Three years since the Quebec mosque attack, Charles Adler Tonight
https://omny.fm/shows/charles-adler-tonight/three-years-since-the-quebec-mosque-attack
British tabloids were ruthless to Meghan Markle — will Canadian media learn from their mistakes? Global News
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have spoken openly about the ruthless, exploitative and dangerous nature of the British press.
The couple has even sued British tabloids over their “continual misrepresentations,” and Markle admitted she’s struggled with the intense media scrutiny since marrying into the Royal Family.
“I never thought that this would be easy, but I thought it would be fair,” she said in a 2019 documentary.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently revealed their plan to step away from senior royal duties and split their time between Canada and the U.K. as they work to become financially independent.
But will Canadian reporters better respect their privacy and cover them in a different way than the U.K. press has? According to experts, the country’s media landscape is likely a factor in why the royal couple picked Canada.
“[Canada] is a completely different environment, and that is possibly something that Meghan observed when she lived here before,” said Janice Neil, chair of the school of journalism at Ryerson University in Toronto. Neil previously worked as a reporter in the U.K.
There’s a huge portion of the U.K. media industry that’s based on “salacious gossip,” Neil said, and Canada doesn’t have that to the same degree.
“[The country] has shockingly learned nothing from a couple decades of criticism … starting with how [they chased] Princess Diana,” she said.
Markle and Prince Harry’s relationship with the U.K. press
Prince Harry has a notoriously strained relationship with the press, as his mother, Princess Diana, died in a car crash after being chased by paparazzi.
The prince has said he feared “history repeating itself.”
“I lost my mother and now I watch my wife falling victim to the same powerful forces,” he said.
Queen confirms Harry and Meghan will live part-time in Canada
What’s more, Markle has experienced racism in the U.K. as a biracial member of the Royal Family.
In a recent Washington Post op-ed, author Yomi Adegoke wrote that British tabloids were “committed not to news but the distortion of [Markle’s] image” in their coverage.
“British racism is often coy and coded, but when it comes to Meghan there was no need to read between the lines,” Adegoke wrote.
“The hate was in the headlines, which referred to the Los Angeles neighbourhood where she grew up as ‘gang-scarred‘ and her role editing a racially diverse edition of Vogue as ‘divisive.'”
The Daily Show host Trevor Noah even pointed out the racism Markle endured in the British press on Monday, comparing headlines about Kate Middleton and Markle.
Noah gave the example of when Middleton was reportedly “gifted” avocados during pregnancy to “cure” morning sickness, while Markle’s avocado habit was linked to “human rights abuse and drought.”
Canada is more progressive than the U.K. when it comes to race, said journalist and human rights advocate Amira Elghawaby, but the country still has some work to do.
Elghawaby said there is still potential for racist coverage of Markle, as many Canadian newsrooms do not reflect the diversity of the country.
“They won’t be fully immune from that here in Canada, but it certainly won’t be as toxic as the culture in the U.K.,” she said.
A chance for Canadian media to prove itself
With Markle and Prince Harry living in Canada, it will take time to see how local outlets cover their day-to-day lives.
Neil believes “tight news budgets” at major Canadian news organizations could allow Markle and Prince Harry to live a more private life.
Private security expert says protection for Prince Harry, Meghan Markle ‘could cost millions’
“If you start having people covering the royals … what are they not going to cover [instead]?” she said.
“Already, many provinces in this country don’t have reporters at the provincial legislature — and many cities don’t have city reporters.”
Elghawaby said it is tough to predict how people will treat the couple — especially Markle — on social media. She pointed to other women of colour in public positions, including former governors general of Canada Michaelle Jean and Adrienne Clarkson.
“They were not exposed to such racism as Meghan has been experiencing, and they were representatives of the Crown,” Elghawaby said.
“But those women were there before social media, and things are evolving. It’s not like it can’t become toxic on social media.”
Elghawaby also wonders if the couple’s move could prompt the creation of new Canadian tabloids.
She said that because media is a business, a growing interest in Markle and Prince Harry could open up new revenue opportunities.
“If it becomes apparent that doing stories about the couple brings more clicks… the question becomes will media in Canada start shifting? Or will we see the emergence of new media businesses emerging to cover the couple?” she said.
Still, it is important Canadian media treats Markle with respect and does not engage in racist coverage.
“Many people are in denial in this country about how racism plays a daily role in many communities,” Elghawaby said.
Rise of hate crimes, Charles Adler Tonight
https://omny.fm/shows/charles-adler-tonight/full-show-27
Hate crime charges filed against Hanukkah stabber, CTV news
https://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1864681
Canadians’ views on racism unchanged, despite ‘difficult’ conversations in 2019: poll, Global News
Racism often captured headlines and took up space in public discourse in 2019 — but a new poll shows those discussions didn’t necessarily change Canadians’ opinions.
An Ipsos poll conducted on behalf of Global News found 49 per cent of Canadians don’t think racism is a serious problem in the country, while 43 per cent do.Those numbers are similar to April findings, when 46 per cent said racism was a serious problem.Sean Simpson, the vice-president of public affairs at Ipsos, told Global News that the poll was conducted to see whether key Canadian news events this year — including the federal election, videos and photos of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau wearing blackface and Sportsnet’s firing of Don Cherry — changed opinions.
“It’s both good news and bad news,” Simpson said.
“The good news is that things don’t seem to be getting worse. The bad news is that there hasn’t been a lot of improvement.”
Simpson also pointed to the poll’s finding that nearly four in 10 Canadians feel that “white Canadians are under threat from immigration” — a number that’s unchanged from April.
“I think people hold their opinions and things that they see and hear from leaders or celebrities reinforces their own positions,” Simpson said.
“Either they agree with what’s being said, or they disagree with what’s being said, but it doesn’t necessarily have impact or sway their own point of view.”
However, changing opinions on racism won’t happen overnight, noted Kathy Hogarth, an associate professor at the University of Waterloo, whose work focuses on marginalized populations in Canada.
“We can’t lose hope because our numbers aren’t changing as quickly as we want them to change,” she said.
“We need to continue having the conversation, and we cannot let the resistance to changing attitudes derail the attitudes about racism.”
Hogarth said Canadians have only begun to question issues such as racism in the justice and child welfare systems, and there’s much more to do.
Amira Elghawaby of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network added there needs to be systemic change in order for the country to truly understand and eradicate racism.
“We know that in our education system, there is not enough work being done to really understand Indigenous experiences in the this country,” she said.
“We’ve seen cutbacks in different provinces around funding and supporting Indigenous study, as well as looking at various forms of discrimination — Islamophobia, anti-Semitism and anti-Black racism.
“We need to have more in our curricula that reflects these experiences; they can’t sort of be tacked on as an afterthought.”
Elghawaby said that efforts to eliminate racism need to be supported by all level of government, citing the federal anti-racism strategy, which advocates will be closely monitoring.
“At the city level, as well, there’s much that can be done to ensure barriers to services, barriers to employment, and any type of hate that’s going on in our communities, we’re looking for solutions.”
An ongoing conversation
Conversations about racism need to go beyond just high-profile news events, both Elghawaby and Hogarth agreed.
“I think that in our media, we need to consistently and continually have these conversations,” Elghawaby said, noting Canadians did have meaningful conversations after the blackface and brownface incident and after Cherry’s firing — but then it faded.
“It sort of winds up being only when such a high-profile situation happens. It captures people’s attentions over a news cycle or two, then it fades from public consciousness.”
“We need to talk about these issues — and they are difficult conversations, but we still need to be having them,” Elghawaby said.
Hogarth added having ongoing conversations on racism would also help tackle the issue of polarization.
“When we begin to take an issue that’s really impacting the lives of a minority of people and make it a discussion point, people feel threatened, they feel the need to get defensive,” she said.
“We need to keep the conversation going because we need to understand that it’s not only a Black issue, it’s not a brown issue, it’s not an Indigenous issue. It’s all of our issue.”
Even beyond news events, she noted, conversations need to happen throughout the year — not just focused on specific months, such as Black History Month.
“The conversation must remain alive,” she said.
Does Quebec’s values test raise the same concerns as Bill 21? Experts weigh in , Global News
BY MAHAM ABEDI GLOBAL NEWS
While Quebec’s move to impose a values test on immigrants has prompted some criticism, experts say it likely won’t cause the same uproar as the province’s ban on religious symbols.
The values test for new immigrants to Quebec will be enforced starting Jan. 1, 2020. The government has said immigrants will be expected to obtain “an attestation of learning about democratic values and the Quebec values expressed by the Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms.”
The test is one component of the Coalition Avenir Québec’s controversial 2018 election platform on immigration. A ban on religious symbols for some workers was another promise the party made.
Stephanie Plante, executive director of the International Commission of Jurists Canada, explained to Global News that both stem from a similar idea that Quebec should have more control over who lives in the province.
While Plante said she has concerns about the test, she noted the test doesn’t have the same life-changing ramifications as the religious symbols ban.
“It’s kind of a bureaucratic step that isn’t really going to lead to anything other than a fulfilment of a campaign promise,” she said.
Errol Mendes, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, explained the two are also legally quite different.
“They’re basically compromising a fair bit [on the values test] to avoid it triggering the same controversy,” Mendes said.
He explained that the ban on religious symbols, which is already being legally challenged, will likely end up in the hands of the Supreme Court of Canada. The values test, as it stands, doesn’t have the same potential.
Quebec Immigration Minister Simon Jolin-Barrette shared sample questions of what may appear on the values test during a press conference Wednesday. Many of the examples provided were true-or-false questions.
“In Quebec, women and men have the same rights, and this equality is written into law. True or False?” read one example.
Another one read: “Since the government passed Bill 21, every new police officer cannot wear a religious symbol while at work. True or false?”
Mendes explained the wording of the sample questions is key to why a legal challenge will be difficult.
“I don’t think it’s going to be challengeable because they’ll be just basically true or false questions,” he said. “If it in any way, shape or form requires people to say they approve of restrictions behind Bill 21, that could be something which could be litigated.”
In other words, Mendes said as long as the test focuses on “knowledge questions” rather than opinions or beliefs, it will be difficult to challenge.
How the test will work
Those seeking permanent residency will be able to take the test online, either in their home country or in Quebec. They will need to score at least 75 per cent on a 20-question, multiple-choice exam, to be completed in 90 minutes. If a prospective immigrant fails, they will be able to take it again. If they fail a second time, they will have the option to sit through a 24-hour class on Quebec values.
Because immigration falls under federal jurisdiction, the provincial test cannot apply to immigration itself. Rather, it will apply to some immigrants who want to be considered for permanent residency in Quebec.
Passing the test will be a requirement to obtain a Quebec Selection Certificate, which does fall under provincial jurisdiction and is needed for permanent residency in the province.
Concerns about the values test
While enforcing a test isn’t discriminatory itself, Amira Elghawaby of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network told Global News it raises concerns.
“Observers have said that this doesn’t really do anything, it doesn’t offer anything different than the citizenship test,” she said. “Some of the questions do feed into stereotypes about immigrants being backwards or not believing in equality between men and women.”
She added the concerns are especially heightened in light of Bill 21.
“[Bill 21] opened up a whole new area of discrimination,” she said. “What this continues is that it continues along the lines of very divisive narrative about ‘us’ and ‘them.'”
Plante added that the values test may “discourage” educated and qualified individuals who want to come to Quebec.
“When you’re trying to integrate somewhere, there are already enough hurdles. This is just another thing and something that could discourage people,” she said.
“The idea that you have to go somewhere and you are going to be questioned on your values — whether or not it’s true or false, multiple-choice or whatever — it’s kind of an alarm bell.”
'Secularism'-Obsessed Quebec Is Making Immigrants Take a Values Test, VICE
As if it isn’t bad enough that the Quebec government is banning people who wear religious symbols from working in public sector jobs, new immigrants who want to move there will now face a “values test.”
The Coalition Avenir Québec government announced Wednesday that starting in January, economic immigrants hoping to live in the province will need to pass a test on “democratic values and the Québec values expressed by the Charter of human rights and freedoms.”
A person must pass that test with a score of at least 75 percent—those who fail can retake it. People who pass the 20-question test will obtain a Certificat de sélection du Québec, which they need to apply for permanent residency.
Speaking to reporters about the test, Premier François Legault emphasized Quebec’s secularism law. Bill 21 states that no one wearing a religious symbol such as a turban or hijab can work in the public sector. That means teachers, bus drivers, and government employees, among others, are banned from wearing religious symbols.
“I wouldn’t want someone to be surprised to find out that in Quebec persons in positions of authority are not allowed to wear religious symbols,” Legault said. “It’s important that people who want to come and live in Quebec know that women are equal to men."
As reported by the CBC, sample questions released by the CAQ include:
Since March 29, 2019, by virtue of the law respecting the laicity of the state, all new police officers may not wear religious symbols.
True
False
and
Identify which situations involve discrimination. A job is refused:
To a woman who is pregnant
To a person lacking the required diploma
To a person because of their ethnic background
(Funnily enough, the answer “to a person wearing a religious symbol” wasn’t an option.)
While Legault didn’t single out any religion, Amira Elghawaby, a board member with the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, said the values test is clearly stoking islamophobia.
“The values test is based on stereotypes about Muslims. Let's not pretend that it is anything else," she said. “The government doesn't seem to care that it is fuelling further fear and suspicion of Muslim communities, which can spill over towards other minority communities as we've seen with Bill 21 and its impacts on Sikh, Jewish, and other religious minorities."
During the federal election campaign, the Bloc Quebecois urged voters to “Optez pour des femmes et des hommes qui vous ressemblent,” meaning choose candidates who look like you, or who are like you. The Bloc ended up winning 32 seats, making huge gains from the 10 seats it won during the 2015 election.
Elghawaby said the values test is just the province's latest attempt to sanction xenophobia.
“Almost three years after the Quebec City massacre, nothing has truly changed—Muslims in Quebec continue to be targeted politically because it is an easy way to win popular support. It is sad and shameful.”
Conservative leadership candidate Kellie Leitch proposed a similar values test for immigrants in 2017, which was viewed by many as a racist dog whistle.
Prospective Canadian citizens already need to pass a test that quizzes their knowledge of the country’s laws and history.
Still pushing for personhood: 90 years after Canada recognized the rights of (some) women, what the fight looks like now, the Toronto Star
By Jenna Moon, Priya Ramanujam, Evelyn Kwong, Wanyee Li, Ayesha Nasir and Andrea Macdonald
It was the day when Canada finally recognized that yes, women were equal persons to men.
Days before the country again goes to the polls in Monday’s Federal Election, Canada on Friday celebrates the 90th anniversary of one of its most seismic political days.
In 1929, a group of women referred to as the Famous Five won a historic legal challenge that saw women designated legal “persons.” The ruling meant that women could be appointed to the Senate and paved the way for women to participate more fully in politics.
The fight had been a long one — the Supreme Court of Canada had initially ruled against the quintet — and it took intervention from Britain to overrule the decision. But for some the fight was only beginning. In effect, the Persons Day ruling only applied to some women.
Many women of colour were not granted full voting rights until the late 1940s — more than 30 years after it was originally granted to women in 1916. Indigenous women, meanwhile, were excluded from voting at a federal level until 1960.
On the 90th anniversary of “persons” status in Canada, the Star spoke with leaders from across the county and asked them: How can Canada do better to execute on its 1929 promise and how far is there still to go before women can participate equally, in politics and beyond?
The interviews have been edited and condensed.
Amira Elghawaby is a journalist and human rights advocate based in Ottawa.
It’s hard not to feel despondent about the state of women’s rights in Canada, 90 years after the Persons Case. Right now, one of the country’s largest provinces has stripped away the rights of countless numbers of women to both practise their faith and work in the public service. Bill 21 is Quebec’s provincial law barring any man or woman who wears a religious symbol from holding positions of authority, ranging from teachers to police officers, judges and prosecutors. While the law has impacted a number of religious communities, observers have suggested that the legislation’s real intent is to prohibit Muslim women, in particular, from wearing headscarves or face veils. “This Bill disproportionately targets women, and particularly Muslim women, impairing their equality rights and excluding them from being full participants in Québec society,” reads a statement by the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF).
Bill 21 will exacerbate how Muslim women are able to engage in the workforce, not only entrenching discrimination at the state level — but signalling to all of Quebec, and even the rest of Canada, that it is acceptable to treat some women as second-class citizens because of the clothing they choose to wear.
Overall, Muslim women in Canada are already often at an economic disadvantage. Statistics Canada’s 2016 General Social Survey shows that in 2016, 56 per cent of Muslim women were employed, as compared to 66 per cent of all women. We also know that newcomers to Canada who identify as Muslim are more likely to live in low-income (under $20,000) than immigrants of other religious backgrounds.
Canadians should therefore see Bill 21 as a full attack on both religious freedoms, and on the rights of women to fully and equally participate in society. We should be working harder to remove barriers to participation for all women, not only women who fit a biased ideal of what personhood and womanhood should look like.
The Canadian Women’s Foundation marked Equal Pay Day this past April by highlighting Statistics Canada numbers which show that:
Indigenous women face a 35 per cent gender pay gap
Women with disabilities (who work part time and full time) face a 46 per cent gender pay gap
Newcomer women face a 29 per cent gender pay gap
Racialized women face a 33 per cent gender pay gap
For the Persons Case to truly have resonance today, we need to hold governments to account for inaction on these issues.
We are not truly free to participate as equal members of society until all of us are truly free to do so. Our contributions mustn’t be shortchanged, either.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2019/10/18/still-pushing-for-personhood-90-years-after-canada-recognized-the-rights-of-some-women-what-the-fight-looks-like-now.html
Why are Conservatives hanging out with a fringe Muslim cleric with dubious credentials? National Observer
Four MPs and four senators from the Conservative party have been associating with a fringe Muslim cleric with dubious credentials who amplifies misinformation about Islamic extremism, National Observer has found.
Mohammad Tawhidi is an Australian who identifies himself as the “imam of peace,” a title that has been disputed as he isn’t affiliated with a mosque, doesn’t seem to have many Muslim followers and doesn’t have credentials he’s claimed to hold.
Though he claims to be a religious reformer and speaks out against Islamic extremism, he also spreads Islamophobic conspiracy theories about the U.S.’s first two Muslim women in Congress, Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, claiming that they have brought a terrorist agenda to Washington, D.C. He has also claimed without evidence that Muslim extremists are conspiring to “create a country” within Australia and name streets after terrorist murderers.
Those views have made Tawhidi a beloved figure in far-right circles, The Intercept reported earlier this year. And over the past two years, Tawhidi also met several Canadian Conservative party senators and MPs, both officially and unofficially, even attending the wedding of one MP, according to social media postings.
“It is well-established that this individual is not a religious scholar, but a charlatan,” Amira Elghawaby of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network said. “No individual who foments hatred by peddling in lies and stereotypes against minority communities should be given a platform, let alone be provided one by Canadian senators.”
Tawhidi didn’t respond to a request for comment from National Observer. Neither did the Conservative party.
Mohammad Tawhidi isn’t affiliated with a mosque, has dubious credentials and amplifies false narratives about Islamic extremism. He's met with four senators and four MPs, and appears to have attended one MP's wedding. #cdnpoli #elxn43
Canadians will head to the polls for the current federal election on Oct. 21.
Mohammad Tawhidi has tweeted his support for the Conservative party ahead of the federal election.
‘A man who has been proven to be a complete fraud’
Tawhidi, who has amassed more than half a million followers on Twitter, has been the subject of a series of investigative news reports by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). Those reports found he didn’t have the academic credentials that he’d previously claimed, he isn’t part of a mosque and his public profile exists mainly because of his frequent media appearances, often done while wearing billowing white robes.
There’s no formal training required to become an imam, but Tawhidi isn’t recognized either as an imam or a sheikh, both titles he uses, by the Australian National Imams Council or equivalents in his home country. ABC reporters also found he was the leader of a similarly named association that he formed himself.
Islam has two main sects, Shia and Sunni. Given that Tawhidi is Shia, it’s unusual that he would refer to himself as an imam: using the word to describe the spiritual leader of a mosque is a Sunni tradition. In the Shia branch of faith, imams are held to be divine leaders descended from the prophet Muhammad.
“It's worrisome to see Conservative senators embracing a man who has been proven to be a complete fraud,” Elghawaby said.
Though Tawhidi frequently comments on American politics, he also seems to visit Canada often and comment on Canadian politics. For example, he criticized M-103, a non-binding motion in the House of Commons that called on federal politicians to condemn Islamophobia, saying the anti-Muslim discrimination is a “made-up” issue.
An undated photo of Conservative MP David Sweet (from left), Mohammad Tawhidi, Conservative MP Garnett Genuis and Conservative foreign affairs critic Erin O'Toole.
He’s also appeared in a video for the Canadian far-right website The Rebel and in a video with former Rebel correspondent Tommy Robinson, in which he warned without evidence that Muslims are waging a “population Jihad” in the United Kingdom.
Members of minority communities don’t get free passes to spread false narratives about that community, feed Islamophobic conspiracies and encourage violence, Elghawaby said.
“His anti-Muslim narratives are extremely harmful and put communities in Canada and elsewhere at risk,” Elghawaby said.
Sen. David Tkachuk, who met with Tawhidi in June 2018 to discuss issues related to Iran, said he wasn’t aware of Tawhidi’s qualifications or views beyond his opposition to the Iranian regime.
At Tkachuk’s request, the Senate formally recognized Tawhidi’s visit to the chamber. Tawhidi’s website lists the gesture among his “qualifications.” In fact, such recognitions are usually not vetted: in general, the speaker will draw the Senate’s attention to a visitor at the request of the senator who received them.
“I have no relationship with him, official or unofficial, and have had no other meetings with him before or since,” Tkachuk said in an email.
Sen. Larry W. Smith, who appeared in a photo with Tawhidi and Tkachuk around the time of Tawhidi’s Senate appearance, didn’t respond to a request for comment sent to his office. Neither did Sen. Linda Frum, who Tawhidi claimed, in a Facebook post, had met with him in January 2018, or Sen. Salma Ataullahjan, who Tawhidi was photographed sitting beside at a June 2018 event.
Tawhidi claimed in a Facebook post to have met with Conservative MP Michelle Rempel in February 2018, and according to a Twitter post that has since been deleted, attended her May 2019 wedding. A source provided National Observer with screenshots of that deleted post, which includes a photo of Tawhidi with Rempel at what appears to be her wedding.
Rempel’s wedding happened a month after one of Tawhidi’s tweets — in which he falsely accused Omar of downplaying the 9/11 attacks — went viral, touching off a firestorm of attention that later circulated on Fox News.
A since-deleted Twitter post, provided to National Observer by a source, shows Tawhidi (middle) at what appears to be MP Michelle Rempel. Rempel is pictured on the right.
Another photo posted online by the Iranian Canadian Journal, a media outlet, shows Tawhidi posing with Conservative MPs Garnett Genuis, David Sweet and Erin O’Toole. “Great to meet with Imam of Peace today,” Genuis said in a tweet posted June 12, 2018.
National Observer sent requests for comment to the constituency offices and campaign offices of Rempel, Genuis, Sweet and O’Toole but didn’t receive a response.
Former Conservative finance minister Joe Oliver, who was also in the photo of Tawhidi and Ataullahjan, though he was out of office at the time, said he’s taken many photos with various people over the years but wasn’t aware of Tawhidi’s background. Oliver said he hadn’t spoken with Tawhidi before the photo and hasn’t spoken with him since.
“What I heard at that event was generally unobjectionable,” Oliver said. “As I recall, it was about peace and tolerance.”
Politicians who give Tawhidi a platform risk legitimizing his views, Elghawaby said. Even if they weren’t aware of Tawhidi’s past statements beforehand, office-holders should know better, and vet people properly before meeting with them, she said.
“This is harmful to Canada's ongoing and laudable efforts to create inclusive, cohesive communities which strengthen our nation.”
Syrian restaurant closes due to death threats, CTV News
https://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1800522
Canada’s political leaders agree Quebec’s religious symbols ban is discriminatory. They’ve also agreed not to do anything about it. Washington Post
By Amanda Coletta
Here’s one thing the leaders of Canada’s major political parties agree on: They oppose Quebec’s new ban on public employees wearing hijabs, turbans or yarmulkes on the job.
Here’s another: They’ve got no plans to do anything about it.
With an election for Parliament less than three weeks away, Quebec’s Bill 21 has become an increasingly uncomfortable topic for the candidates for prime minister.
The legislation, the first of its kind in North America, has drawn criticism across Canada and among rights advocates worldwide. But it has support in Quebec, a key battleground in the tight race between Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s Liberals and opposition leader Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives. The French-speaking province holds 78 of the 338 seats up for grabs in the Oct. 21 vote.
Which is why the leaders have been somewhat muted in their criticism.
Trudeau, who opposed the bill before it was approved in June, has said he doesn’t believe free societies should be “allowing discrimination against anyone.” Scheer said in Montreal this week that he wouldn’t implement such a law at the federal level. Green Party leader Elizabeth May called it “distressing.” New Democratic Party leader Jagmeet Singh, a Sikh who wears a turban, described it as “discriminatory.”
Bloc Québécois leader Yves-François Blanchet. (Andrej Ivanov/Reuters)
But only Trudeau has left the door slightly ajar to “intervening at a later date.” Several organizations have filed legal challenges to the bill. The prime minister, who represents a district in Montreal, has said it would be “counterproductive” to join such a challenge now.
All of which disappoints Amrit Kaur. Kaur, a Sikh woman from Quebec, graduated from teachers college June 16 — the day Bill 21 was approved. Rather than remove her turban to work in her home province, she moved across the country to take a job in Surrey, B.C.
Kaur, an activist with the World Sikh Organization of Canada, said she’s tired of federal leaders paying “lip service” to criticism of the ban but not taking action.
“It shows that they’re just pandering for the sake of votes — and not for the sake of the values that make us Canadian,” she said.
Quebec Premier François Legault has described Bill 21 as another step in the lengthy process of secularizing the province in which the Catholic Church long wielded outsize influence. Police officers, teachers and other public employees hold positions of authority in their communities, he says, and shouldn’t be wearing symbols that might promote their faith while they serve the public.
Critics see the legislation as an assault on the practices of Muslims, Sikhs and other religious minorities, many of them relative newcomers to the province. Politicians and activists across Canada and beyond have condemned it; local leaders in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta have passed resolutions opposing it.
But polls have shown nearly 2 in 3 Quebecers support the law — making it a “hot potato,” pollster Christian Bourque said.
“A leader of a federal government would be going against somewhat of a consensus in the province,” said Bourque, of the Leger polling firm in Montreal. “They can quickly do away with the issue by saying they won’t personally challenge it.”
Complicating the politics is the separatist Bloc Québécois party, which supports the law and is competitive in several districts in the province.
Montreal’s English-language school board, the province’s largest, says four job applicants who wore hijabs withdrew their applications rather than remove their veils. One returned and said she would take the hijab off.
“It is very unfortunate,” school board spokesman Michael Cohen said. “But we had no choice.”
Groups including the English-language school board and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association are challenging the law in court. But the federal party leaders have taken a different tack.
Singh is one of them. On a campaign stop at a Montreal market Wednesday, a man suggested the Ontario-born and -educated lawyer remove his turban so he would “look like a Canadian.”
“I think Canadians look like all sorts of people,” Singh replied. He later told reporters that his very presence in Quebec was “an act of defiance” against the law but that he would let the courts handle it.
That suits Quebec’s premier just fine. Legault asked the federal leaders last month to promise to “stay out” of any legal challenges “forever.”
But it’s not good enough for Jack Jedwab. The president of the Montreal-based Canadian Institute for Identities and Migration says it’s hard to square the leaders’ reluctance to intervene with the promises they’ve made to tackle racism and systemic discrimination after revelations last month that Trudeau wore blackface several times as a younger man. (Trudeau has apologized.)
“If you’re truly committed to issues of combating discrimination and inequality, you would think that these leaders would take stronger positions on Bill 21,” he said.
Amira Elghawaby, a board member of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, said she’s “disappointed” in the leaders for “throwing minority communities under the bus because [they] don’t feel that speaking up for our rights and freedoms is worth it.”
Naheed Nenshi, the Muslim mayor of Calgary, sees “a real lack of courage.”
“What I’ve heard from the federal leaders is a lot of mumbling apologia about dignity and human rights,” he told the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. this week. “And then a pretty forceful thing that says, ‘But we’re not going to do anything about it.’ ”
Nenshi said that the federal government has tools at its disposal beyond joining a legal challenge, such as withholding federal funding or employing the rarely used power of disallowance to wipe out a provincial statute.
Kerri Froc, an assistant law professor at the University of New Brunswick, said the use of disallowance “would probably generate a constitutional crisis.” A likelier though less powerful tactic, she said, would be a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the attorney general.
The right perspective? YouTube, radicalisation and Rebel Media, the Listening Post
It might surprise you to learn that one of the internet's most influential far-right publications comes out of Canada.
In 2015, The Rebel Media - founded by longtime Canadian pundit and political operative Ezra Levant -launched and quickly latched onto the monumental rise of YouTube, carving themselves a considerable online presence.
In four short years, the network cultivated an impressive lineup - the who's who of the far-right: from homegrown Canadian provocateurs like Faith Goldy, Lauren Southern and Gavin McInnes; to international agitators like Sebastian Gorka, Jack Posobiec, Laura Loomer, Katie Hopkins and Tommy Robinson.
Collectively, these high-profile contributors, as well as numerous others, have helped to tally up nearly half a billion views and 1.2 million subscribers on YouTube.
The Rebel Media's sales pitch is simple: They claim to tell "the other side of the story" - the side the mainstream media are too afraid to tell. But what that actually translates into is an obsession with controversial subjects championed by the far right.
"I would say anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-refugee, anti-climate, anti-liberal, anti a lot of things," says Amira Elghawaby, a board member of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network. "And unlike a real news organisation they don't look for balance. They don't look to try to actually find out what's really going on. But they simply try to create narratives and anger that really get people riled up. And sort of looking for conspiracies. Everywhere."
Caleb Cain, an American 26 year old from West Virginia, used to devour its content.
"When I first found The Rebel Media it was through Lauren Southern," Cain told The Listening Post's Flo Phillips and Ryan Kohls. "She went out and held up a sign and basically criticised feminism and said that feminism was the death of the West."
From there, Cain confesses he went down a Rebel Media rabbit hole on YouTube and some of his views became radicalised.
"I believed in this conspiracy theory called white genocide," said Cain. "And the theory goes something like Muslims and people from the Third World with low IQs and bad dangerous cultures are coming in and purposely invading Western society in efforts to replace it. And I really bought into this and it created a lot of fear for me."
The success of The Rebel Media is undoubtedly connected to the ubiquitous platform that YouTube provides. Prior to 2015, The Rebel's founder Levant had relied on more traditional avenues to express his views like the now-defunct Sun News Network. With the advent of YouTube however, the need for a high-tech studio and the watchful eye of broadcasting standards disappeared.
"The fact is YouTube allows someone to find an audience for content that is both more extreme and very frequently less factual than conventional mass media would be," says Jonathan Goldsbie, editor at Canadaland. "YouTube as far as I'm concerned is perhaps, even more than Facebook, the most powerful force for radicalisation, misinformation and propaganda that the world has ever seen."
"Not surprisingly, many have made a career out of it. In cases like The Rebel people have made a business out of it," Goldsbie added.
The Rebel's short tenure has not been without controversy. In 2017, one of its most popular contributors, Goldy, was fired after her sympathetic coverage of the Charlottesville protests in the United States, and a subsequent appearance on a neo-Nazi podcast that went viral. In quick succession, numerous contributors and supporters backed away.
Perhaps even more damaging to The Rebel's reputation has been its connection to violent acts; acts like the Finsbury Park Mosque attack in London, the Quebec City mosque shooting, and in Fredericton, New Brunswick, the murder of two police officers. In all three instances, the men involved watched The Rebel Media and had become convinced Muslims were invading their countries.
"We see horrific mass killings. And I think that there's an idea that wants to sort of dismiss those instances as you know just weird fringe acts," says Jared Holt an investigative reporter at Right Wing Watch. "But I think that's kind of the logical conclusion of this. If you're teaching people that people in their community are trying to destroy them, to upend their idea of culture, I think it's almost you know a logical next step that some people will choose to act on it."
Video:
Farber: The outstanding people of 5779, the Canadian Jewish News
As the Jewish year 5779 comes to a close, it is a time for all of us to be self-reflective. It’s been my custom (OK, I started it last year) to consider those inside and outside our community who have helped make this a better world.I have been fortunate to have had the honour to meet so many good and decent people who understand in the very deepest reaches of their hearts that vision, outreach, courage and steadfastness speaks to the Jewish concept of tikun olam – the admonition to repair the world and ensure it is a place where our children and grandchildren can feel safe and can thrive.Today’s world is complex and filled with possibilities, but it also has traces of evil and hatred. The folks I recognize this year walk with their heads held high. They cast away fear of being vilified and stigmatized for their progressive views, understanding that in order to get to that better place, we have to sometimes walk through the muck and, as Shakespeare so wisely intoned, “suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune.”
Liv Mendelsohn
Mendelsohn is the director of accessibility and inclusion at the Miles Nadal Jewish Community Centre in Toronto. A field instructor for the faculty of social work at the University of Toronto, she has devoted her professional life to ensuring that those with disabilities are embraced as part of our community. She has a passion for this work, as evidenced by the fact that she is also the director of the ReelAbilities Toronto Film Festival and was named as a CivicAction DiverseCity fellow last year. This year, she is a mentor for the Association for Fundraising Philanthropies, where she focuses on issues of charity and inclusion.
Amira Elghawaby
Full disclosure, Elghawaby and I sit together on the board of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network and we have worked in concert for many years on social justice issues. She is a true friend of all minority communities. She’s outspoken and firm in her belief that all people have intrinsically good qualities, but she does not suffer fools gladly. As a journalist and human rights advocate, she has spoken her mind on the evils of white supremacy, advocated against Quebec’s Bill 21 and stood side-by-side with the Jewish community condemning anti-Semitism. She championed progressive causes when directing communications for the National Council of Canadian Muslims and continues to do so in her present work with the Canadian labour movement.
Zachary Dan
Here is a young man who’s smart, articulate and privileged, but he did not let that privilege go to his head. Quite the contrary. A member of the fabled and philanthropic Dan family of Toronto, he is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he received a master’s degree in computer science. Prior to that, he graduated with a bachelor of science and aerospace, aeronautical and astronautical engineering. Raised to embrace the values of justice and charity, he put his skills to good use, developing Act Analytics, “a service provider using a technology driven approach to bring sustainable business practices to modern investing.” It helps investors become real and progressive agents for world change.
Jack McCarthy and Steve Kennedy
I have been friends with these two for over 40 years and both stood with me under the huppah when I married Karyn (my true and best friend forever), but they have also done so much to help those in need. Both have worked in the social service field, in areas of child welfare, youth justice, homelessness and mental health. Kennedy was a volunteer firefighter when he lived in Nova Scotia and McCarthy is the chair of CanUgan, which supports folks with physical disabilities in rural Uganda.
We owe all these folks a hug and a thank you for proving to us that there is good in this world. Shanah tovah to all.
Why federal leaders, despite criticism, aren’t taking a stronger stance on Quebec’s Bill 21, Global News
About one week into the federal election campaign, leaders have been repeatedly pushed on their positions regarding Quebec’s Bill 21.
But a recent poll conducted exclusively for Global News by Ipsos found that Canadians themselves are split on the law, which bans religious symbols for some public-sector employees.
Fifty-two per cent of Canadians said they would oppose a bill that would restrict or disallow religious clothing or gear — such as a crucifix, turban or hijab — for public servants such as police officers, teachers and lawyers.
That leaves 48 per cent of Canadians who would either support or somewhat support such a law.
The poll is in line with previous polls, which show such rules are particularly popular within Quebec.
According to the latest findings, 63 per cent of Quebecers support Bill 21. Support for the bill is second highest in Saskatchewan and Manitoba (53 per cent), followed by Alberta and Atlantic Canada (45 per cent), British Columbia (43 per cent) and Ontario (42 per cent).
Among decided voters, support for the bill was highest among Bloc Québécois voters, followed by supporters of the People’s Party of Canada and the Conservative Party — at 85 per cent, 76 per cent and 62 per cent, respectively.
Support was lower among decided Liberal voters at 39 per cent and NDP and Green Party voters at 35 per cent each.
Major federal leaders, including the Liberals’ Justin Trudeau, the Conservatives’ Andrew Scheer, New Democrat Jagmeet Singh and the Green Party’s Elizabeth May, have all spoken out against the law.
Yet, none have committed to challenging the provincial law themselves.
This has resulted in criticism from those who have been pushing for the federal government to take a stronger stance against the law.
Balpreet Singh of the World Sikh Organization of Canada (WSO) told Global News he’s “absolutely shocked” the law has not prompted outrage across the country.
“I am absolutely shocked that the fact people are being banned from work because of their religion in Canada is not a national crisis.”
He continued: “It baffles me that we are supposed to be leaders on human rights.”
Singh noted that the law may be one created within provincial borders, but it affects all Canadians.
“If a provincial government can curtail human rights for a small group of racialized individuals then that sets a precedent,” said Singh, who is the legal counsel for the WSO.
“So, if tomorrow, a provincial government wants to use the notwithstanding clause to clamp down on a racialized group or the LGBTQ community, what will we do then?”
Bill 21 was adopted in June and invokes the notwithstanding clause of the Canadian Constitution, which prevents citizens from challenging the law for violating fundamental rights and liberties protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
In August, the Sikh group decided to officially intervene in a court challenge launched by the National Council of Canadian Muslims, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association and a university student named Ichrak Nourel Hak, who wears a hijab.
Lawyers challenging the bill did so on grounds rooted outside the charter. They argued the law is unconstitutional because it encroaches on federal jurisdiction, is impermissibly vague and violates citizens’ rights to participate in their democratic institutions.
Federal leaders who oppose the law have all said they will not intercede while the court challenge plays out.
Scheer and Singh have both denied the possibility of stepping in, while Trudeau has left the door open.
On Friday, Trudeau told reporters: “We are not closing the door to a possible intervention because it would be irresponsible for a federal government to choose to shut the door on a matter of fundamental rights.”
Two days prior to that, Scheer left the legal challenge to the courts.
“People who are against this bill right now are making that case directly in the courts. That is their right, they will have the ability to do so, and the courts will ultimately decide on that. For our part, we will not proceed with this type of initiative at the federal level we don’t believe that this is something we would ever do at the federal level,” he said.
Asked a similar question over the weekend, Singh replied: “The folks that are bringing that forward, it’s their court challenge, and it would not be appropriate to interfere with their court challenge.”
May has also not said whether she would support a legal challenge to the bill. The Bloc Québécois and the People’s Party of Canada have voiced support for Bill 21.
Stéphanie Plante, who works at the University of Ottawa’s Centre for Interdisciplinary Research on Citizenship and Minorities, told Global News that federal leaders are unlikely to offer anything more detailed than these statements during the election campaign.
“Any party leader — whether you are Boris Johnson, whether you’re Donald Trump or whether you’re these three guys — they want to project themselves in a leadership role and not necessarily get into the nitty-gritty of policy details,” Plante said.
Plante said the leaders are more likely to make broad statements on Bill 21 but also a range of other topics, such as climate change, the economy and national security.
Leaders are especially careful to get into controversial provincial issues during election time, she noted, pointing to Alberta’s oilsands as another example.
Plante noted that more detailed discussions on Quebec’s law are likely to happen after the election is over — partly because leaders will have to keep track of what happens with the court challenge.
But that’s not good enough for some advocates, including Amira Elghawaby of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, who said she was hoping federal leaders would be less calculated in denouncing the law.
“It’s a very sad day in Canada when our federal leaders are making those types of calculations and deciding not to speak up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms,” she said.
Beyond Bill 21, Elghawaby noted that Canada has “come quite far” in terms of having conversations about issues such as reconciliation, anti-Semitism and racism. She said not addressing Quebec’s ban on religious symbols could have larger implications.
“We hurt the wider society once we start preventing people from participating. We are limiting our potential as a country, both economically and socially.”
Removing anti-immigration billboards is censorship, says columnist, The Current, CBC Radio
Removing anti-immigration billboards is censorship, says columnist
Campaign urging Canadians to 'Say NO to Mass Immigration' taken down after outcry
CBC Radio · Posted: Aug 27, 2019 1:09 PM ET | Last Updated: August 27, 2019
Billboards featuring the portrait of the People’s Party of Canada Leader Maxime Bernier and a slogan advocating against 'mass immigration' appeared across the country last week. (Chris Helgren/Reuters)
Despite public outcry, billboards urging Canadians to "Say NO to Mass Immigration" should not have been taken down, a columnist says.
"It's a disgusting message," said Lise Ravary, a writer with the Montreal Gazette and broadcaster with Cogeco Media.
However, she told The Current's guest host Matt Galloway that "as long as a billboard advertising is, you know, within the limits of the law, I don't see under what pretence we could say: 'Take it down.'"
"To me it's censorship. He's allowed to think what he thinks he's allowed to say it to people."
The billboards started appearing in different spots across the country last week. Though they featured the face of politician Maxime Bernier and the logo of his People's Party of Canada, they were placed and paid for by a third-party advertising group: True North Strong & Free Advertising Corporation.
The sign's message was swiftly met with a outpouring of criticism from some politicians. Halifax Premier Stephen McNeil tweeted that "as Premier, I welcome everyone to Nova Scotia — but I don't welcome this negative, divisive tone."
Pattison Outdoor Advertising, the company that owns the billboard network, removed the national campaign over the weekend.
Bernier, who has said he agreed with the message, responded to the decision by tweeting the billboard was "only controversial for the totalitarian leftist mob who want to censor it."
"The message on the billboard is not 'controversial' for two-thirds of Canadians who agree with it, and for those who disagree but support free speech and an open discussion," the Quebec MP wrote on Twitter.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the "freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression," but journalist and human rights advocate Amira Elghawaby said to claim the issue was about free speech is "absolutely wrong."
"Free speech is not a ticket to demonize and marginalize," said Elghawaby, who serves on the board of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network.
She called the billboards an example of "dog whistle politics" to get the attention of voters who hold "anti-immigrant views."
"Mr. Bernier can claim that this is him wanting to have a debate, but what it actually is, it's him signalling to those people who again are holding these views … that he is the one who's going to quote, unquote, save Canada."
In a poll in February, almost half of respondents believed Canada is accepting too many refugees. (Paul Chiasson/The Canadian Press)
No mass immigration to Canada: expert
Contrary to the wording scrawled on the billboards, there is no mass immigration to Canada, points out immigration expert Usha George.
"Canada's one of the very few countries in the world which has got a very organized immigration system," said George, the director of the Centre for Immigration and Settlement at Ryerson University.
The government operates a points system, she explained, which prioritizes immigrants who contribute to the economy.
"Our family immigration is much smaller, and our refugee immigration is even smaller than that," she said.
The immigration plan is revised and must be approved by parliament each year, she added.
Last October, Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen announced a multi-year plan to increase the immigration target to 350,000 per year by 2021 — a figure that is close to one per cent of the country's population.
The government said the increase was necessary to meet demands of the labour market and expanding economy.
In February, a Leger poll had almost half of respondents saying they believe Canada welcomes too many immigrants and refugees. Another in June reported that 63 per cent of respondents think the government should prioritize limiting immigration levels.
George said that sentiment "comes from a lack of understanding about how immigrants contribute to the system," and from "negative propaganda about immigrants."
"It also comes from the fact that more and more of the immigrants who come into this country these days are from countries that are non-European," she told Galloway.
"The diversity of the immigrants who are coming in also incites fear among far-right groups, and really conservative kind of individuals, who feel that Canada is changing."
Written by Padraig Moran. Produced by Julie Crysler, Samira Mohyeddin and Marc Apollonio.
Ottawa had Canada's 3rd-highest hate crime rate in 2018, CBC News
Ottawa had one of the highest rates of hate crime among Canadian cities last year, according to numbers released Monday by Statistics Canada.
There were 105 hate crimes reported to police in 2018 in the capital, or 9.8 incidents per 100,000 people.
That placed Ottawa third behind only Hamilton, where there were 17.1 hate crimes per 100,000 last year, and Quebec City, where there were 11 per 100,000.
César Ndéma-Moussa, president of Roots and Culture, an Ottawa organization that advocates for members of black and racialized communities, as well as other vulnerable groups, found those numbers "disturbing, yet unsurprising."
"Of course, this contradicts the vision that we have of peaceful Ottawa," Ndéma-Moussa said.
César Ndéma-Moussa of Ottawa advocacy group Roots and Culture said hate crime has become a bleak reality for some communities. (CBC/Simon Gohier)
"When we look ... at a global context in terms of rise of white supremacy and white nationalism, we cannot be surprised," he said.
Those incidents have spilled over into 2019: There were four incidents in recent months of graffiti targeting Ottawa's black community, including one family who found their garage door spray-painted with the N-word in May.
In recent years, vandals have also targeted Jewish and Muslim communities in Ottawa, and the city has been the site of anti-immigration rallies.
"This is the reality of Ottawa today," Ndéma-Moussa said.
Tip of the iceberg
But according to Amira Elghawaby, a board member with the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, the numbers from Statistics Canada don't tell the whole picture.
"This is really the tip of the iceberg," Elghawaby said. "Many people, for whatever reasons, are reluctant to report, don't feel comfortable; or they are reporting, but the police are not deeming [their complaints] to be founded. And so they're not really showing up in any data."
Elghawaby believes Ottawa's ranking at the top of the Statistics Canada hate crime list can be explained in part by the fact it's one of the only places in the country where people can report hate crimes online.
"We've actually worked with police to remove barriers to reporting in the city," she said.
While Elghawaby calls the initiative forward-thinking, she said still much more needs to be done, including better training for officers to deal with hate incidents, and annual police reports on these types of crimes, like other cities have done.
Amira Elghawaby, a board member with the Canadian anti-hate network, says the numbers don't tell the whole story about hate crimes in Ottawa. 0:41
"What we can simply deduce from these numbers is we need to address hate in our communities," she said. "We need to make sure that if there are people who are victimized, that they feel comfortable coming forward."
According to Statistics Canada, most of the police-reported hate crimes in 2018 fell under assault, uttering threats or mischief.
Race and religion were found to be the main factors motivating the attacks.