Dutrisac: Survivance et résignation [on the CAQ electoral strategy and immigration]

2022/06/01 Leave a comment

Of interest, particularly the contrast between the earlier inclusive vision of the first PQ government and how it has evolved to the defensive approach of the CAQ:

Il a été beaucoup question de fierté lors du congrès national de la Coalition avenir Québec (CAQ). François Legault a parlé des deux pôles de son gouvernement, la prospérité et la fierté. Le ministre André Lamontagne a aussi beaucoup parlé de fierté dans l’allocution finement rédigée qu’il a livrée samedi après-midi.

Ce type d’événements partisans baigne dans un enthousiasme parfois factice — il ne l’était aucunement cette fin de semaine —, qui se manifeste par les autocongratulations et le cheerleading, le simplisme des lignes de communication et un comportement moutonnier particulièrement exacerbé dans un parti composé de militants disciplinés, ou dociles, plutôt que chicaniers. À cet égard, la CAQ surpasse le Parti libéral du Québec.

Cet enthousiasme se percevait sur le plancher du centre des congrès de Drummondville : jamais depuis les libéraux de Robert Bourassa en 1985 un parti politique québécois n’a été en si bonne posture à l’orée d’élections générales, ce que la faiblesse de ses adversaires ne fait que souligner.

En campagne électorale il y a quatre ans, François Legault avait aussi parlé de fierté, en contraste avec un Philippe Couillard distant, qui semblait parfois douter du peuple québécois.

Après un premier mandat, les Québécois sont-ils plus fiers qu’en 2018, sont-ils plus prospères ? a lancé le chef caquiste, tout en donnant évidemment une réponse affirmative aux deux questions.

Sur le plan de la prospérité, son bilan est positif, surtout si on le compare à celui du gouvernement précédent, de l’austérité duquel nous nous souvenons amèrement. Malgré la pandémie, les finances publiques sont en ordre, la forte croissance économique a dépassé celle de nos voisins, le taux de chômage est au plus bas, la productivité est en hausse, l’écart de richesse avec l’Ontario s’est réduit, les salaires ont augmenté, bien que la poussée d’inflation, qu’on espère de courte durée, soit venue brouiller les cartes, et avec ça, le gouvernement caquiste a remis « de l’argent dans les poches des Québécois ».

Plus prospères et plus fiers, les Québécois devraient afficher une assurance à toute épreuve. Pas si vite : c’est compter sans le spectre de la « louisianisation » du Québec, brandi par François Legault, en lien avec une immigration qui s’intégrerait mal à notre société de langue française. Il y va de la « survie » de la nation québécoise, a fait valoir le chef caquiste.

Dès le début du prochain mandat, le gouvernement caquiste entend organiser un vaste sommet sur les perspectives démographiques du Québec et l’apport de l’immigration. L’événement permettrait d’informer la population sur cet enjeu crucial dans le but de bâtir un rapport de force face à Ottawa. Dimanche, François Legault a réitéré une demande à laquelle Justin Trudeau avait déjà répondu par un non catégorique, celle de rapatrier la responsabilité de la réunification familiale, qui compte pour près du quart des immigrants reçus, et il a ajouté la gestion des programmes visant les travailleurs temporaires et les étudiants étrangers.

Comme l’éventualité que le premier ministre du Canada acquiesce à cette revendication semble lointaine, voire utopique, un prochain gouvernement Legault devra s’atteler à reprendre concrètement la maîtrise de la situation avec les leviers dont il dispose, mais qu’il n’a pas pleinement utilisés.

Ce retour de la survivance, une posture qui fut l’apanage des Canadiens français après 1840, laisse perplexe. C’est une stratégie empreinte de résignation, un aveu d’impuissance politique. Et puis le mouvement nationaliste d’émancipation des années 1960 et suivantes, celui de René Lévesque, progressiste et tourné vers l’avenir, avait mis la hache dans cette survivance passéiste.

Il faudrait que François Legault nous dise si son nationalisme est essentiellement conservateur, essentialiste et défensif, ou s’il s’agit d’un nationalisme progressiste — existentialiste, pourrait-on dire —, qui parle d’avenir et s’appuie sur le pluralisme et le métissage qui caractérisent déjà la nation québécoise. Quand François Legault répète « c’est comme ça qu’on vit au Québec », une formule pour le moins maladroite, et qu’il en rajoute avec « c’est comme ça qu’on parle au Québec », on peut se demander où il s’en va avec ses skis. Le français est la langue commune certes, mais il se parle des centaines de langues au Québec, y compris des langues autochtones.

Le gouvernement Legault a déjà amélioré les choses en matière d’immigration, que ce soit en francisation et en soutien à l’intégration, et le chantier n’est pas terminé. Mais il devrait revenir à l’esprit de Gérald Godin : les immigrants pour la plupart veulent s’intégrer à la nation québécoise et contribuer à sa culture vivante et originale, dont nous pouvons nous enorgueillir. C’est ça aussi, être fier.

Source: Survivance et résignation

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Abbott – The truth is out: Britain’s immigration system is racist, and always has been. Now let’s fix it

2022/06/01 Leave a comment

By Labour MP Diane Abbott. Many of the historic examples cited are common to other immigration destination countries:

The unspoken rationale underlying British immigration policy since the second world war has always been about race. A new leaked Home Office document, which was never intended to be seen by the public, spells this out. The report, which was commissioned by the Home Office in the wake of the Windrush scandal, was leaked to the Guardian after repeated attempts by the government to suppress its publication. It has a stark conclusion: that the origins of the “deep-rooted racism of the Windrush scandal” lie in the fact that “during the period 1950-1981, every single piece of immigration or citizenship legislation was designed at least in part to reduce the number of people with black or brown skin who were permitted to live and work in the UK”.

This was true whichever political party was in power. Who can forget the red mug marketed by the Labour party in 2015 emblazoned with the words “Controls on immigration”? The problem was not the mug, but the fact that cracking down on immigration was one of our election promises at all.

It was the 1962 Commonwealth Immigrants Act that for the first time brought restrictions on the entry of Commonwealth citizens into the UK. Before this, there had been freedom of movement for all citizens of the United Kingdom and its colonies. Postwar Britain was suffering a labour shortage and so by the late 1940s, employers were recruiting directly from the Commonwealth. For instance the London Transport executive had recruitment drives in Barbados, Trinidad and Jamaica.

But there were already murmurings of disapproval even then. The day the Windrush docked in Tilbury, Essex in 1948, 11 Labour MPs sent a letter to the prime minister, Clement Attlee, asking for controls on immigration, stating that the British people “are blest with the absence of a colour racial problem. An influx of coloured people domiciled here is likely to impair the harmony, strength and cohesion of our public and social life and to cause discord and unhappiness among all concerned.”

In 1949, the Royal Commission on Population reported that “immigrants of good stock would be welcomed without reserve”. “Good stock” in this context might be assumed to mean white. In 1956, a ministerial committee was set up to investigate colonial migration – and whether it should be curbed. It argued that: “The principle that the United Kingdom should maintain an open door for British subjects grew up tacitly at a time when the coloured races of the Commonwealth were at a more primitive stage of development than now. There was no danger then of a coloured invasion of this country … In the meantime circumstances have changed …” The report continues: “We clearly cannot undertake to absorb … all the coloured immigrants who may wish to come here.”

With their fear of a “coloured invasion”, these MPs were foreshadowing what Margaret Thatcher would say more than 20 years later, when she referred to Britain being “swamped” by migrants. Pertinently, that 1956 report also said: “There is no doubt that even though a bill would in form be non-discriminatory, it would nevertheless be clear against whom the bill was really directed.”

In the decades to come, those of us campaigning against racist immigration legislation were never in any doubt against whom it was really directed. When that first Commonwealth immigrants bill made it to the House of Commons, in response to the increasing anti-immigrant clamour, the home secretary of the day, Rab Butler, nearly gave the game away in the debate on the legislation, saying in the Commons that the legislation would not be based “on colour prejudice alone”. In theory at least, it was not supposed to be based on colour prejudice at all. But that 1962 act put an end to freedom of movement, limited the immigration of Commonwealth passport holders and for the first time made the distinction between skilled and unskilled labour.

The Labour party opposed the legislation and promised to repeal it. But the small number of Labour MPs who actually voted against the bill in parliament suggested that that they were not as enthusiastically against it as they might have been. And the next Labour government did nothing to repeal it. Instead, it brought in another Commonwealth Immigration Act in 1968, rushed through parliament in just three days by the home secretary, Jim Callaghan, in response to media hysteria about the possibility of 200,000 Kenyan Asians with British passports coming to the UK as they fled Kenya’s Africanisation policy.

There must have been some concern in government that they did not want the legislation to look as crudely racist as it was. So they invented the concept of “patrials” – someone who had a parent or grandparent who was born in, or was a citizen of the UK. Nobody, however, was in any doubt that “patrial” was a euphemism for white.

By 1971, the Tories were in power and another immigration act brought in that year elaborated on the (completely bogus) legal concept of “patrials”, clamped down further on Commonwealth immigration and extended powers of deportation. It did allow Commonwealth migrants who had come to Britain before 1973 to remain in the UK indefinitely. But, crucially, it put the onus on those who had come to Britain to prove their right to stay. It was that requirement that had such catastrophic consequences for the Windrush generation whose cases were eventually brought to light in 2018.

Secret cabinet minutes of the time reveal that ministers knew that the decision to exempt “old” Commonwealth countries such as New Zealand and Australia from immigration controls would be criticised as being discriminatory in favour of the white Commonwealth. But the home secretary, Reginald Maudling, argued that it was “necessary and defensible” to curb Asian migration. The 1981 Nationality Act, the most fateful of the decade, would reverse an age-old convention that anyone born on British soil was British. Birth in Britain was no longer an automatic entitlement to citizenship.

From the 1970s onwards, Britain’s immigrant communities began to organise and campaign. One of the earliest cases was Rochdale housewife Anwar Ditta. Britain’s convoluted and increasingly draconian immigration laws meant she could not bring her three children over from Pakistan. She was not the first immigrant to suffer because of the rules, but she was the first to build a rainbow coalition of support. With no experience, she campaigned from 1976 to 1981 and won the right to bring her children to Britain.

This was one of a series of campaigns opposing Britain’s degrading practices meted out to immigrants such as “virginity tests”. Some of us would spend the coming decades writing about and marching against these rules, even when it meant campaigning against our own Labour government.

Source: The truth is out: Britain’s immigration system is racist, and always has been. Now let’s fix it

Filed under Immigration, Racism Tagged with ,

All-powerful PMO, mistrust “destroying” the public service: Paul Tellier

2022/06/01 Leave a comment

Of note.

Would be of interest for other former and more recent clerks (e.g., Michael Wernick, Wayne Wouters, Mel Cappe etc) would also be surveyed on their perceptions on trust/mistrust between the public sector and PMO. Certainly existed under the Harper government although diminished over time for most:

A lack of trust between politicians and senior levels of the public service, and a Prime Minister’s Office that calls all the shots, is “destroying” Canada’s public service, warns Paul Tellier, Canada’s former top bureaucrat and former head of both Canadian National Railway and Bombardier Inc.

“The current government, with centralization of everything in the PMO, is in the process of destroying the public service … and the word ‘destroying’ is not too strong,” the former clerk of the Privy Council in the Brian Mulroney era said in an interview.

Tellier made his comments after the release of a new report, Top of Mind, by two think tanks – the Ottawa-based Institute on Governance, and the Brian Mulroney Institute of Government at St. Francis Xavier University – which threw the spotlight on the increasingly troubled relationship after probing public service executives at all levels of government about their biggest challenges.

The report found that today’s executives worry about falling public trust in government; the decline in senior bureaucrats giving “fearless advice” to ministers; a hollowing-out of policy capacity; a post-pandemic economic reckoning; conflicts among levels of government; and the need for public service reform.

The relationship is a longstanding problem, one that Tellier argues was aggravated by the Stephen Harper rules-bound Federal Accountability Act. But he thinks the problems have worsened under the current Justin Trudeau government.

Tellier questions how the public service can recruit and keep top talent, as well as drive change if deputy ministers and ministers feel compelled to check everything they do with PMO.

“There is no way that if I was a cabinet minister, I would allow a bunch of people in PMO to tell me how to do my work. And it’s at every level, it’s not only for junior ministers, the most senior ministers… It’s for deputy ministers and departments.”

“So why, if you trust the minister and if you trust the advisors to the minister in his office and in the department, do you want six people in PMO to review a draft press release, or a tweet?”

Tellier has never been far from Canada’s public service over the past five decades. He joined as a young lawyer in the 1970s, went on to lead the public service and advise ministers and prime ministers. He has watched various public service renewal efforts come and go – including Public Service 2000 (PS 2000), which he led under Mulroney.

Mulroney came to power after the Liberals had ruled for all but a few months from 1963-84. At first, the new prime minister distrusted the public service and promised to issue them “pink slips and running shoes.” But Mulroney said in a recent interview he grew to trust and rely on public servants who gave him the “straight goods,” even poaching senior bureaucrats like Derek Burney and Mark Entwistle to join his PMO.

Mulroney also told the Institute on Governance that without the work of public servants, “we wouldn’t have got our major agenda through.”

Today, many experts say much about the public service needs fixing, but Tellier believes the first step is to restore trust between politicians and bureaucrats – a key relationship in Canada’s Westminster-style democracy.

“There’s no trust,” said Tellier. “And it starts at the top.”

“I don’t know what happened (to trust). I like to say, if you write a good policy paper or a good briefing note, it is going to be read. But if it’s not going to be read, why bother?

The relationship has been strained for years, but respect for the public service nosedived during the Harper era as its role was diminished, its advice devalued and its neutrality undermined.

The Federal Accountability Act, with its focus on rules, oversight and compliance, changed the role of the deputy ministers, which left them inward-looking and isolated from Canadians.

Tellier pulls no punches about the accountability act, introduced by the Harper government in response to the sponsorship scandal. He called it a “mistake” that must be reviewed.

He said the act deepened a culture of risk-aversion, putting a stop to public servants meeting with business leaders, which was essential to understanding the various forces at play when developing policy.

“The accountability act was a mistake – not every single clause – but I think that it went way too far. As a result, it has deprived future governments of very useful input from the public service and the business sector and visa-versa.”

The public service’s job is to offer policy advice, then deliver programs and services to Canadians. Of late, the focus on reforming the public service is aimed at fixing problems that get in the way of implementing programs and service – an archaic human resources regime, a gridlock of rules and outdated technology.

But Tellier argues such reforms miss a key problem – fixing the relationship between ministers and deputy ministers.

“I think that Tellier is right about that,” said Lori Turnbull, director of the school of public administration at Dalhousie University.

“There’s only so much the public service can do by way of self-improvement that will really change anything if the political classes aren’t interested in what they say or what ideas they have.”

Take innovation. If politicians aren’t interested in public servants’ advice or innovations – unless it’s risk-free – then there is no impetus for innovation, Turnbull said.

A big problem is politics. Parties get elected on campaign platforms they consider a “contract with the voter” that they must deliver. As a result, they come to power knowing what they want and don’t believe they need any advice from public servants.

This leaves little “time and space” for public servants, who end up “playing at the margins,” taking care of implementing promises, but not coming up with the big ideas, Turnbull said.

Also, ministers want advice and answers fast. They complain that public servants take too long to gather evidence and assess options. That urgency has ramped up over the years because of technological change, the 24-hour news cycle and the rise of social media.

“There’s always been a kind of time difference between how fast the political side wants things, and how quickly the public service can move while still doing its job responsibly,” said Turnbull. “That time crunch seems to be getting worse. At one point, it was a healthy tension and now it’s becoming unhealthy, where the political side stops waiting and just does it. “

But Turnbull worries what could happen to the already fractured relationship with the shift to a public service with more flexible working arrangements in the wake of COVID-19.

She said executives and politicians are more likely to return to the office “in real time” while the rest of the public service could work remotely from anywhere across the country. That could further distance senior bureaucrats and politicians from the rest of the public service, which delivers services and does the legwork for evidence-based policy advice.

Stephen Van Dine, senior vice-president of public governance at the Institute on Governance, said those “opportunities to have a quiet word” with the minister that are critical to building trust are less likely in a public service where some are working remotely.

“The hustle and bustle of briefing a minister, whether in the car to-and-from the Hill, over a sandwich, in a hallway where you can grab one-on-one encounters where the minister and deputy can have a quiet word,” Van Dine said. “If these opportunities become fewer and fewer, that is like the compounding impact of (playing) broken telephone.”

Canada is not alone in facing this issue. The tensions between ministers and senior bureaucrats have been studied to death over for years. A major U.K. study on the relationship called it the “fulcrum” of a Westminster system. When it’s not working, policy and service delivery are compromised.

But past efforts at fixing it in Canada have focused on making the public service more accountable – such as the accountability act – and responsive to what politicians want. There’s been little discussion of what ministers could do to repair the relationship.

Tellier said there must be a “healthy tension” between public servants and politicians, but that balance is out of whack with politicians increasingly dominating.

Without trust, frank discussions between politicians and public servants — which Tellier called “the tennis match” — don’t happen, putting policy and delivery at risk.

He said a fix begins with the prime minister, who must make it clear that ministers should consult their deputies. And if they don’t trust them, the prime minister should replace them with deputies they do trust.

Source: All-powerful PMO, mistrust “destroying” the public service: Paul Tellier

Filed under Government Tagged with , , , , , ,

Immigration report shows skills don’t always match job market [Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP)]

2022/06/01 Leave a comment

Of interest and not too surprising given some similar issues in other parts of Canada:

A northern research report has found that while the main immigration stream used by permanent residents in Northern Ontario’s five largest cities is economic, the jobs the newcomers have applied to fill don’t quite align with labour market vacancy rates.

Part of the new series by the Northern Policy Institute (NPI) called All Roads Lead Home: Immigration flows into Ontario’s north and what this means for RNIP impacts, Mercedes Labelle, author and Lead Analyst at Northern Policy Institute, lays out current immigration levels and characteristics for each of Northern Ontario’s five Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot program cities: Thunder Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, North Bay, Timmins, and Sudbury.

The Rural and Northern Immigration Pilot (RNIP) was created in 2020 as a three-year program to encourage newcomers to Canada to settle in rural areas and Northern Ontario, rather than in big cities like Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal. It is based on the applicant securing a job offer before they apply.

The newcomer candidates need to demonstrate their intention to reside long-term in the city, to become a part of the fabric of Northern Ontario. They must also complete extensive paperwork, as well as numerous interviews, in-depth evaluations of the job offer and review by the selection committee. If the applicant is successful, they will be recommended to Immigration Refugee and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) for permanent residency.

The RNIP program has been implemented across the five largest communities in Northern Ontario as they are experiencing job vacancy rates between five and 55 per cent in some occupations.

But as it turns out, Labelle said at the moment, there is a disconnect between targeted occupations under the RNIP and what is really needed.

“RNIP is a community-driven economic development immigration stream, where the community identifies the occupations that have the most need,” Labelle told Sudbury.com. “What we found in this paper is that there’s little alignment between occupations of recent immigrants and occupations that have the highest vacancy rate.”

The ‘highest vacancy rate’ is calculated by comparing job postings to the total labour market and “identifying data-driven labour market statistics,” said Labelle.

She said while the RNIP program has shifted the focus to more demand-based targeting, there is still considerable variance between jobs in highest demand and the occupations targeted by RNIP.

The research report put forward five recommendations to be considered, which include annual and ongoing monitoring of the program, community-specific assessments and expanded analysis, undertaking Welcoming Francophone Community initiatives – referring to the specific program focused on attracting Francophone newcomers to Northern Ontario –  as well as

“Strengthening the alignment between labour market shortages, targeted occupations, postsecondary institutional fields of study, and immigrant-intended occupations to maximize economic outcomes,” states the report.

Of course, Labelle notes there have been some unexpected challenges in the early years of the pilot program.

“No one really expected this to be going on during a global pandemic,” said Labelle. “The first two years of the RNIP pilot program were in the midst of COVID, so it’s really hard to plan for things like that.”

And now that most people are easing into recovery, Labelle said another unexpected challenge appeared.  “We’re seeing a ton of labour market shortages emerge and signing bonuses popping up for occupations,” she said. “With a labour market that’s changing so rapidly, we need to continuously update this data and also the projected future.”

There is a desperate need for newcomers to Northern Ontario, said Labelle, and also, the need to keep them here.  A 2021 report stated that the North must attract 1,700 new residents a year minimum for 20 years just to keep pace.

“Our (Northern) demographics are older on average than Ontario and we have high levels of youth out migration, so there’s not going to be enough people to backfill all these retirees in the coming years, which will make our communities economically unsustainable,” said Labelle. “We absolutely need to not only attract immigrants, but retain people already in the communities and make sure that they’re participating in the labor force to the fullest extent.”

The research report notes that retention of immigrants in the first year following admission averages 70 per cent, meaning approximately 30 per cent of immigrants are leaving Greater Sudbury within their first year of gaining permanent residence.

But consistent analysis of labour market data will help, said Labelle.

“Immigrants are less likely to leave if they have a meaningful employment opportunity, meaning they’re working in an occupation that truly is in need, and they have stable employment with a welcoming employer.”

Housing is also an indicator of a welcoming community, said Labelle, meaning that suitable, affordable and adequate housing is necessary.

“We can see through this paper that recent immigrants are less likely to be home owners than more established immigrants,” said Labelle, “and taking that step from renter to an owner really helped solidify retention in the communities.”

Labelle said more answers will be available when there is new data available.

“As I’m sure everyone knows, the housing market has skyrocketed, prices of housing and affordability is really out of touch for a lot of Canadians and a lot of immigrants,” said Labelle. “We’ll be interested to see the impact that has on retention, attraction, and the ability to settle in a community.”

Labelle said one finding that surprised her was that, based on 2020 data, Sudbury had the lowest vacancy rate. “Meaning Sudbury wasn’t facing as severe labor shortages as the other big five, which really surprised me, especially because this data does reflect COVID.”

As 2022 is the final year of the three-year pilot program, Labelle said she hopes the program will continue and has faith that it will, based on the success of RNIP, as well as the community-driven Atlantic Immigration Pilot Program, which Labelle said was made permanent.

She said the biggest key to success in the program is the collaboration within the community, what she refers to as a “community hug.”

“What makes the RNIP so unique is the understanding of collaboration needed within a community to fully welcome an immigrant,” said Labelle.  “It’s not only making sure services are available to the immigrant, but it’s also making sure that services are available to the employer.”

Labelle said that in addition to monitoring, data collection and analysis, the community will be the real indicator of success. “I’m glad immigration is at the forefront, and I’m glad it’s being led by the community,” she said.

You can read the full report from the Northern Policy Institute here.

Source: Immigration report shows skills don’t always match job market

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Canada’s backlog of Nexus applications balloons to nearly 300,000 despite downturn during pandemic

2022/05/31 Leave a comment

Yet another unfortunate fail. While not personally affected given our cards are valid until 2024, can understand the frustration of those affected:

Canada’s backlog of Nexus applications has ballooned into the hundreds of thousands, despite a sharp downturn in applicants during the pandemic, prompting blowback from frustrated travellers as clogged airports continue to overflow.

The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) says 295,133Nexus applications have yet to be processed due to ongoing office closures prompted by COVID-19.

Would-be cardholders in the program, which allows pre-approved Canadians to pass through separate, speedy lines when travelling to and from the United States, must be risk-assessed by both the CBSA and U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

The American agency reopened its Nexus enrolment centres for applicant interviews on April 19, but centres in Canada remain closed after shuttering in March 2020.

The resulting backlog means some Nexus members are struggling to book sit-downs before their cards expire, as Canadian residents hoping to renew their status can only schedule interviews in fewer than a dozen border community offices where slots are few.

Travelling retirees are among those exasperated by the standstill.

“A lot of snowbirds go to the U.S. frequently. They often go back and forth, and a fair number of them would be Nexus card holders, including myself,” said Jill Wykes, editor of Snowbird Advisor, an online resource for snowbirds.

Wykes questioned why enrolment centres remain closed when many other government offices have been open for months.

“The airports are chaotic, and if you have Nexus you can get through so much more quickly coming and going, whether it’s at the border or the airport,” she said.

“The whole situation is very frustrating, that the government did not anticipate this pent-up demand, which as been anticipated for two years.”

The CBSA said in an e-mail that Canada and the U.S. are in discussions about when to reopen Canadian enrolment centres.

“Although the extent of the backlog in 2019 is not known, I can tell you that the backlog has significantly increased over pre-pandemic levels due to the closing of the enrolment centres in March 2020 for public health reasons,” spokeswoman Rebecca Purdy said.

Meanwhile the Fast program for cross-border commercial truck drivers now sports a backlog of 11,018, the CBSA said.

Jacques Roy, a professor of transport management at HEC Montreal business school, says the backlog is affecting business and leisure travellers. It also adds pressure to airports already struggling with security staff shortages and endless queues.

“I really am having a hard time understanding why nothing was done or processed during that period,” Roy said of the ongoing office closures.

The CBSA said it continues to carry out risk assessments remotely within its standard 30-day timeline for new applicants or those seeking to renew a soon-to-expire card.

However, once both countries have pre-approved the application, “the onus is then on the applicant to schedule an interview at a Nexus/Fast EC (enrolment centre) using the online portal,” the agency said.

It has not set a date for when Canadian enrolment centres will unlock their doors.

Nexus memberships are typically valid for five years, after which they must be renewed. The process involves a risk assessment and a screening interview – for both first-time applicants and long-time card holders – the CBSA said.

Nexus membership declined by 170,814, or nine per cent, to 1.73 million enrollees between 2020 and 2021, according to agency figures.

Between 2018 and 2019, the number of new applications had risen by nearly a third to 262,125. They then plunged to 172,125 in 2020 and 29,705 in 2021. Nonetheless, with enrolment centres shuttered, the pile of partially processed applications continued to mount.

Source: Canada’s backlog of Nexus applications balloons to nearly 300,000 despite downturn during pandemic

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

La maîtrise de l’immigration, «une question de survie», dit Legault

2022/05/31 Leave a comment

Quebec/federal relations continue to be challenged. Will see how this plays out after the Quebec election and the degree to which federal parties accommodate or set limits:

À quatre mois des élections générales, François Legault fait de l’obtention de nouveaux pouvoirs en matière d’immigration une condition sine qua non à la survie de la nation québécoise.

Le chef de la Coalition avenir Québec propose de hisser le thème de l’immigration parmi les principaux sujets de discussion de la campagne électorale — qui battra son plein à la fin de l’été — afin que « les Québécois comprennent bien l’urgence de rapatrier les pouvoirs » de sélection de quelque 11 000 immigrants inscrits au programme de regroupement familial, qui lui échappent à l’heure actuelle.

Si la « moitié » des participants du programme de regroupement familial continuent de bouder le français comme ils le font présentement, « ça peut devenir une question de temps avant qu’on devienne une Louisiane », a soutenu M. Legault dimanche, tout en évoquant des études gouvernementales sur le sujet.

« Je demande, aux prochaines élections, un mandat fort pour aller négocier ça avec le gouvernement fédéral », a-t-il fait valoir lors du discours de clôture du congrès national de la CAQ, à Drummondville.

François Legault s’est par la suite abstenu de préciser, devant les journalistes, les contours du « mandat fort » qu’il sollicite auprès de l’électorat québécois le 3 octobre prochain. « À partir du moment où on a l’appui d’une majorité de Québécois, c’est dur pour les partis politiques fédéraux de refuser cette demande-là [et] de gagner au fédéral sans appui au Québec », s’est-il contenté de dire.

« Avec tout ce qui se passe chez les conservateurs », un nouveau parti politique plus sensible aux revendications québécoises pourrait apparaître sur la scène politique fédérale d’ici le prochain scrutin fédéral, a-t-il dit.

Référendum sectoriel

Le chef du gouvernement québécois a rejeté l’idée avancée par des membres de la CAQ au cours du week-end de tenir un « référendum sectoriel » en immigration afin d’établir un rapport de force plus favorable. « Ce n’est pas dans les plans », a-t-il mentionné. « Ça suffit le niaisage ! […] La première initiative de la prochaine législature devra être l’organisation d’un référendum sur l’immigration », avait fait valoir le militant de Terrebonne Kevin Serafini samedi. « Bravo ! » avait spontanément crié une sympathisante caquiste. Les membres se sont toutefois bien gardés de l’ajouter dans le cahier de 23 propositions qu’ils ont remis au gouvernement de François Legault.

En revanche, ils se sont par exemple dits favorables à l’idée d’ajouter un cours obligatoire d’histoire et de culture du Québec au programme collégial, de concevoir un « catalogue de grandes œuvres artistiques québécoises » pour les enseignants et de mettre sur pied un musée de l’Histoire nationale du Québec. Le président régional Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean de la Commission Relève de la CAQ, Samuel Massicotte, y voit notamment une occasion de donner tort à Lord Durham, selon qui les descendants des Français formaient un « peuple sans histoire et sans littérature ». « On survit encore, malgré certaines tentatives d’un autre ordre de gouvernement de nier notre langue, de nier nos droits. On continue de s’accrocher », a souligné l’enseignant en histoire.

Turbulences économiques ?

À l’approche du rendez-vous électoral, François Legault a exhorté les électeurs québécois à rejeter les propositions des oppositions de gauche, convaincue que « l’argent pousse dans les arbres », et de droite, muette face aux changements climatiques. « Quand les temps sont pleins d’incertitudes, de turbulences et de dangers économiques, ce n’est pas le temps de se lancer dans des aventures avec des idéologues de gauche ou de droite. En fait, quand la mer est houleuse, c’est le temps de confier la barre à une équipe compétente, expérimentée, solide ! » a-t-il déclaré sur la scène du Centrexpo Cogeco, entouré de la plupart des personnes qui brigueront les suffrages sous la bannière de la CAQ. La présidente-directrice générale du CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal, Sonia Bélanger, était dans le lot.

Le premier ministre a plus tard expliqué son changement de ton sur les perspectives économiques québécoises en parlant de projections d’économistes évoquant « 40 % de chances » de récession mondiale. D’ailleurs, la hausse graduelle du taux directeur de la Banque du Canada « n’est rien pour aider l’économie », a-t-il fait remarquer aux médias.

Dans un deuxième mandat, un gouvernement caquiste pratiquera une « gestion rigoureuse des finances publiques », ce qui ne l’empêchera pas de donner un coup de pouce aux Québécois pour « passer au travers » de la hausse du coût de la vie, a indiqué M. Legault devant des centaines de militants gonflés à bloc. Ceux-ci avaient reçu pour consigne de frapper leurs bâtons gonflables, un bleu, un blanc, à l’appel du mot « fierté ». « Sans la prospérité, la fierté manque de moyens. Puis sans la fierté, la prospérité manque de sens. Ça prend les deux », a insisté le chef caquiste en précampagne électorale.

Source: La maîtrise de l’immigration, «une question de survie», dit Legault

And a comparable article in English:

Premier François Legault gave a glimpse into what his provincial election campaign will look like Sunday, with a speech outlining his plan to demand Ottawa hand over more immigration powers to Quebec.

Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ), Legault’s party, held its caucus in Drummondville, Que., this weekend, a city in the Eastern Townships southeast of Montreal.

Legault told the crowd of about 1,000 people there he wants to ask Quebecers for a “strong mandate” in the Oct. 3 election to be a powerful negotiator with Ottawa on matters of immigration.

The speech Legault gave, which he dubbed “Pride,” was heavily nationalist, calling for the preservation of the French language, Quebec culture and listing the passing of Bills 21 (on secularism) and 96 (the overhaul of the Charter of the French language) as wins for his government.

“We changed Quebec,” he said.

Bill 21 outlaws civil servants in positions of authority, including teachers, lawyers, police officers and judges, from wearing religious garb or symbols. In practice, the law has for the most part affected female Muslim teachers who wear head scarves.

While Quebec manages economic immigration to the province — a power other provinces and territories in Canada do not have — the federal government is responsible for family reunification and the admission of refugees, representing close to half of newcomers to the province every year.

Legault said he wants Quebec to be able to choose much of that remaining half, except for refugees, so that it can prioritize French-speaking foreigners. He said that family reunification cases represent about 11,000 of the 50,000 people who immigrate to the province every year.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has so far rejected Legault’s calls for Quebec to have complete control over immigration into the province but has pointed to Bill C-13 tabled by the federal Liberals, which in part aims to increase immigration from French-speaking countries.

Legault said it was a question of the survival of the French language in the province, pointing to the state of Louisiana as an example of a place that used to be predominantly French-speaking but no longer is, surrounded by a nearly monolingual English-speaking country.

“It’s important for Quebecers to understand that it’s a question of survival,” for a French-speaking Quebec, he said.

But when asked by a reporter if there were government studies on the impacts of family reunification and the use of French, Legault’s answer wasn’t clear.

“Is it too much to ask them to learn before moving to Quebec? Is it too much? I don’t think so,” he said.

A heavily criticized clause in Bill 96, which was voted into law last week, calls on refugees to learn French within six months of arriving to Quebec, after which they can no longer access most public services in another language.

Critics say six months is not enough to become fluent in French, and that the clause will make it difficult for immigrants to access basic services.

Tuesday, after the law passed, Legault gave reporters a heads up that he wanted to turn to pressuring the federal government to handing over its immigration levers.

“That’s where the focus should be,” in protecting French, he said.

Critics say policies go beyond language

But some critics see Legault’s focus on legislation targeting minorities as a way to appeal to his voter base, largely composed of older portions of the Quebec population and those living outside of major cities.

Some groups helping immigrants, migrant workers and refugees in Montreal believe Quebec is creating a two-tiered immigration system, making it harder for non-French-speaking people to access permanent residency, while relying more heavily on a vulnerable temporary foreign workforce to fill serious labour shortages.

“I doubt it’s solely a question of the French language,” said Mostafa Henaway, an advocate at the Immigrant Workers’ Centre, in an interview last week.

Indigenous leaders across the province have also denounced Legault’s government for failing to listen to their calls to be exempt from Bill 96, saying their sovereignty and language revitalization efforts are at stake.

On Sunday, Legault made no mention of the labour shortage or of problems with access to health care — such as emergency room capacities, surgery wait lists and a shortage of family doctors. He said he would unveil a health care plan at some point in the campaign.

Statistics Canada reported in the fall that there were 279,000 job vacancies in Quebec in 2021.

Four months away from the October election, the CAQ has already recruited candidates in more than 100 electoral districts, and so far half of those candidates are women. The party still has 29 out of 125 candidates to name.

Source: Legault pledges to demand more control from Ottawa over immigration to Quebec

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

‘Don’ of a new era: the rise of Peter Thiel as a US rightwing power player

2022/05/31 Leave a comment

Of note – campaign finance is another issue that will likely never be addressed. The lack of limits worked in Obama’s favour, so this is not just a problem of Republicans:

As the Republican party primaries play out across the US, the most sought after endorsement is still that of former president Donald Trump. But when it comes to the most vital part of any American campaign – money – another figure is emerging on the right of US politics who is becoming equally significant.

Peter Thiel, the PayPal founder and former CEO referred to as the “don” of the original PayPal Mafia, a group that included Elon Musk, is establishing himself as a serious power player in American rightwing politics by wielding the power of his vast fortune.

Thiel, styled as a billionaire venture capitalist and tech entrepreneur, plowed more than $10m into a super Pac backing Hillbilly Elegy author JD Vance, winner of the Republican primary for an open US Senate seat in Ohio.

In August, Thiel’s backing will be tested again after shoveling $13.5m into supporting former employee Blake Masters in the competitive Republican primary for a US Senate seat in Arizona.

In both cases, Thiel put his money – his fortune is said to be in the region of $6bn – to work behind candidates aligned with Trump’s rightwing agenda in 2022 midterm elections.

Earlier this year Thiel stepped down from the board of Meta, where he was an early investor, and a long-serving adviser to CEO Mark Zuckerberg. “He wanted to avoid being a distraction for Facebook,” according to a person close to Thiel. With his resignation effective this month, the source told Forbes Thiel “thinks that the Republican Party can advance the Trump agenda and he wants to do what he can to support that”.

But there is a vacuum between the entire Trump political agenda and Trump himself. The former president is apt to pick candidates who promote his stolen election claims. Not all succeed, or are likely to. Trump’s failed backing of David Perdue as Georgia’s Republican gubernatorial candidate looked like a personal grudge against incumbent Brian Kemp, who certified Biden’s victory in 2020.

Thiel has so far helped Trump in that cause. By some estimates, Thiel has donated $25m to 15 other 2022 candidates for the House and Senate towing the Trump election fraud line.

Max Chafkin, author of a Thiel biography The Contrarian, recently wrote that Thiel’s goal is to turn Trump’s ideology into “a disciplined political platform”.

For Thiel, endorsements of Vance and Masters follow a $300,000 donation to the campaign of far-right senator Josh Hawley, then running for Missouri attorney general in 2016. He also donated money to help elect Trump president and spoke on his behalf at the Republican National Convention.

Thiel stayed out of the 2020 presidential race, and instead donated $2.1m to a super Pac supporting Kris Kobach, the Kansas secretary of state who had proposed creating a registry of Muslim immigrants and visitors.

“Thiel is one of the conservative mega donors that has the ability to shore up candidates that might need additional support. His spending is targeted, and his ability to spend millions can be impactful,” said Sheila Krumholz at OpenSecrets.

Where Trump often seems a single issue political player – obsessed with the 2020 election loss – Thiel is more flexible in terms of what he represents, Krumholz says.

“Often when your’e talking about party-aligned mega donors, there are people who have been active over decades, so Peter Thiel strikes a different figure. He’s an entrepreneur, he’s tech industry, super successful, seen as part of the young conservative vanguard that some see as more libertarian.”

“They might be Trump supporters, but their portfolio and persona waters down the connection,” Krumholz adds.

Like Musk, Thiel – called The Dungeon Master by the New York Review of Books because he played Dungeons & Dragons as a teenager and read J R R Tolkien’s trilogy ten times – presents a contradictory picture.

As an undergraduate, he founded the conservative Stanford Review and in 1995 Thiel co-authored The Diversity Myth, a book sought to question the impact of multiculturalism and “political correctness” at California’s higher education campuses.

“In bright and shallow Silicon Valley, Thiel stands apart for having retained the intellectual intensity of a bookish undergraduate, a quality that has made him an object of curiosity, admiration and mockery,” the publication noted. “He stands apart amid the orthodoxy of tech-world social progressivism as much for his conservatism as for his business sense.”

In 2003, he co-founded Palantir Technologies, a firm to assist US intelligence agencies with counter-terrorism operations. Last week, Palantir and global commodities trader Trafigura announced a new target market to track carbon emissions for the oil, gas, refined metals and concentrates sector. BP is among its customers, Reuters reported.

Thiel’s libertarian credentials, and perhaps in part his political motivation, were publicly established in 2016 when he funded an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed by Terry Bollea, known more popularly as wrestler Hulk Hogan, that bankrupted the news website Gawker. Gawker had outed Thiel in 2007.

“It’s less about revenge and more about specific deterrence,” Thiel said of the action. “I saw Gawker pioneer a unique and incredibly damaging way of getting attention by bullying people even when there was no connection with the public interest … I thought it was worth fighting back.”

Funding the lawsuit, he added, was one of the “greater philanthropic things that I’ve done”.

Blake Masters, the 35-year-old Republican US senate candidate for Arizona, has suggested he would use the same tactics after the Arizona Mirror wrote that the candidate opposes abortion rights and “wants to allow states to ban contraception use”. Masters denies those positions.

“If I get any free time after winning my elections then you’re getting sued, and I’ll easily prove actual malice,” Masters wrote in a tweet. “Gawker found out the hard way and you will too.”

Thiel, said Masters last year, “sees some promise in me, but he knows I’ll be an independent-minded senator”.

But the larger issue for Thiel may be intense cross-currents in the US around big tech, social media and free speech. His former PayPal Mafia consigliere, Musk, is also emerging from the tech world to have influence in US politics – where he recently declared himself a Republican – and free speech as he seeks to buy the social media platform Twitter.

“[Tech is] an industry on the cutting edge and caught in the cross-fire between the parties,” said Krumholz. “There are a lot of conflicting pressures on and from within the tech industry. Tech is being scapegoated by some, and held responsible for much of the disinformation, excesses of social media, partisan division and radicalization we see.”

Moira Weigel, a professor of communications at Northeastern University and a founding editor of Logic magazine, argued in the New Republic last year that Thiel does not really matter: “What matters about him is whom he connects.”

At the moment, Thiel is busy connecting some of the most rightwing politicians in recent US history.

Source: ‘Don’ of a new era: the rise of Peter Thiel as a US rightwing power player

Filed under Politics Tagged with , ,

Immigrants in Quebec could struggle to have rights respected under new language law

2022/05/30 Leave a comment

Of note:

Groups helping immigrants, migrant workers and refugees in Montreal say their clientele will struggle to have their basic rights respected under Quebec’s revamped language law.

Bill 96, the province’s overhaul of the Charter of the French language, was adopted into law at the National Assembly Tuesday. The law’s wide scope limits the use of English in the courts and public services, and imposes stricter language requirements on small businesses, municipalities and CEGEP students.

One of the law’s clauses calls on newcomers to learn French within six months of arrival, after which they can no longer access most public services in another language.

Community workers say that could make it difficult for their clientele to access justice and even complete daily errands, pushing some further into isolation and vulnerable situations.

They believe Quebec is creating a two-tiered immigration system, where people fleeing strife who speak only rudimentary English could be discouraged from coming to the province despite growing labour needs. Meanwhile, the province is relying on an increasing number of temporary foreign workers in low-wage jobs to fill significant labour shortage gaps.

“We really feel discriminated against,” said Evelyn Calugay, who runs PINAY, a Filipino women’s rights group.

Filipinos coming to Quebec are often compelled to fill precarious jobs, such as domestic work, leaving them little time to learn French, Calugay explained. They already come from a country with eight major dialects, she noted.

Calugay, who is 76 and came to Quebec in 1975 when the province was desperate for nurses, said it took her a year of full-time French classes to get to a point where she could understand and be understood in French.

“We learned English in school because it was taking from the American system, so the language was imposed on us, and before that our ancestors were forced to speak Spanish,” said Calugay. The Philippines was a colony first of Spain, then the United States until it gained independence after the Second World War.

Calugay said she appreciates the importance of preserving the French language, and following the laws and customs of Quebec and Canada, but that the revamped language charter now feels coercive, rather than a way to promote French.

“We don’t even encourage temporary workers to come to Quebec for now,” she said.

Legault shifting focus to immigration

Premier François Legault told reporters Tuesday after the law passed that he wanted to turn his focus to making sure a larger number of immigrants accepted into the province already speak French, noting he would be making it a campaign issue in the upcoming election.

He said his government has increased the proportion of its selection of immigrants who speak French from 55 per cent to 84 per cent, but that the proportion of French-speaking immigrants accepted into the province by the federal government was only about 50 per cent.

While Quebec manages economic immigration to the province — a power other provinces and territories in Canada do not have — the federal government is responsible for the admission of refugees.

Calugay points out that if Quebec’s powers are extended to include refugees, the province could effectively limit admissions from certain countries based on their French proficiency, while bringing in more temporary foreign workers, who mostly hail from Mexico, Guatemala and Honduras.

“Because that’s cheap — what does a capitalist want? Cheap labour, of course,” she said.

Mostafa Henaway of the Migrant Workers’ Centre agrees with Calugay that the government appears to be prioritizing temporary migrant work in order to appease its voter base.

“There’s this idea that they want a temporary and sort of disposable, flexible workforce,” Henaway said in a phone interview.

“So, the CAQ can say it reduced permanent migration. Then at the same time, they can say they increased the number of temporary migrants and protected the French language.”

He said the six-month clause means vulnerable workers and immigrants in all kinds of situations could have trouble understanding and making themselves understood when it comes to denouncing abuse.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has so far rejected Legault’s calls for Quebec to have complete control on immigration into the province but has pointed to Bill C-13 tabled by the federal Liberals, which in part aims to increase immigration from French-speaking countries.

In a statement to CBC News, Jean Boulet, the provincial minister responsible for immigration, labour and francization, said prioritizing French-speaking immigrants is important for Quebec, “given the French character of Quebec and the issues in sustaining the official language of Quebec.”

“Temporary workers are essentially the responsibility of the federal government and there is no threshold limiting the arrival of this category of immigration,” Boulet said.

In 2021, nearly 24,000 temporary foreign workers were employed in Quebec, the highest number yet in the province and up from about 17,000 the year before. Quebec announced last year it had signed a deal with Ottawa for companies in the province to hire up to 20 per cent more than that.

When children are the translators

For Rose Ndjel, the director of Afrique au Féminin in Montreal’s Parc-Extension neighbourhood, the challenge posed by the extended language restrictions will be on people who have already lived there for years and may not have easy access to French courses because of time and cost.

Ndjel helps run a local bank of interpreters who speak many of the more than 130 languages present in Park Ex, such as Spanish, Punjabi, Hindi, Lingala, Urdu and Tamil.

Ahead of the law’s adoption, she said a local school board employee contacted her asking for interpreters to translate teacher meetings to parents.

“The people who speak French in Parc-Extension are people who moved here from other neighbourhoods,” Ndjel said, referring to the growing gentrification in the area.

“Otherwise, it’s the children who go to the elementary and high schools in French who speak the language.”

She said children sometimes miss school to help translate services, such as at doctor’s offices, for their parents or grandparents.

“That will happen even more with this law,” Ndjel said in French. “Parents won’t be able to do anything without their kids. Unfortunately, that’s where we’re at. Children’s health is at stake.”

Source: Immigrants in Quebec could struggle to have rights respected under new language law

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , ,

ICYMI – David: Le véritable adversaire [en immigration]

2022/05/30 Leave a comment

Of note, useful analysis. Likely won’t be pretty:

Durant la campagne électorale de 2018, François Legault s’était impatienté lors d’une conférence de presse face à l’insistance des journalistes qui le questionnaient sur ses positions en matière d’immigration.

« Vous parlez beaucoup d’immigration, mais pas les personnes normales », leur avait-il lancé. Les « personnes normales » lui parlaient de tout autre chose, par exemple de Gaétan Barrette, disait le chef de la CAQ.

C’était pourtant lui qui avait choisi d’introduire le sujet dans la campagne pour embarrasser Philippe Couillard, mais il était vite apparu qu’il le maîtrisait très mal. Les modalités de l’entente Canada-Québec signée en 1991 lui échappaient visiblement, tout comme les conditions d’obtention de la citoyenneté canadienne. Il devenait donc urgent de passer à autre chose.

Cette fois-ci, le premier ministre a eu le temps de faire ses devoirs et a manifestement décidé d’en faire un thème important de la prochaine campagne. Pour mettre la table, son bureau a donc laissé filtrer au Journal de Québec les résultats d’un sondage que la CAQ a commandé à la firme Léger dans le but de démontrer que, contrairement à ce qu’il soutenait il y a quatre ans, les « personnes normales » sont très préoccupées par la question.

Plus de deux Québécois francophones sur trois (68 %) sont d’avis que les seuils d’immigration sont déjà suffisamment ou trop élevés, que les nouveaux arrivants n’ont pas une connaissance suffisante du français (65 %) et qu’ils adoptent davantage l’anglais que le français comme langue d’usage (66 %). Près de la moitié (48 %) estiment qu’il s’agit de la plus grande menace pour le français.

Pratiquement assuré d’être reporté au pouvoir, M. Legault n’a pas vraiment besoin d’accuser encore le PLQ de mettre la nation en danger ni de se lancer dans une surenchère identitaire avec le PQ. Ces deux partis tenteront au mieux de sauver les meubles le 3 octobre. L’électorat de QS est presque totalement imperméable au discours caquiste et la position du Parti conservateur d’Éric Duhaime sur l’immigration n’est pas si éloignée de celle de la CAQ.

En réalité, son véritable adversaire est Justin Trudeau. En 2018, il prétendait que ce dernier serait obligé de répondre positivement à ses demandes si les Québécois lui donnaient un « mandat clair ». Il a obtenu ce mandat et M. Trudeau est pourtant demeuré inébranlable. Il en obtiendra sans doute un encore plus clair, mais cela fera-t-il vraiment fléchir son adversaire, qui entend augmenter massivement le nombre d’immigrants au Canada ?

En fin de semaine prochaine, les délégués au congrès de la CAQ seront invités à adopter une résolution réclamant que le gouvernement fédéral transfère au Québec « l’ensemble des pouvoirs en matière d’immigration le plus rapidement possible ». C’est même plus que ce que M. Legault a demandé jusqu’à présent, dans la mesure où il accepte que l’accueil des réfugiés demeure de juridiction fédérale.

Or, tous les Québécois ne sont pas aussi convaincus qu’Ottawa devrait céder des pouvoirs. Selon le sondage Léger-CAQ, 52 % des francophones, mais seulement 30 % des 18-34 ans sont de cet avis, alors que 50 % de ces derniers estiment que la situation actuelle devrait être maintenue ou même que les pouvoirs d’Ottawa devraient être augmentés. Sans surprise, seulement 7 % des non-francophones souhaitent que le Québec en obtienne davantage.

Pour renforcer cet appui et accroître le rapport de force face à Ottawa, la campagne électorale pourrait être le prélude au lancement d’une grande « conversation » nationale. Dans l’entourage de M. Legault, on jongle avec l’idée de réunir des États généraux sur l’immigration, qui engageraient l’ensemble de la société québécoise dans un vaste exercice de réflexion sur son avenir collectif. Cela ne pourrait certainement pas nuire.

La formule n’est pas nouvelle. On pense immédiatement aux « États généraux du Canada français », dans les années 1960, qui avaient marqué une étape décisive dans le développement du mouvement nationaliste et affirmé le droit du Québec à son autodétermination, mais il s’agissait là d’une initiative de la société civile.

En 2001, le gouvernement Bouchard avait organisé des « États généraux sur la situation et l’avenir de la langue française au Québec », présidés par l’ancien président de la CSN Gérald Larose. Ils n’avaient pas eu un gros effet, dans la mesure où Lucien Bouchard y voyait simplement un prix de consolation pour les militants péquistes qui réclamaient à grands cris un retour à la loi 101 originelle.

Les militants caquistes sont loin d’être aussi exigeants envers leur chef que l’étaient ceux du PQ à l’époque. Ils se contentent de le suivre sans jamais le bousculer. Si M. Legault décidait de lancer une opération de ce genre, alors que rien ne l’y oblige, ce serait vraisemblablement avec l’intention d’y donner suite. Qui sait où cela pourrait mener.

Inévitablement, ceux qui croient qu’il n’a pas renoncé à son idéal d’antan y verront une « astuce » visant à raviver le projet indépendantiste, mais s’il est réellement convaincu que le plein contrôle de l’immigration est essentiel à la survie d’une société française dans le cadre fédéral et qu’Ottawa s’entête à le refuser au Québec, il lui faut bien tenter quelque chose.

Source: Le véritable adversaire

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

ICYMI – Milloy: Election debates lack real purpose

2022/05/30 Leave a comment

Valid questioning:

Why do we have leaders’ debates?

I suspect those Ontarians who bothered to watch the most-recent election debate are probably asking themselves that very question — I know that I am.

It’s not that there was anything particularly wrong with the evening and kudos to both the moderators and party leaders for all trying their best. But what was its purpose?

Theoretically, I guess it was to inform voters on the various policy positions of the parties to allow us to compare-and-contrast them.

However, all I remember hearing was the intention of each leader to throw huge amounts of money at every problem in a way that was somehow different from the boatloads of money promised by their competitor. Did I really talk that way when I was in politics?

In fairness, there were a few points of contrast, such as the differing party positions on the building of Highway 413. But let’s be honest, examples like these were few and far between.

Why does this happen?

Mainly it’s because public policy has become unbelievably complex and there are no easy solutions, yet voters have short attention spans. The only way for a party to get noticed is to simplify issues, couch them in bumper-sticker slogans and ditch the nuance.

How else could you try to explain your position on something as complex as health care, education or the economy in a few short minutes while three other people are yelling at you?

Some say that leader’s debates help us “get to know” the party leaders as people. Fair enough, but I am not sure that learning who throws the best zingers or has the cleverest lines (often prepared in advance) is an ideal way to judge who should lead the province.

What if we focused on something else?

What if leaders’ debates attempted to show us what makes party leaders tick? What if their goal was to reveal a party leader’s values, beliefs, and deepest convictions?

Let me share several questions that I have always wanted to hear asked at a debate.

What do we owe each other?

How far can we get in perfecting the world? Are there public policy issues that can’t be solved by government?

To what extent do you believe that people are on the margins of society because of their own bad choices or because society is rigged against them?

Do you believe that there are sacred things in our world that can never be altered — lines that can never be crossed? What are they?

Do you believe that big corporations have too much power?

These are not abstract questions. The answers to each of them have profound implications for everything from tax policy to social policy. They determine how governments support the poor and vulnerable, develop programs around the environment and allow the private sector to operate in key areas of our lives.

Wouldn’t it be kind of interesting to hear each party leader grapple with them?

I get it. Election debates are not philosophy seminars, and many may find my questions wacky. But tell me, are they any wackier than asking each party leader their greatest political regret or, as they did during the federal Conservative leadership debate, the last TV program that they binge watched?

Mine might be more useful.

Source: Election debates lack real purpose

Filed under Politics Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →