is one of numerous Shia scholars who have been repeatedly – and unexpectedly – denied entry to the US in the past decade, despite their prior travel to the country for work purposes, raising concerns that they are being deliberately excluded because of their religion.

Despite traveling to the US regularly for five years on a valid 10-year visa, Shabbir was stopped at the airport in 2019 and detained for five hours, facing questions about the intent of his visit.

He was traveling with his wife, but was asked why he had invitations from years ago from American organizations – which fed his suspicion that officials had gone through his email.

He was eventually allowed to enter, but once he returned from the US, he received a notification that his visa had been revoked.

This revocation – unceremonious, without a specific reason and out of the blue – fits a pattern that has been experienced by many Shia scholars.

Mohammad Ali Naquvi, cofounder and chair of the American Muslim Bar Association (AMBA), said his organization has documented denials or revocations of more than 50 Shia scholars in the past decade.

Some were denied entry as they were about to board a US-bound flight, some were denied entry after arriving in the country and forced to turn back despite having a valid visa – and some like Shabbir still remain in a limbo of “administrative processing”.

“It has a burden on the religious practice of Shia Muslims in the US, not being able to have the scholars here,” Abed Ayoub, national executive director at the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC), said. “Not being able to have your religious events because of immigration enforcement is very problematic.”

The issue has been going on for a long time. Sheikh Jihad Ismail, an Australian Shia scholar, was about to board his flight to Albany from Dubai in 2014 when he was told he couldn’t fly into the US. This threw him off, especially because he had visited the US nearly 20 times since 2002, giving talks and engaging with the Shia community in the country. His visa has been under “administrative processing” for six years. According to Naquvi, there are some “administrative processing” cases that go back nine years.

Both Ismail and Shabbir know numerous other scholars going through similar experiences. Ismail recalled the story of a friend who was recently made to return on the next flight after arriving in the US.

Many of these scholars are from English-speaking countries such as the UK, Canada and Australia.

There is no solid reason to which anyone in the community can point to explain why so many Shia scholars have been denied entry, but they say they have their suspicions.

Ayoub traces the issue back to the San Bernardino shooting in 2015, in which the shooters had pledged allegiance to the Islamic State.

This was followed by the Obama administration passing the Visa Waiver Program Improvement and Terrorist Travel Prevention Act of 2015, which disqualified the visa waiver for applicants from 40 countries if they had made any trips to Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen on a government assignment or military order.

This is tricky because Shia pilgrimages, including the ziyarah, take place in Iran and Iraq.

Nearly all Shia scholars have visited or regularly visit these countries, which automatically puts them under scrutiny under the law.

“Because you’re seeing a big number of individuals coming from visa waiver countries, what we believe is happening is the consular officers at the state department are misreading this law,” Ayoub said.

“What they’re doing, in our opinion, is yes, the individual may not qualify for visa waiver, but they’re holding the same standard in even issuing a visa,” he added.

That still doesn’t explain why Ismail was denied the visa in 2014, before the San Bernardino shooting, feeding further confusion among the scholars. It’s clear that there is a pattern that holds true for all these instances, yet nobody can pinpoint the exact issue that would uniformly justify these cases.

This has a grave impact for Shia Americans, especially the current generation.

For a religion with a rich practice of cultural and knowledge exchange across borders, Shabbir said there is an immense value English-speaking scholars have in reaching the current generation, and these visa denials hamper that education.

If scholars like himself aren’t allowed to teach in the US, the other option for such exchange programs is to invite scholars from countries where they may not understand British or American culture, and the culture gap could become a barrier.

“Those young people then find it very difficult to consolidate their faith and the culture they are living in,” he said.

“They see the western culture as something inherently bad, and if they’re going to be religious that means they have to be against western culture,” he added. “Whereas it’s not the case – but they won’t know that until they are presented with a western scholar who has grown up through the system.”

But there are signs of progress. Ayoub said the Trump administration assisted on some individual cases, and activists are now in talks with Biden administration officials who Ayoub said had been “very receptive”.

Those like Shabbir hope the doors open up soon. For him, beyond giving talks as a religious scholar, he misses the opportunity to visit his in-laws, with whom his wife has been staying for a few months to take care of her mother. This means he has to go months without seeing his wife or child.

“It’s not just the visa rejection,” he said. “There’s just so much more that ends up being attached to it.”

Source: Shia Muslim scholars denied entry into US suspect religious bias

Lightman and Akbary: New data provide insight into pandemic inequalities

Insightful analysis, contrasting vaccination rates (relatively similar) and health outcomes (disparities):

Existing analyses of COVID-19 in Canada and internationally suggest infection rates were highly variable across populations, with researchers highlighting the disproportionate burdenexperienced by groups that are intersectionally disadvantaged.

Early in the pandemic, widespread evidence emerged of the unequal rates of infection experienced by residents and care workers in long-term care homes in Canada. Soon after, racialized populations and immigrants were also found to be especially hard-hit. The COVID-19 mortality rate was significantly higher for racialized populations.

Our new research finds that while these individuals had higher rates of COVID-19 infection, they were equally or more likely to get vaccinated than comparison groups. This has important policy implications. Rather than focusing on individual decision-making, the data suggest a need to prioritize protections and pay for workers in essential jobs that are unpredictable, dangerous, physically demanding and/or low wage.

Overwhelming evidence shows that vaccines are an effective protective measure, both in terms of reducing infection ratesand severity of illness. Using the 2022 Statistics Canada dataset “Impacts of COVID-19 on Canadians – Testing and Vaccination,” our analyses found that variable vaccination rates were not the reason behind differing rates of infection.

These data were collected as part of Statistics Canada’s crowdsourcing initiative which aimed to gather timely information on Canadians’ experiences of testing for COVID-19 and access to vaccination during the pandemic. Statistics Canada used open advertising to obtain participants who chose to self-select by completing an online questionnaire from February 21 to March 13, 2022.

For racialized minorities, 20 per cent tested positive, compared to 15 per cent for non-racialized minorities (outcomes were similar when comparing PCR to rapid test results). In particular, those who identified as Black and Filipino (populations that also have high rates of employment in care occupations and in service industries fared worst. Black populations experienced a one-third rate of positivity for rapid tests (see Figure 1).

https://e.infogram.com/lightman-fig1-1hzj4o37mqvl34p?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fmagazines%2Fmarch-2023%2Fnew-data-provide-insight-into-pandemic-inequalities%2F%3Futm_source%3DPolicy%2BOptions%2BNewsletter%26utm_campaign%3D18ca25504e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_02_14_05_26_COPY_01%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_26f66e24ce-18ca25504e-104024581%26mc_cid%3D18ca25504e%26mc_eid%3D86cabdc518&src=embed#async_embed

Citizenship was also an important factor. Those without Canadian citizenship status (including temporary foreign workers) fared worse for both types of testing (at an average of 22 per cent positivity), compared to those immigrants with citizenship status and the Canadian-born. The latter fared by far the best, at 14 per cent positivity via PCR tests, and 17 per cent positivity via rapid tests (see Figure 2).

https://e.infogram.com/lightman-fig2-1hd12yxqz1wmx6k?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fmagazines%2Fmarch-2023%2Fnew-data-provide-insight-into-pandemic-inequalities%2F%3Futm_source%3DPolicy%2BOptions%2BNewsletter%26utm_campaign%3D18ca25504e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_02_14_05_26_COPY_01%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_26f66e24ce-18ca25504e-104024581%26mc_cid%3D18ca25504e%26mc_eid%3D86cabdc518&src=embed#async_embed

Women and men, interestingly, were found to have had similar rates of infection. However, those who identified as essential workers had higher rates of infection (see Figure 3), with women overrepresented among this population.

https://e.infogram.com/lightman-fig3-1h7z2l8z9qnzg6o?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fmagazines%2Fmarch-2023%2Fnew-data-provide-insight-into-pandemic-inequalities%2F%3Futm_source%3DPolicy%2BOptions%2BNewsletter%26utm_campaign%3D18ca25504e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_02_14_05_26_COPY_01%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_26f66e24ce-18ca25504e-104024581%26mc_cid%3D18ca25504e%26mc_eid%3D86cabdc518&src=embed#async_embed

Yet the data on rates of vaccination tell a different story. This suggests that variable infection rates were tied to specific jobs or to systemic inequalities, rather than a function of individual choice.

There was only a marginal difference in vaccination rates between essential workers and non-essential workers. Racialized people and immigrants had higher rates of vaccination than non-racialized people and non-immigrants (see Figure 4).

https://e.infogram.com/lightman-fig4-1h7g6k0gvyrgo2o?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fmagazines%2Fmarch-2023%2Fnew-data-provide-insight-into-pandemic-inequalities%2F%3Futm_source%3DPolicy%2BOptions%2BNewsletter%26utm_campaign%3D18ca25504e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_02_14_05_26_COPY_01%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_26f66e24ce-18ca25504e-104024581%26mc_cid%3D18ca25504e%26mc_eid%3D86cabdc518&src=embed#async_embed

Finally, the data reject explanations tied to access to health facilities. In the five cities in Canada with the highest rates of infection, residents had higher rates of access to at least one health facility and a pharmacy close to them (see Figure 5).

https://e.infogram.com/lightman-fig5-1hxr4zxr1nreo6y?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fpolicyoptions.irpp.org%2Fmagazines%2Fmarch-2023%2Fnew-data-provide-insight-into-pandemic-inequalities%2F%3Futm_source%3DPolicy%2BOptions%2BNewsletter%26utm_campaign%3D18ca25504e-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2022_02_14_05_26_COPY_01%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_term%3D0_26f66e24ce-18ca25504e-104024581%26mc_cid%3D18ca25504e%26mc_eid%3D86cabdc518&src=embed#async_embed

Together, this information suggests that COVID-19 infection rates were not related to personal decision-making or access to health services. Instead, it raises concerns about broader social responsibilities. Populations that are racialized and/or non-citizens and those doing essential jobs were infected at disproportionate rates, even as they took steps to get vaccinated.

Notably, the data do not provide information on time order, so it is plausible that those workers on the front lines reported positive cases prior to having access to the vaccine. This raises further questions about which occupations and which areas of each city were prioritized for personal protective equipment and early access to vaccination, while refuting suggestions of a lack of awareness or interest in vaccination by underserved communities.

As well, the data do not indicate the severity of illness. Thus, the analyses may tell a story of lives saved due to vaccination for populations that were at greater risk of infection due to their workplace conditions.

In terms of policy, this suggests that there is an urgent need to focus on improving working conditions for essential workers. This includes providing paid sick leave and job guarantees for those who take time off work to care for themselves or others. Staffing levels and accommodations to work from home for those who are sick (when possible) should be ensured. Accommodations to reduce workplace injuries and increase mental health supports must be made available. Providing safe transportation to and from work facilities as well as paid time to travel to get vaccinated should be a policy initiative. Finally, emergency housing for self-isolation when needed and access to child and elder care, as well as affordable housing for those with lower socioeconomic status, should also be top priority.

Perhaps most critically, wages must be raised for workers who are systematically at higher risk of infection due to the face-to-face nature of their employment (while also structuring workplaces to avoid dangerous work conditions where possible.) This would at least partially compensate for increased rates of infection within certain jobs and recognize the toll it takes on individuals, families and communities.

All this reinforces a structural rather than individual analysis of disease burdens and public health measures. Clearly, getting vaccinated is not the end of the story. Ongoing social responsibility is needed to protect vulnerable groups – whether this takes the form of masking, work-from-home measures, or other workplace accommodations.

The implications of the pandemic are nowhere near over. There must be a move beyond rhetoric of “gratitude” to essential workers; instead, governments and employers must implement better policies and pay. These policies must be evidence-based so Canadians have an accurate understanding about the pandemic and its effects.

Given the emerging information about the potentially long-term implications of COVID-19, these measures take on added urgency for groups such as children, people with disabilities and intersectionally disadvantaged populations.

A note about methodology

Statistics Canada started the crowdsourcing initiative as part of a data collection series to address the informational needs of Canadians and enhance their understanding related to the impact of COVID-19. According to an evaluation report, Statistics Canada’s crowdsourcing products have proven to be useful for briefing purposes, policy research and analysis, program and service planning and decision-making, as well as knowledge-production and modeling. Statistics Canada uses a number of measures to ensure the quality of data collected through the crowdsourcing initiative. First, the questionnaires are designed based on Statistics Canada’s standard practices and wording used in a computer-assisted interviewing environment. During data collection, a computer application is used to automatically control the flow of questions, depending on participant responses, and to check for logical inconsistencies and errors in participant responses. The computer application used for these purposes is tested extensively. After data have been collected, Statistics Canada maximizes the quality of crowdsourced data through error detection of invalid or missing values for age, gender and postal code at micro levels. Furthermore, Statistics Canada compensates for overrepresentation and underrepresentation by calculating a benchmark factor for every participant based on demographic projections of the number of people by province and territory, sex and age group. As recommended by Statistics Canada, therefore, the authors of this article used the benchmark factor to produce their results in the same way that survey weights are used to produce estimates from non-crowdsourced data.

Source: Lightman and Akbary: New data provide insight into pandemic inequalities