Low turnout scuttles Italy referendum on citizenship

2025/06/11 Leave a comment

As expected and arguably planned:

An Italian referendum on granting faster citizenship to certain immigrants and seeking to strengthen labor rights failed because of low turnout, after Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and leading right-wing political parties urged Italians to boycott the democratic process.

In conceding defeat, Maurizio Landini, the secretary-general of the powerful CGIL trade union federation that helped bring about the referendum, said it still was a “starting point” on important issues that remain “on the table” for Italy. This includes heated debates over how many immigrants should be welcomed to Italy, as the country suffers a demographic crisis with an aging population and one of the lowest birthrates in the world.

As well as asking Italians to vote to liberalize the labor market, the referendum sought to reduce the time it takes to become a naturalized citizen from 10 years to five years. Campaigners for the change said this would help second-generation Italians born in the country to non-European Union citizens. They can spend years, often long into adulthood, battling to get full citizenship rights from the only country they know to be their home.

Italian economists have said the change could also be a useful measure to address the problems resulting from Italy’s aging society and low birthrate — just 12% of the population is younger than 14.

On Sunday and Monday, the two days of referendum voting, turnout was low and thus the referendum was declared void. Partial data from Italy’s Interior Ministry published Sunday showed national turnout of just 22.7%, far below the 50% participation by eligible voters that is required for referendums in Italy to be valid. After polls closed on Monday, the YouTrend polling agency estimated voter participation to have been around 30% of eligible voters. In his concession speech, Landini said it was clear from the results that “there is an obvious crisis of democracy.”

Source: Low turnout scuttles Italy referendum on citizenship

Filed under Citizenship Tagged with ,

Devant les annonces prébudgétaires d’Ottawa, Legault rebrandit le référendum en immigration 

2024/04/11 Leave a comment

Sigh although his concern regarding the excessive increases in temporary workers is legitimate and likely more political positioning. But a referendum on immigration, even if narrowly focused, will likely not be conducive to reasoned discussion:

Le premier ministre François Legault n’en peut plus d’entendre son homologue à Ottawa, Justin Trudeau, faire un « feu d’artifice d’annonces » prébudgétaires à l’intérieur des champs de compétence du Québec. Il invite le fédéral à se concentrer plutôt sur la hausse du nombre d’immigrants temporaires et ravive l’idée d’un référendum sectoriel en immigration.

« Au lieu de faire des annonces dans les champs de compétence du Québec, occupez-vous de vos propres responsabilités, en particulier l’immigration », a lancé l’élu caquiste, mardi, lors d’un point de presse tenu quelques minutes avant la période des questions, à l’hôtel du Parlement.

M. Legault réagissait à une série d’annonces effectuées dans les dernières semaines par lesquelles le gouvernement de Justin Trudeau a fait connaître ses intentions de débourser des milliards de dollars pour le logement. Il y a deux semaines, l’annonce de la création d’une Charte canadienne des locataires et de l’équivalent d’un bail uniforme pour tout le Canada avait fait fulminer les ministres du gouvernement Legault.

« Ce que je dis à M. Trudeau, c’est : écoutez les Québécois. Puis, au lieu de […] dire “on va vous donner de l’argent en santé, on va vous donner de l’argent pour le logement”, allez donc à la racine du problème. Il y a trop d’immigrants temporaires », a soutenu le premier ministre caquiste.

M. Legault reproche à son homologue au fédéral d’avoir « laissé exploser leur nombre à 560 000 », selon le dernier décompte. Après l’avoir écartée en février, le premier ministre revient donc avec l’idée d’un référendum sectoriel en immigration, en fonction du « résultat des discussions » avec son homologue, qui aboutiront à une rencontre au sommet sur le sujet d’ici la fin juin.

« On va rentrer dans le détail. Est-ce que les immigrants temporaires devraient être préapprouvés par le Québec ? Si c’était le cas, ça voudrait dire qu’un, on contrôlerait le nombre, et deux, on contrôlerait les exigences en français », a-t-il dit mardi. « Est-ce qu’on fait un référendum là-dessus éventuellement ? Est-ce qu’on fait un référendum plus large sur d’autres sujets ? »

Exclu, puis considéré

En février, pourtant, François Legault avait écarté un éventuel référendum sectoriel en immigration. « Je ne pense pas qu’on a besoin de faire un référendum pour demander aux Québécois s’ils souhaiteraient qu’on rapatrie les pouvoirs à Québec », avait-il dit.

Or, Justin Trudeau a une « obligation de résultat » en vue de sa réunion de juin, a fait valoir M. Legault mardi. Après une rencontre le mois dernier, le premier ministre québécois avait affirmé ressentir chez M. Trudeau une ouverture à ce que le Québec puisse décider du nombre de travailleurs temporaires admis sur son territoire et qu’une « partie » d’entre eux se voient refuser le renouvellement de leur permis de travail.

Sans quoi, « il faut voir, là, est-ce qu’on a besoin de faire un référendum pour s’assurer que la majorité des Québécois appuient », s’est interrogé M. Legault à voix haute.

À Ottawa, mardi, le ministre fédéral de l’Immigration, Marc Miller, a assuré que les discussions avec Québec allaient bon train. « J’ai vraiment senti dans les dernières semaines de la ministre [québécoise de l’Immigration Christine] Fréchette une ardeur au travail, une volonté de vraiment trouver des solutions à nos défis », a-t-il dit.

S’il convient avoir des « points de divergence » avec le gouvernement Legault, l’élu libéral entend oeuvrer sur « la langue commune du Québec » et sur le désir de Québec « de réduire les gens qui sont ici de façon temporaire ». L’idée de confier tous les pouvoirs en immigration au Québec comme l’avait demandé le gouvernement caquiste le mois dernier n’est toutefois pas sur la table.

« Un pays qui donne tous ses pouvoirs à quelqu’un d’autre n’est plus un pays », a-t-il maintenu.

Québec demandera des compensations sans conditions pour l’ensemble des programmes fédéraux s’immisçant dans les pouvoirs du Québec, a indiqué M. Legault mardi. « Il n’est pas question d’accepter ça. » Le dépôt du budget fédéral est prévu le 16 avril.

Source: Devant les annonces prébudgétaires d’Ottawa, Legault rebrandit le référendum en immigration

English version:

Premier François Legault on Tuesday threatened to hold a referendum on immigration if he doesn’t get what he wants from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Legault is pressing Ottawa for more power over immigration. Trudeau slammed the door on giving the province full control last month. “Will we hold a referendum on (getting full power over immigration) eventually? Will we do it more broadly, on other subjects?” Legault said. “It will depend on the results of discussions” with the federal government. “Don’t forget, Mr. Trudeau promised me a meeting by June 30 at the latest. So, I expect results there.”

Speaking to reporters in Quebec City, Legault complained the province has received more than 500,000 temporary foreign workers and asylum seekers over the past eight years.

“The federal government has allowed the number of temporary immigrants to explode to 560,000,” he said.

“This causes enormous problems for Quebecers. We lack teachers, nurses, housing, and (immigrants and asylum seekers) pose a real challenge for the future of French, particularly in Montreal.”

Legault said a referendum is “not in our plan, short term.”

However, he added: “Do we need to hold a referendum so that Mr. Trudeau is convinced that a majority of Quebecers are saying that it doesn’t make sense (to allow) 560,000 immigrants” to come to Quebec.

He said Quebecers “have always been welcoming, will always be welcoming” toward immigrants. “But now we can’t do it anymore. Our capacity to receive has been exceeded.”

He said Trudeau recently admitted Canada has welcomed too many immigrants.

“It’s the first time he’s said that,” Legault noted.

Last week, Trudeau said temporary immigration has to be brought “under control.” He said the number of temporary foreign workers and international students has ”grown at a rate far beyond what Canada has been able to absorb.”

Legault said the problem could be solved if Ottawa granted Quebec the power to pre-approve all temporary immigrants. That way, Quebec could control the number of arrivals and set French language requirements, he said.

After a March 15 meeting with Legault, Trudeau said: “No, we are not going to give more power (to Quebec) on immigration. Quebec already has more powers over immigration than any other province because it’s very important to protect the French language.”

At the time, Legault said Trudeau has privately expressed openness to discussing the idea of giving Quebec a say on the admission of temporary workers and would consider new rules ensuring more workers speak French.

The Coalition Avenir Québec government is under pressure to crack down on immigration. The party’s most significant rival is the poll-leading Parti Québécois.

After last month’s Legault-Trudeau meeting, PQ Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon said Trudeau’s response proves Legault is unable to win more powers for Quebec.

“This resounding No is evidence of a completely absent level of bargaining power,” the leader of the pro-sovereignty party said at the time. “It’s embarrassing for Quebec. We deserve more than this perpetual humiliation.”

Source: Legault threatens immigration referendum if Trudeau doesn’t relent

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

Polish government plans referendum asking if voters want ‘thousands of illegal immigrants’

2023/08/14 Leave a comment

Far from a neutral way to pose a question….:

Poland’s ruling party wants to ask voters in a referendum whether they support accepting “thousands of illegal immigrants from the Middle East and Africa” as part of a European Union relocation plan, the prime minister said Sunday, as his conservative party seeks to hold onto power in an October parliamentary election.

Mateusz Morawiecki announced the referendum question in a new video published on social media. It indicated that his party, Law and Justice, is seeking to use migration in its election campaign, a tactic that helped it take power in 2015.

Poland is hosting more than a million Ukrainian refugees, who are primarily white and Christian, but officials have long made clear that they consider Muslims and others from different cultures to be a threat to the nation’s cultural identity and security.

EU interior ministers in June endorsed a plan to share out responsibility for migrants entering Europe without authorization, the root of one of the bloc’s longest-running political crises.

The Polish government wants to hold the referendum alongside the parliamentary election, scheduled for Oct. 15. Morawiecki said that the question would say: “Do you support the admission of thousands of illegal immigrants from the Middle East and Africa under the forced relocation mechanism imposed by the European bureaucracy?”

The video announcing the question includes scenes of burning cars and other street violence in Western Europe. A Black man licks a huge knife in apparent anticipation of committing a crime. Party leader Jaroslaw Kaczynski then says: “Do you want this to happen in Poland as well? Do you want to cease being masters of your own country?”

Leaders have announced two other questions in recent days. One will ask voters for their views on privatizing state-owned enterprises and the other will ask if they support raising the retirement age, which Law and Justice lowered to 60 for women and 65 for men.

The questions are set up to depict the opposition party, Civic Platform, as a threat to the interests of Poles. The pro-business and pro-EU party, which governed from 2007 to 2015, raised the retirement age during its time in power, favored some privatization and signaled a willingness to accept a few thousand refugees before it lost power.

The video takes aim directly at Civic Platform leader Donald Tusk, a former president of the European Council. “Tusk is the greatest threat to our security, he is the greatest threat to Poland’s security,” Morawiecki says. “Let’s not let Tusk — as an envoy of the Brussels elites — demolish security in Poland.”

Europe’s asylum system collapsed eight years ago after well over a million people entered the bloc — most of them fleeing conflict in Syria — and overwhelmed reception capacities in Greece and Italy, in the process sparking one of the EU’s biggest political crises.

The 27 EU nations have bickered ever since over which countries should take responsibility for people arriving without authorization, and whether other members should be obliged to help them cope.

Initially Poland was neither an entry country nor a destination country for migrants and refugees. It became a front-line state two years ago when migrants began crossing from Belarus, something European authorities view as an effort by the Russian ally to generate turmoil in Poland and other European countries.

Poland responded by building a large wall on its border. It has recently increased its military presence on the border fearing an uptick in migration and other possible instability.

As well as disagreements over migration, Law and Justice has long been in conflict with the EU over a perception by the bloc that the Warsaw government has been eroding democratic norms.

Source: Polish government plans referendum asking if voters want ‘thousands of illegal immigrants’

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , , ,

How Quebec’s 1995 referendum was a turning point for racist comments in political discourse that’s still felt

2022/10/03 Leave a comment

Of note:

Standing on a stage in Montreal Wednesday night, singer Allison Russell recalled what it was like to live in the city after the Parti Québécois lost the referendum 27 years ago.

“I was spat on, called a monkey and told to go back to Africa,” Russell, who is Black and was born in Montreal, told the audience.

In defeat, former premier Jacques Parizeau had blamed the 1995 loss on “money and ethnic votes.”

Russell, who was 17 at the time, said the comments sparked racist acts in the streets and contributed to her decision to move away shortly afterward. She compared the remark to recent comments about immigration made by Coalition Avenir Québec candidate Jean Boulet and party leader François Legault.

The topic has dominated political discourse in the last days and weeks of the campaign.

In a local debate on Radio-Canada last week, Boulet — who serves as both the province’s labour and immigration minister —  said “80 per cent of immigrants go to Montreal, don’t work, don’t speak French or don’t adhere to the values of Quebec society.”

After Radio-Canada brought the comments to light this week, Boulet issued an apology on Twitter, saying he misspoke and that the statement about immigrants not working and not speaking French “does not reflect what I think.”

Legault said Boulet didn’t deserve to keep the immigration file if re-elected. But Legault himself said Monday that welcoming more than 50,000 immigrants per year would be “a bit suicidal,”referring to the protection of the French language.

Earlier this month, Legault apologized for citing the threat of “extremism” and “violence” as well as the need to preserve Quebec’s way of life as reasons to limit the number of immigrants to the province.

Aly Ndiaye, a Quebec-city based historian and rapper also known as Webster, said he sees the 1995 referendum loss and Parizeau’s remark as a turning point for Quebec nationalism that made way for the kind of things Boulet and Legault have said this election campaign.

From inclusive nationalism to a change in Quebec identity

In the 1960s and 70s, Quebec’s nationalist movement was intent on being progressive and inclusive, Ndiaye said. The movement was inspired by decolonization and revolutions happening across the world at the time — it was looking “outward,” he said.

“After Parizeau, there was a closure,” Ndiaye said. Quebec nationalism turned inward, he added.

“There started to be a more exclusive vision of Quebec identity… That’s what Legault represents.”

What worries Ndiaye is the fact that such comments are rarely labelled as racist, despite the fact that they stem from a vision of society that sees immigrants and their descendants as “second-class citizens.”

“The Legault government is a racist, xenophobic and Islamophobic government,” Ndiaye said. “It’s aberrant.”

Hate calls

Fo Niemi, who founded the Montreal Center for Research-Action on Race Relations (CRARR) in 1983, said he remembers the Parizeau moment clearly.

“I almost fell off my chair,” he said.

Niemi said the centre received hate calls in the days following the Oct. 30, 1995 vote and stopped answering the phone for two or three days as a result.

When it comes to racist comments made in this year’s provincial election, Niemi said that while there is a possibility they could lead to violence, or aggression against immigrants, they could also lead to an overall negative attitude in Quebec toward immigration and immigrants.

“Let’s be clear, we’re not talking about all immigrants. We’re talking about immigrants who are clearly identifiable, i.e. non-white immigrants.”

He agrees with Ndiaye about the hesitation to name racism.

“They don’t call a spade a spade,” Niemi said, calling the CAQ remarks “dog whistle politics,” which refers to the use of messages that convey a particular — usually racist — sentiment to a target audience.

Evelyn Calugay, who runs PINAY, a Filipino women’s rights group, said she remembers hearing about comments made to people in her community as well as to people of Chinese descent in 1995.

Stuff like, “You don’t know how to speak French? Go back to where you belong, where you came from,” Calugay said.

“They will always have somebody to blame and the people they have to blame are always the minorities, the marginalized — because they are a bunch of racists to me!” she said with a bit of a laugh.

Calugay came to Quebec in 1975 to work as a nurse. She is 76.

What happens after the election?

The CAQ isn’t the only party to have come under fire for anti-immigrant sentiments. Comments about Quebec Muslims from Parti Québécois candidates Lyne Jubinville, Suzanne Gagnon and Pierre Vanier and his wife Catherine Provost have surfaced in the past two weeks.

Vanier, the candidate for Rousseau, and Provost, the candidate for neighbouring L’Assomption, were both suspended by PQ Leader Paul St-Pierre Plamondon Friday for posts they made on social media, one of which questioned the intelligence of Muslim women who wear head scarves.

Whatever the election result Monday, Niemi says his concern is what will happen afterward.

“Are we going to talk about the negative fallout of all of these, shall we say, hateful statements?” he said. “What credibility will the government have to address racism and xenophobia and any other negative consequence of these statements?”

As for Russell, the Quebec-born singer now lives in Nashville with her family and recently, after playing in well-known American folk bands, began a solo career with her album Outside Child.

Source: How Quebec’s 1995 referendum was a turning point for racist comments in political discourse that’s still felt

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , ,

Australia: Citizenship crisis: coalition resists referendum in favour of new rules for candidates

2018/05/18 Leave a comment

Understandable reluctance giving risks and divisiveness of referendums (and not clear whether winnable) with the unfortunate result that Australian parliaments will continue to be significantly under-representative:

Candidates will have to disclose the birthplace and citizenship of themselves, their parents and grandparents before the next federal election under changes announced by the government to try to put an end to Australia’s citizenship crisis without a referendum.

On Thursday an inquiry examining section 44 of the constitution warned that, without a referendum, elections could be subject to “manipulation” by challenges against candidates with dual citizenship or other disqualifications.

Despite the electoral matters committee’s bipartisan push for a referendum to reform or repeal section 44 of the constitution, the special minister of state, Mathias Cormann, confirmed that the government was “not inclined to pursue a referendum”.

Instead the government will pursue steps “to minimise the risk of a recurrence of the eligibility issues” that have plagued the 45th parliament, in which 14 parliamentarians have resigned or been ruled ineligible since mid-2017 owing to dual citizenship.

The government set up the inquiry into section 44 by the joint standing committee on electoral matters after the high court ruled five senators and MPs ineligible in October.

In a bipartisan report released on Thursday, the committee recommended the government prepare a referendum question to either repeal all the disqualifications for standing for parliament in section 44 or to give parliament the power to set the disqualifications itself.

But the committee acknowledged a referendum “will not be positively received by Australians and the outcome … is uncertain”.

It accepted the “preconditions for a successful referendum on this issue will take time” and cannot be achieved before the “Super Saturday” byelections triggered by the high court’s ruling against Katy Gallagher or before the next federal election.

The committee suggested a series of measures to “mitigate the impact of section 44” including:

  • a requirement that all candidates reveal their family citizenship history at the time of nomination and information relevant to other disqualifications;
  • an “online self-assessment tool” to be developed by the Australian Electoral Commission;
  • improved education for minor parties and independents; and
  • exploring expedited citizenship renunciation processes with foreign governments.

At a press conference in Brisbane Malcolm Turnbull said the government did not have time to deal with a referendum before the next election and the Australian people “expect us to deal with the constitution as it stands”.

Even in the longer term, the prime minister said he “very much doubted” whether Australians would support a change to the constitution.

Cormann said the government would instead “move to improve the existing candidate nomination process for elections”.

In November the government introduced a new citizenship register requiring current and future parliamentarians to reveal their birthplace, that of their parents and grandparents and to produce documents showing renunciation of foreign citizenship 21 days after their election.

Cormann announced those requirements would now be applied to “candidates for election to the Australian parliament” who will provide the information to the AEC “as well as information on other potential disqualifications under section 44 of the constitution”. This is likely to require disclosure of criminal convictions, bankruptcies and interests in contracts with the government.

The committee warned that section 44 opened the electoral system to “the risk of manipulation, where a successful candidate could have their election challenged on the basis of preference flows from an ineligible candidate”.

“This raises the possibility of deliberate manipulation of disqualification rules to overturn an otherwise valid election,” it said.

The committee noted that when all the disqualifications in section 44 are considered – including foreign citizenship, employment in the public service and an “indirect pecuniary interest in an agreement with the commonwealth” – more than 50% of the Australian population is ineligible to run for parliament.

The report argued that the ban on dual citizens caused numerous problems, including uncertainty for parliamentarians who were unsure of the citizenship of their parents or grandparents, and the possibility that foreign governments could manipulate eligibility by not processing renunciation in a timely manner.

“Challenges to sitting members will continue into future elections; disrupting electoral outcomes, causing uncertainty and confusion, and having the potential to undermine the authority of both federal parliament and the constitution itself.”

Despite those dire warnings the chair of the electoral committee, the Liberal senator Linda Reynolds, told Guardian Australia she was “not [so] pessimistic” to suggest it will take further disqualifications to convince Australians of the need for a referendum.

“We need to start a conversation about whether the rules are the right ones for today’s society,” she said.

Reynolds cited the fact that public servants have to give up their jobs to run for parliament, and the citizenship requirements favour “Australians with a long-term unbroken family history” and those who can afford legal advice to remove disqualifications.

via Citizenship crisis: coalition resists referendum in favour of new rules for candidates | Australia news | The Guardian

Further article: Will we actually vote on changing the constitution after the dual citizenship fiasco? – Politics – ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Filed under Citizenship, Dual Citizenship Tagged with ,