ICYMI: Tate Britain is forcing gallery visitors to confront history and social issues. Could it be turning people off? 

Nuance and balance are important:

…Apart from the bureaucratic mindset, it is the lack of nuance that most exasperates critics. Waldemar Januszczak, the influential art writer, complained in The Sunday Times recently of the Tate’s “growing obsession with identity politics and the dour exhibition-making that results from it,” which he wrote was partially to blame for a decline in visitors. “People don’t go to art galleries to be lectured or turned into better citizens. They go to be transported,” he added.

Art critics panned Tate Britain’s 2023 rehanging of its permanent collection – a major undertaking for a gallery of its stature – for losing a sense of wonder in art. Jonathan Jones of the left-leaning Guardian newspaper said that “today’s Tate Britain is where art goes to sleep. That’s largely because it is committed to a worthy view of art.”

Several commentators took issue with the large text introductions on the wall of each room and the labels next to paintings in the 16th-, 17th- and 18th-century rooms of the collection. They typically contain three to four paragraphs of social history with repeated mentions of the slave trade, the great wealth of the landed classes who profited from empire and then a line or two about where the artists in the room fitted in. Commentary about style and craft is noticeable by its absence.

Artists working 300 to 400 years ago are often held to the standards of today. At Tate Britain, masters such as Thomas Gainsborough, Joshua Reynolds and George Stubbs are chided for painting “flattering portraits, scenes of contented workers, and idyllic landscapes,” when in fact “British society, both here and across an expanding empire, is far from cohesive or peaceful.”

“My advice,” said Roger Turner, a private tour guide leading a party of six from a suburban London church around the permanent collection recently, “is not to look at the labels. These information boards are essentially propaganda. They prevent people from looking at the paintings and appreciating them.”

Tate Britain suffers its own particular discomfort over the slave trade, which is addressed on its website and in written displays at the gallery. 

Originally called the Tate Gallery, it was founded by a legacy from Henry Tate, who made his fortune as a sugar refiner whose company later merged into the global giant Tate & Lyle. As the gallery notes, Mr. Tate may have begun his business a couple of decades after the abolition of the slave trade in the British Empire, but his industry was rooted in slavery. …

Source: Tate Britain is forcing gallery visitors to confront history and social issues. Could it be turning people off?

Settlement Services: 2024 data

For some reason, IRCC does not regularly publish use of settlement services on open data and thus I submit annual requests. The following slides contrast 2024 with previous years by service, region and province.

Starting with monthly data, the first chart shows the pandemic dip has been completely eclipsed by post pandemic growth:

The next chart shows how the proportion of different services has remained relatively constant:

The regional breakdown highlights the sharp increase in settlement services to Europe, driven entirely by those from Ukraine:

The country view shows not unsurprisingly that it has been Ukraine and Afghanistan where growth has been greatest:

Lastly, usage by province, comparing recent and overall period changes, with Atlantic Canada and Ontario having the largest increase since 2018 (most Quebec settlement services are delivered by the province, not the federal government so hard to compare trends):

ICYMI: Bouchard | Retour sur le nationalisme identitaire

Another thoughtful commentary by Bouchard:

Le nationalisme identitaire est une forme dégradée de nationalisme. Ce dernier, quand il est bien entendu, exprime un sentiment qui fait aimer sa nation et inspire le désir de la servir pour la faire progresser. Il invite à un engagement porteur de progrès, axé sur des valeurs, des idéaux. Il se traduit dans des initiatives concrètes qui font avancer une société.

Un nationalisme qui nous a bien servis

Notre passé en offre des exemples, qu’il s’agisse du mouvement patriote, de la Révolution tranquille ou du souverainisme. Chaque fois, la nation poursuivait un idéal porteur de grands enjeux. Et dans chaque cas, le nationalisme fut un puissant moteur. À ces exemples, on pourrait ajouter, bien qu’avec les importantes réserves que l’on devine, le programme de la Survivance. Il faut reconnaître qu’il poursuivait un idéal très élevé (trop élevé ?) de pureté morale inspiré des valeurs chrétiennes et soudé à la survie de la langue.

Au fil des ans, les enjeux se modifiaient et le nationalisme se redéfinissait en fonction des urgences de l’heure. Ainsi, à partir des années 1960, le nationalisme rompait avec celui du siècle antérieur. Les aspirations et les urgences ayant changé, notre nation se mobilisait désormais au service d’autres valeurs et d’autres finalités, d’ordre économique, social, politique et culturel. nationalisme identitaire est une forme dégradée de nationalisme. Ce dernier, quand il est bien entendu, exprime un sentiment qui fait aimer sa nation et inspire le désir de la servir pour la faire progresser. Il invite à un engagement porteur de progrès, axé sur des valeurs, des idéaux. Il se traduit dans des initiatives concrètes qui font avancer une société.

Le nationalisme de la CAQ

Le type de nationalisme promu par François Legault et le ministre Bernard Drainville ouvre une voie sans issue et nocive. La notion identitaire qui lui est accolée est floue. Le premier ministre lui-même n’arrive pas à la définir clairement. Elle prête aussi à controverse. Elle peut se durcir, éveiller des sentiments primaires, donner dans le renfermement, l’exclusion et la privation de droits. On a alors affaire à un horizon rétréci, symptôme d’un nationalisme éviscéré qui a évacué les contenus prometteurs.

En plus, ce type de nationalisme ne s’adresse pas à tous les Québécois. On le voit quand M. Legault confond Québécois et Canadien français (par exemple à propos du projet de musée d’histoire nationale). On le voit encore plus clairement dans la dernière politique annoncée par le ministre Drainville, une politique qui élargit abusivement à tout le personnel relié à une école l’interdiction d’afficher des signes religieux. Ce personnel entretient-il avec les élèves un contact continu, intense ? Ici, le nationalisme identitaire glisse dans l’exclusion et l’irrespect des droits.

J’approuve entièrement le texte de Françoise David, Louise Harel et Christine Saint-Pierre publié dans La Presse du 22 avril. Le prétexte donné à l’appui de la loi 21 pour interdire le port de signes religieux chez les enseignantes et les enseignants mettait en cause l’influence néfaste exercée sur les élèves quand l’enseignement se fait endoctrinant. En quoi ce prétexte vaut-il pour le personnel travaillant hors des salles de classe ?

Ne soyons pas dupes. Cette mesure est manifestement le fruit d’un calcul électoraliste de la part d’un parti déjà bien mal en point et dont la feuille de route ne cesse de se détériorer. On essaie encore de raviver la peur d’un islamisme envahisseur désireux de corrompre notre société. Cette menace est usée. Elle a souvent servi depuis trente ans au Québec. Mais où voit-on les signes, les effets de cette agression ? On ne jongle pas de cette façon avec un enjeu qui a des ramifications profondes et légitimes chez certains Québécois.

La laïcité fait évidemment partie des valeurs les plus relevées. À la condition de ne pas la dévoyer.

Dans ce domaine comme dans d’autres, notre premier ministre flirte avec la confusion. Il fait souvent référence à « nos valeurs » et quand il veut aller plus loin, il aime évoquer la laïcité. Mais il y a plus que la laïcité dans nos valeurs. Et dans la laïcité, il y a plus que l’interdiction faite aux « islamistes » de prier en public ou la nécessité de « chasser le religieux de nos écoles ». À ce sujet, du reste, on comprend mal que ce prosélyte d’une laïcité intégrale soutienne le financement d’écoles à vocation explicitement religieuse.

Du bon usage de l’identité et du nationalisme

L’identité peut être conçue de diverses façons. Selon moi, la définition la plus simple, la plus consensuelle, peut se formuler ainsi : un ensemble largement partagé de traits, de valeurs, de souvenirs et de symboles qui créent un sentiment d’appartenance, lequel avec le temps se transforme en solidarité. À ce point, ce genre d’identité en vient à coiffer un rapport social indispensable à toute mobilisation. Il se forge dans la durée à même des réalisations méritoires, source d’une fierté légitime pour l’ensemble de la nation.

Le nationalisme québécois a présentement grand besoin d’une perspective assortie de résonances précises. Il faudrait y greffer des contenus sociaux, culturels, économiques et politiques à l’image de ce que fut le néonationalisme de la Révolution tranquille.

En ce qui concerne la sphère culturelle en particulier, il y a urgence. De nombreuses études et de nombreux témoignages l’attestent. On a parlé d’une « dissolution silencieuse » de notre nation (Maxime Plamondon, Le Devoir, 7 février 2025). Il faut aussi penser aux jeunes qui ont besoin de se former l’esprit, de développer des sensibilités, des aspirations qui en feront des adultes plus avertis et des citoyens plus responsables. Des Québécois plus alertes et plus engagés aussi. Il est urgent de leur donner les moyens de s’abreuver à d’autres sources que les réseaux sociaux et les scories d’une nouvelle culture ambiante stérilisante.

Voilà une priorité sans équivoque que notre gouvernement ignore. Une culture vivante permet d’irriguer, d’enrichir la vie collective. C’est une finalité qui nous élève et qui raffermit les fondements de notre nation. Si on s’y mettait, le Québec pourrait à nouveau par sa culture briller dans le monde comme il l’a déjà fait.

Enfin, le souverainiste que je suis déplore vivement le fait que le chef du Parti québécois se joint avec enthousiasme à la croisade mal inspirée du ministre Drainville. Je croyais que ce parti, ayant tiré la leçon du passé, avait retrouvé la sagesse.

Source: Idées | Retour sur le nationalisme identitaire

Identity nationalism is a degraded form of nationalism. The latter, when it is understood, expresses a feeling that makes his nation loved and inspires the desire to serve it to make it progress. It invites a commitment to progress, focused on values, ideals. It translates into concrete initiatives that move a society forward.

Identity nationalism is a degraded form of nationalism. The latter, when it is understood, expresses a feeling that makes his nation loved and inspires the desire to serve it to make it progress. It invites a commitment to progress, focused on values, ideals. It translates into concrete initiatives that move a society forward.

A nationalism that has served us well

Our past offers examples, whether it is the patriotic movement, the Quiet Revolution or sovereignism. Each time, the nation pursued an ideal with great stakes. And in each case, nationalism was a powerful engine. To these examples, we could add, although with the important reservations that we guess, the Survival program. It must be recognized that he pursued a very high ideal (too high?) Of moral purity inspired by Christian values and welded to the survival of language.

Over the years, the stakes changed and nationalism was redefined according to the urgencies of the hour. Thus, from the 1960s, nationalism broke with that of the previous century. Aspirations and emergencies having changed, our nation was now mobilizing in the service of other values and other purposes, of an economic, social, political and cultural nature. Identity nationalism is a degraded form of nationalism. The latter, when it is understood, expresses a feeling that makes his nation loved and inspires the desire to serve it to make it progress. It invites a commitment to progress, focused on values, ideals. It translates into concrete initiatives that move a society forward.

The nationalism of the CAQ

The type of nationalism promoted by François Legault and Minister Bernard Drainville opens a dead end and harmful. The notion of identity attached to it is blurred. The Prime Minister himself cannot define it clearly. It also lends itself to controversy. It can harden, awaken primary feelings, give in confinement, exclusion and deprivation of rights. We are then dealing with a narrowed horizon, a symptom of an eviscerated nationalism that has evacuated promising content.

In addition, this type of nationalism is not aimed at all Quebecers. We see it when Mr. Legault confuses Quebecers and French Canadians (for example about the national history museum project). This is seen even more clearly in the latest policy announced by Minister Drainville, a policy that abusively extends the ban on displaying religious signs to all school-related staff. Does this staff maintain continuous, intense contact with students? Here, identity nationalism slips into the exclusion and disrespect of rights.

I fully approve of the text by Françoise David, Louise Harel and Christine Saint-Pierre published in La Presse on April 22. The pretext given in support of Law 21 to prohibit the wearing of religious signs among teachers called into question the harmful influence exerted on students when teaching is indoctrinating. How does this pretext apply to staff working outside the classroom?

Let’s not be fooled. This measure is clearly the result of an electoral calculation on the part of a party already in very bad shape and whose roadmap is constantly deteriorating. We are still trying to revive the fear of an invading Islamism eager to corrupt our society. This threat is worn out. She has often served for thirty years in Quebec. But where do we see the signs, the effects of this aggression? We do not juggle in this way with an issue that has deep and legitimate ramifications among some Quebecers.

Secularism is obviously one of the highest values. On the condition of not divertinting it.

In this area, as in others, our Prime Minister flirts with confusion. He often refers to “our values” and when he wants to go further, he likes to evoke secularism. But there is more than secularism in our values. And in secularism, there is more than the prohibition of “Islamists” to pray in public or the need to “drive the religious out of our schools”. On this subject, moreover, it is difficult to understand that this proselyte of integral secularism supports the financing of schools with an explicitly religious vocation.

Good use of identity and nationalism

Identity can be designed in various ways. In my opinion, the simplest definition, the most consensual, can be formulated as follows: a widely shared set of traits, values, memories and symbols that create a sense of belonging, which over time turns into solidarity. At this point, this kind of identity comes to shape a social relationship essential to any mobilization. It is forged over time by meritorious achievements, a source of legitimate pride for the entire nation.

Quebec nationalism is currently in great need of a perspective with precise resonances. Social, cultural, economic and political contents should be added to it, like what was the neonationalism of the Quiet Revolution.

With regard to the cultural sphere in particular, there is urgency. Many studies and many testimonies attest to this. We spoke of a “silent dissolution” of our nation (Maxime Plamondon, Le Devoir, February 7, 2025). We must also think of young people who need to train their mind, to develop sensitivities, aspirations that will make them more informed adults and more responsible citizens. Quebecers who are more alert and more committed too. It is urgent to give them the means to drink from sources other than social networks and the slags of a new sterilizing ambient culture.

This is an unequivocal priority that our government ignores. A living culture makes it possible to irrigate and enrich collective life. It is a purpose that elevates us and strengthens the foundations of our nation. If we get down to it, Quebec could once again shine in the world through its culture as it has already done.

Finally, the sovereignist that I am deeply deplores the fact that the leader of the Parti Québécois is enthusiastically joining in the poorly inspired crusade of Minister Drainville. I believed that this party, having learned the lesson of the past, had regained wisdom.

Our past offers examples, whether it is the patriotic movement, the Quiet Revolution or sovereignism. Each time, the nation pursued an ideal with great stakes. And in each case, nationalism was a powerful engine. To these examples, we could add, although with the important reservations that we guess, the Survival program. It must be recognized that he pursued a very high ideal (too high?) Of moral purity inspired by Christian values and welded to the survival of language.

Over the years, the stakes changed and nationalism was redefined according to the urgencies of the hour. Thus, from the 1960s, nationalism broke with that of the previous century. Aspirations and emergencies having changed, our nation was now mobilizing in the service of other values and other purposes, of an economic, social, political and cultural nature. Identity nationalism is a degraded form of nationalism. The latter, when it is understood, expresses a feeling that makes his nation loved and inspires the desire to serve it to make it progress. It invites a commitment to progress, focused on values, ideals. It translates into concrete initiatives that move a society forward.

The nationalism of the CAQ

The type of nationalism promoted by François Legault and Minister Bernard Drainville opens a dead end and harmful. The notion of identity attached to it is blurred. The Prime Minister himself cannot define it clearly. It also lends itself to controversy. It can harden, awaken primary feelings, give in confinement, exclusion and deprivation of rights. We are then dealing with a narrowed horizon, a symptom of an eviscerated nationalism that has evacuated promising content.

In addition, this type of nationalism is not aimed at all Quebecers. We see it when Mr. Legault confuses Quebecers and French Canadians (for example about the national history museum project). This is seen even more clearly in the latest policy announced by Minister Drainville, a policy that abusively extends the ban on displaying religious signs to all school-related staff. Does this staff maintain continuous, intense contact with students? Here, identity nationalism slips into the exclusion and disrespect of rights.

I fully approve of the text by Françoise David, Louise Harel and Christine Saint-Pierre published in La Presse on April 22. The pretext given in support of Law 21 to prohibit the wearing of religious signs among teachers called into question the harmful influence exerted on students when teaching is indoctrinating. How does this pretext apply to staff working outside the classroom?

Let’s not be fooled. This measure is clearly the result of an electoral calculation on the part of a party already in very bad shape and whose roadmap is constantly deteriorating. We are still trying to revive the fear of an invading Islamism eager to corrupt our society. This threat is worn out. She has often served for thirty years in Quebec. But where do we see the signs, the effects of this aggression? We do not juggle in this way with an issue that has deep and legitimate ramifications among some Quebecers.

Secularism is obviously one of the highest values. On the condition of not divertinting it.

In this area, as in others, our Prime Minister flirts with confusion. He often refers to “our values” and when he wants to go further, he likes to evoke secularism. But there is more than secularism in our values. And in secularism, there is more than the prohibition of “Islamists” to pray in public or the need to “drive the religious out of our schools”. On this subject, moreover, it is difficult to understand that this proselyte of integral secularism supports the financing of schools with an explicitly religious vocation.

Good use of identity and nationalism

Identity can be designed in various ways. In my opinion, the simplest definition, the most consensual, can be formulated as follows: a widely shared set of traits, values, memories and symbols that create a sense of belonging, which over time turns into solidarity. At this point, this kind of identity comes to shape a social relationship essential to any mobilization. It is forged over time by meritorious achievements, a source of legitimate pride for the entire nation.

Quebec nationalism is currently in great need of a perspective with precise resonances. Social, cultural, economic and political contents should be added to it, like what was the neonationalism of the Quiet Revolution.

With regard to the cultural sphere in particular, there is urgency. Many studies and many testimonies attest to this. We spoke of a “silent dissolution” of our nation (Maxime Plamondon, Le Devoir, February 7, 2025). We must also think of young people who need to train their mind, to develop sensitivities, aspirations that will make them more informed adults and more responsible citizens. Quebecers who are more alert and more committed too. It is urgent to give them the means to drink from sources other than social networks and the slags of a new sterilizing ambient culture.

This is an unequivocal priority that our government ignores. A living culture makes it possible to irrigate and enrich collective life. It is a purpose that elevates us and strengthens the foundations of our nation. If we get down to it, Quebec could once again shine in the world through its culture as it has already done.

Finally, the sovereignist that I am deeply deplores the fact that the leader of the Parti Québécois is enthusiastically joining in the poorly inspired crusade of Minister Drainville. I believed that this party, having learned the lesson of the past, had regained wisdom.

McWhorter: The Future of Black History Lives on Donald Trump’s Front Lawn

Good commentary:

…The proper response to that very real problem, however, is, as President Bill Clinton put it about affirmative action, to “mend it, but don’t end it.”

Mr. Trump’s approach is instead a bleat of tribalist pique, seeking to simply deep-six any discussion of race (or gender or sexuality, or a great many other uncomfortable topics). His executive order “Ending Illegal Discrimination and Restoring Merit-Based Opportunity” is a clapback to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that frames any outreach efforts to Black people as by definition a form of discrimination against white people.

A mature, multiethnic society should resist the complacency of birds-of-a-feather hirings and admissions, instead seeking out talent wherever it might reside and whatever it might look like. To be sure, that mission was sullied by identity politics, the temptations of virtue signaling, the opportunity to follow the funding trail and ultimately a tacit commitment to lowering standards. Mend that. Don’t try to force the country back to an earlier, more willfully oblivious era, when the topic of inequality was everywhere to be witnessed but nowhere to be mentioned. That is a kind of barbarity.

So is the idea is that any teachings about Black history are a form of political agitation, “radical and wasteful,” as another executive order on D.E.I. has it. That our country openly addresses Black history in all of its facets is a badge of honor and sophistication, and the institution that Mr. Trump called out as harming our view of American history is an exemplar of all the field could be. The president and his minions should just walk on by. The rest of us should walk on in.

Source: The Future of Black History Lives on Donald Trump’s Front Lawn

Citizenship Oath Self-affirmation Canada Gazette feedback: Using LLM and ChatGPT

Prompted by the thorough analysis by Nora Sobel of Red River University of feedback to the government’s proposal to allow for self-affirmation of the citizenship oath (“citizenship on a click”) as well as my earlier more informal analysis, it is interesting to note the respective conclusions.

My take, remarkably good in this example in terms of summarizing the main comments and the relative weighting of comments. ChatGPT’s conclusion reads partly like a general comment calling for “thoughtful implementation that preserves the integrity, symbolism, and inclusiveness of the citizenship oath” while stating a hybrid option as being the most broadly acceptable (i.e., a policy recommendation based on trying to please both groups rather than the essence):

From Sobel:

The analysis identified that a substantial portion of the online comments that supported the new regulations were reflective of specific experiences of the individuals submitting their opinions, especially related to decreasing the time of the citizenship process and increasing flexibility for participating in the citizenship ceremony.

On the other hand, a substantial portion of the online comments that opposed the new regulations were more general and connected to broader political matters, including the importance of the citizenship process, avoiding devaluing Canadian citizenship, respecting Canada, improper process for change in the regulations, improper reasons for change in the regulations, and concerns about the possibility of fraud.

The analysis also uncovered several alternative solutions proposed by participants with distinct positions about the regulations that could build a consensus about this public policy related to the Oath of Citizenship process. Some of the most common proposals were related to identifying a larger number of appropriate authorized officials to be present in the citizenship ceremonies, increasing the options of dates and times offering citizenship ceremonies, and advocating and legislating for paid work time for new Canadian citizens attending the citizenship ceremonies.

In addition, the analysis of the online comments showed another opportunity to build consensus given the common understanding between Canadian-born and not Canadian-born participants that the citizenship ceremony presents a high value for Canada, and that one of the main purposes in this ceremony should be to honour new Canadians.

Google’s LLM:

The provided text contains public feedback and commentary regarding a proposal to alter the process for taking the Canadian Oath of Citizenship, specifically suggesting allowing for self-administered online oaths without an official present. Many respondents support the proposal, citing the potential for reduced waiting times and increased convenience for applicants. Conversely, a significant number of comments strongly oppose the change, arguing it diminishes the importance and solemnity of becoming a citizen and should remain a meaningful in-person ceremonyto foster a sense of community and allegiance to Canada. Concerns about potential fraud and the devaluation of Canadian citizenship were also frequently raised by those against the proposed changes.

ChatGPT (only source cited is Canada Gazette notice, i.e., Sobel’s article not used)

Summary of Canada Gazette Feedback on Proposed Changes to Citizenship Oath Administration

The proposed changes to the Canadian citizenship oath aim to modernize the process by allowing individuals to self-affirm or declare the oath using a computer, without the physical presence of a citizenship official. This initiative is part of a broader effort to streamline administrative procedures, reduce costs, and improve accessibility.

Key Themes from Public and Stakeholder Feedback:

  1. Support for Accessibility and Efficiency: Many respondents welcomed the proposed changes as a positive step toward improving accessibility, especially for individuals in remote areas, those with disabilities, or with scheduling constraints. The digital approach was seen as a cost-effective and time-efficient solution.
  2. Concerns About Integrity and Symbolism: Some stakeholders expressed reservations about the potential erosion of the ceremonial and symbolic aspects of the citizenship oath. Concerns were raised about the importance of the shared experience and the presence of an official to lend solemnity and legitimacy to the process.
  3. Recommendations for Safeguards: Several submissions advocated for built-in safeguards to ensure the authenticity and security of self-administered oaths. Suggestions included secure digital platforms, identity verification protocols, and post-oath follow-ups.
  4. Call for Hybrid Options: There was a general consensus among some stakeholders for offering both virtual and in-person options to cater to diverse preferences and circumstances. Flexibility was emphasized as key to balancing modernization with tradition.
  5. Cultural and Emotional Significance: Feedback underscored the deep cultural and emotional significance of the oath ceremony for new Canadians. Respondents highlighted the importance of preserving a sense of community and recognition in the citizenship process.

Conclusion:

While the majority of feedback reflected support for the proposed modernization efforts, there remains a clear call for thoughtful implementation that preserves the integrity, symbolism, and inclusiveness of the citizenship oath. A hybrid model with robust safeguards may be the most broadly acceptable path forward.

ICYMI: Carney’s aim to cut immigration marred by undercounting of temporary migrants, economists warn

Important analysis regarding a highly dubious assumption:

…But economists who have analyzed immigration statistics say that any reductions would not reflect the true number of temporary residents living here and may mean that pressure on housing and services will not be eased to the extent expected. 

Official population figures also fail to capture undocumented migrants who last year Mr. Miller estimated could number about 600,000. 

The economists warn that Ottawa is overestimating the number of temporary migrants who leave the country once their visas expire. This could have a serious impact on planning, including for housing demand, they say.

“The undercounting of non-permanent residents is an issue that must be addressed in order for this policy to be effective,” said Benjamin Tal, deputy chief economist of CIBC.

There are just over three million non-permanent residents in Canada, according to the latest Statistics Canada population estimates. 

Non-permanent residents include international students, work-permit holders, asylum claimants and family members of work- or study-permit holders. 

Population estimates by Statscan presume that visa holders whose permits to stay here have expired leave the country within 120 days, but many do not leave and remain and work in Canada, said Henry Lotin, a former federal economist and founder of the consultancy Integrated Trade and Economics. 

“We know that many, perhaps even half, of these expired visa holders are awaiting permanent residency or a renewal of their temporary visa,” Mr. Lotin said. “The population estimates as presented assume expired temporary residents leave the country − that is a fiction.” 

“Policy makers and planners need accurate population estimates to plan adequate housing, infrastructure, health care and other social services. No one plans for population you are told you do not have.”

An analysis published last month by Mr. Tal, with input from Mr. Lotin, also expressed concern that Statistics Canada is not counting people with extended Temporary Resident Visas who do not have work permits. …

Source: Carney’s aim to cut immigration marred by undercounting of temporary migrants, economists warn

ICYMI: Canadian telecom firms blame immigration policies for mobile subscriber slowdown

An example of the how the corporate world became somewhat dependent of large numbers of permanent and temporary immigration:

…For years, Canada’s top telecom providers rode a wave of high immigration, collectively adding hundreds of thousands of new mobile phone subscribers most quarters. Those days are over. 

Canada’s three biggest wireless firms — BCE Inc., Rogers Communications Inc. and Telus Corp. — all cited tighter immigration rules when explaining to investors over the past two quarters why subscriber growth has slowed. The trio recorded fewer than 54,000 net new mobile subscribers in the first quarter, the lowest number in four years. 

Two years ago, the country’s population grew 3.1%, a rate not seen since the 1950s, largely due to an influx of foreign students and temporary workers. But last year, as it became clear the housing supply and the health care system were straining from this growth, the federal government enacted measures meant to stem the tide. 

As a result, Canada plans to admit nearly 20% fewer permanent residents this year than its target in 2024, as well as fewer foreign students.

BCE saw a small decline in net mobile phone subscribers in the first quarter, which it said was partly due to “slowing population growth attributable to government immigration policies.” The company’s revenue is falling, which was a consideration in its decision to slash its dividend by over half — the first cut in 17 years.

Telus also said reduced immigration hampered its mobile subscriber growth when it reported earnings on Friday. And Rogers, which has the largest number of wireless customers, reported a weak quarter of growth on that metric and also cited “slowing population growth as a result of changes to government immigration policies.” 

Source: Canadian telecom firms blame immigration policies for mobile subscriber slowdown

ICYMI: Foreign student asylum claims hit record high in 2024, set to grow in 2025

Of note. About 4 percent of all students is 2024:

International students filed a record 20,245 asylum claims last year, with 2025 on track to surpass that number, according to federal immigration data obtained by Global News.

The claims are rising, even as Ottawa cuts the number of study permits it issues, with Prime Minister Mark Carney pledging like his predecessor Justin Trudeau to return Canadian immigration to “sustainable levels.”

The newly released figures also suggest that 2025 could see an even greater number of claims by foreign students. In the first three months of the year, international students filed 5,500 asylum claims, a 22 per cent increase from the same period last year.

The data from Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada show the number of international students seeking asylum last year was nearly double the 2023 figures and six times higher than in 2019.

Immigration lawyers say the numbers will keep trending upwards, as the federal government restricts previously available pathways to permanent residence, and as the backlog for adjudicating cases continues to balloon.

“The government has closed a lot of doors for international students to apply for permanent residence through regular streams,” said Toronto-based immigration and refugee lawyer Chantal Desloges.

“As a result, it’s funneling people to look for other solutions.”

Pressure grows to ‘dial back’ levels

During his first news conference as prime minister, Carney repeated his pledge to cap the total number of temporary workers and international students to less than five per cent of the Canadian population by the end of 2027, down from seven per cent.

“This will help ease strains on housing, on public infrastructure and social services,” said Carney on May 2.

Source: Foreign student asylum claims hit record high in 2024, set to grow in 2025

ICYMI: Companies are trying to save DEI from Trump. But can they save DEI from itself?

More than ticking boxes…:

…To that point, there’s a wide body of research that suggests companies with a diverse work force and diverse leadership teams perform better than those that are less so. 

McKinsey & Co., among the leaders in quantifying the effects of diversity on performance, suggests the business case for diversity is getting stronger. The consultancy says companies with ethnic and gender diversity on executive teams are 39-per-cent more likely to outperform peer companies than a decade ago.

Those companies benefit from a wide variety of pluses diversity brings – new and different ways of looking at things, solving problems and serving customers; the richness of a culture that doesn’t simply incorporate diversity but embeds it and reflects it in the products and services it sells. 

If you’ve worked in a global company that does business across multiple cultures, languages and political frameworks, diversity is table stakes. If you don’t have leadership and a work force that understand and can deliver to a global customer base you won’t survive.

But creating a truly diverse culture is easier said than done. Many companies have had trouble building internal mechanisms that make diversity a performance-driver. 

One of the most common shortfalls: Companies focus on the recruiting part of diversity but fail to create the internal structures necessary to train, develop and acclimatize these new hires. 

The streets of Corporate America are littered with a talented, diverse range ofcandidates who were recruited to show a commitment to DEI, but failed because companies didn’t create what HR types call a culture of success to support them….

Source: Companies are trying to save DEI from Trump. But can they save DEI from itself?

ICYMI: At Supreme Court, a Once-Fringe Birthright Citizenship Theory Takes the Spotlight

Useful analysis of some of the usual suspects of “fringe” legal theories:

Shortly after the Supreme Court announced in April that it would consider the nationwide freeze on President Trump’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, he gleefully spoke to reporters in the Oval Office.

Mr. Trump said that he was “so happy” the justices would take up the citizenship issue because it had been “so misunderstood.” The 14th Amendment, he said — long held to grant citizenship to anyone born in the United States — is actually “about slavery.”

“That’s not about tourists coming in and touching a piece of sand and then all of the sudden there’s citizenship,” Mr. Trump said, adding, “That is all about slavery.”

For more than a century, most scholars and the courts have agreed that though the 14th Amendment was added to the Constitution after the Civil War, it was not, in fact, all about slavery. Instead, courts have held that the amendment extended citizenship not just to the children of former slaves but also to babies born within the borders of the United States.

The notion that the amendment might not do so was once considered an unorthodox theory, promoted by an obscure California law professor named John Eastman and his colleagues at the Claremont Institute, a conservative think tank — the same professor who would later provide Mr. Trump with legal arguments he used to try to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

The story of how the theory moved from the far edges of academia to the Oval Office and, on Thursday, to the Supreme Court, offers insight into how Mr. Trump has popularized legal theories once considered unthinkable to justify his immigration policies.

“They have been pushing it for decades,” said John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law and a top lawyer in the George W. Bush administration. “It was thought to be a wacky idea that only political philosophers would buy. They’ve finally got a president who agrees.”

The White House did not respond to requests for comment.

President Trump promoted the theory during his first campaign but did not act on it until his second term. He signed an executive order on his first day to end birthright citizenship for the children of undocumented immigrants and some temporary foreign residents.

Legal challenges were swift and emphatic. Challengers pointed to the text of the 14th Amendment, which states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

Proponents of the policy have pointed to birthright citizenship as a cornerstone of what it means to be an American, part of the national ethos of the country as a place that is open to everyone, regardless of faith, color or creed. Of the world’s 20 most developed countries, only Canada and the United States grant automatic citizenship to children born within its borders. 

In a brief to the Supreme Court, an immigrant advocacy group argued that “birthright citizenship is at the core of our nation’s foundational precept that all people born on our soil are created equal, regardless of their parentage.”

State attorneys general who are challenging the policy weighed in with a brief that argued that the Supreme Court had already settled the question in the landmark 1898 case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, when the court found that a man born in San Francisco to Chinese parents was a citizen.

So far, courts have agreed. Judges in Washington State, Massachusetts and Maryland quickly instituted nationwide pauses on Mr. Trump’s policy.

In oral arguments this week, the justices will primarily consider whether federal judges have the power to order these temporary pauses, known as nationwide injunctions. But the question of birthright citizenship will form the backdrop.

In an interview, Mr. Eastman said he developed his views on birthright citizenship after the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

Back then, Mr. Eastman, who had clerked for Justice Clarence Thomas, was a law professor at Chapman University in Orange County, Calif., and director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence at the Claremont Institute.

In late November 2001, a man named Yaser Esam Hamdi was taken into custody by U.S. forces in Afghanistan and transferred to the U.S. military base/prison at Guantánamo Bay.

Officials learned Mr. Hamdi was an American citizen. His mother, a Saudi national, had given birth to him while the family was living in Baton Rouge, La., where Mr. Hamdi’s father was working as a chemical engineer.

Because Mr. Hamdi was a U.S. citizen, the authorities believed they could no longer hold him as an “enemy combatant” in Guantánamo Bay, where he was considered beyond the reach of the full legal protections of federal courts. They transferred him to a naval brig in Norfolk, Va.

In a 2004 friend-of-the-court brief in the case, Mr. Eastman argued that the idea that citizenship was automatically conferred on all children born on American soil was a “generally accepted though erroneous interpretation” of the 14th Amendment that was “incorrect, as a matter of text, historical practice and political theory.”

Mr. Eastman drew on the work of a California State University, San Bernardino political science professor affiliated with the Claremont Institute, Edward J. Erler, who had offered the same theory in books published in 1997 and 2003.

Mr. Erler, who did not respond to a request for comment, arguedthat the children of people in the country illegally, or temporarily, are not automatically citizens.

Although the idea that children born in the United States automatically become citizens has deep roots in the common law, it was not adopted in the text of the Constitution until 1868, as part of the 14th Amendment. It came in a sentence that overturned Dred Scott, the 1857 Supreme Court decision that affirmed slavery and helped prompt the Civil War.

Mr. Eastman claimed that nowhere during the debate over the 14th Amendment had lawmakers agreed to include temporary visitors.

The justices rejected this view, finding that the Constitution’s due process protections applied to Mr. Hamdi.

Still, for years afterward, Mr. Eastman and Mr. Yoo publicly debated the issue, with Mr. Eastman arguing his theory that birthright citizenship was not in the Constitution and Mr. Yooarguing it was.

For much of that time, the debate felt abstract, Mr. Yoo said, of interest mostly to legal scholars.

“Never has an abstract idea had such enormous policy effects,” he said. “It’s like it almost just jumped from law review articles to the White House.”

That leap happened when Mr. Trump ran for president in 2015.

In an interview with the Fox News personality Bill O’Reilly in August 2015, Mr. Trump outlined his plans to overhaul the immigration system. Mr. O’Reilly seemed skeptical at first, and then increasingly frustrated.

Mr. O’Reilly pointed to the 14th Amendment as an impediment to Mr. Trump’s plan. But Mr. Trump responded, “I think you’re wrong about the 14th Amendment.”

“I can quote it — do you want me to quote you the amendment,” Mr. O’Reilly said, nearly shouting. “If you’re born here, you’re an American — period! Period!”

“But there are many lawyers, many lawyers are saying that’s not the way it is,” Mr. Trump responded.

Mr. Eastman said Mr. Trump was “likely” referring to him but also to other academics who had published on the issue. He said he was not sure how his views had reached the presidential candidate.

Mr. Trump did not pursue a plan to end birthright citizenship in his first term. Mr. Eastman said that in 2019 he met with Attorney General William P. Barr at Mr. Barr’s invitation to discuss a possible executive order on birthright citizenship but that nothing came of it. Mr. Barr did not respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Eastman said he was “very happy” when Mr. Trump announced he would end birthright citizenship on his first day back in office.

By then, Mr. Eastman and Mr. Trump had a close association. Mr. Eastman was one of the architects of a plan to create fake slates of pro-Trump electors in states that Joseph R. Biden Jr. won and to urge Vice President Mike Pence to accept those slates while presiding over the certification of the 2020 election.

A California judge recommended that Mr. Eastman be disbarred over the episode. He said he was appealing, though his California law license is currently inactive as a result. He is also fighting criminal charges that are slowly making their way through state court in Arizona. (A case against him and other defendants in Georgia appears unlikely to go forward.)

Mr. Eastman said that the president did not directly consult him about the birthright citizenship order but that several of his friends, whom he declined to name, were involved. “They knew that my scholarship was kind of at the forefront of this,” he said.

Mr. Trump’s order fueled new interest in examining the underpinnings of birthright citizenship, said Ilan Wurman, a law professor at the University of Minnesota and author of a book on the 14th Amendment.

“President Trump has a rather uncanny ability to move Overton windows — issues that people thought were off the table are on the table,” Mr. Wurman said.

Mr. Wurman argues that a close read of the 1898 case and the historical record reveals that the Supreme Court has never firmly held that children born to those illegally present are citizens.

A flurry of friend-of-the-court briefs have brought some of these ideas to the justices, including one from Mr. Eastman.

In a brief to the justices in late April, he argued that although the justices had agreed to hear arguments only about the nationwide pause on the president’s policy, that they should also decide the merits and end birthright citizenship.

“There are a lot of people in the country waiting for resolution of this issue,” he said. “Is the executive order valid or not? And the longer we wait, the more consternation it’s caused.”

Source: At Supreme Court, a Once-Fringe Birthright Citizenship Theory Takes the Spotlight