Why Are the Anti-Israel Chants So Tedious? » Mosaic

2024/05/03 Leave a comment

Of interest:

The anti-Israel demonstrations on American campuses have been compared to the anti-Vietnam War demonstrations of the 1960s and early 1970s. In their intensity, they may be similar. In their stupidity, they are not. Nowhere is the difference between the two protest movements more immediately apparent than in the quality and nature of the slogans used by their participants.When one considers the slogans of the anti-Vietnam War movement, one is struck by the wit and humor of many of them. Many still have the power to make one smile or laugh, such as the “Make Love, Not War” motto that probably outdid any other in its popularity. What made it so potent, yet so funny? Partly, its clever yoking together of two opposed English idioms that shared only the verb “make”; partly, its puckish suggestion that everyone, from the foot soldier in Vietnam to the president of the United States, would be better off in bed with someone else than on a battlefield or in a war-cabinet session; partly its invoking of the sexual revolution of the sixties as both the antithesis of, and the alternative to, a supposed culture of aggressive militarism; and most sweepingly, its implication that life-giving Eros and death-dealing Thanatos are different expressions of the same human libido, and that the first is preferable to the second. That’s a lot to pack into four words, but “Make Love, Not War” managed to do it.

Other anti-Vietnam War slogans were almost as memorable. Some, like “Hell, no, we won’t go [to fight in Vietnam]” were chanted at demonstrations. Two favorites that I remember were displayed on signs. One bore the iconic flower of hippiedom and the words, in a take-off of the warning recently introduced in those days on packs of cigarettes, “War Is not healthy for children and other living things.” The other, a parody of the famous World War I recruiting billboard, had a drawing of a grim-faced Uncle Sam exhorting, “Join the U.S. Army! Travel to exotic lands, meet exciting people, and kill them.” There was the stern “If you support this war, send your own children,” and the poignant “Not our sons, not your sons, not their sons.” A sign carried only by black demonstrators said, “No Vietnamese ever called me n—r.”

There were, of course, angrier and more violent anti-Vietnam War slogans, too, such as the chant “Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?” But these, though they spread as the war dragged on and public frustration with it mounted, were never the rule. The dominant tone was irony and sarcasm, the underlying message: “You who are prosecuting this war may be more powerful than we are, but we are smarter than you, more creative than you, and more caring for human life and human beings, and because of this, we will prevail.”

Compare this with:

  • “Red, black, green, and white, we support Hamas’s fight!.”
  • “Hitler, Hitler, go back home! Palestine is ours alone!”
  • “Globalize the intifada!”
  • “One, two, three, four, Israel will be no more! Five, six, seven, eight, Israel we’ll eliminate!”
  • “There is only one solution! Intifada revolution!”
  • “Say it loud, say it clear: we do not want Zionists here!”
  • “Oh, al-Qassam, you make us proud!  Kill another soldier now!”
  • “Resistance by any means necessary!”
  • “Palestine is our demand! No peace on stolen land!”
  • “We say justice. You say how? Burn Tel Aviv to the ground!”
  • “We don’t want no two states. We want all of ’48!”

The sheer idiocy of such slogans is as staggering as is their hatefulness. Those who compose them seem to be under the impression that whatever rhymes is intelligent, and their ability to put two rhyming words together in what resembles a cheer for a high-school basketball team appears to be as far as their intelligence extends.

One mustn’t, of course, overgeneralize. Although many college students have joined the demonstrations, many times their number haven’t. Still, changed attitudes toward Israel aside, something has clearly happened to the minds of young American protesters between the 1960s and today. What?

Well, childhoods and adolescences dumbed down by smartphones, WhatApp, and Facebook, for one thing. And college educations given by teachers, products of the postmodernism and deconstructionism that gained ascendancy on university campuses in the last decades of the 20th century, who have taught that there is no such thing as verifiable truth or falsehood but only the competing narratives of oppressed and oppressor, and that it is incumbent to identify with the latter. And a national politics that has become one of non-debatable identities rather than of debatable issues. And the fear of saying or thinking anything that smacks of racism, sexism, genderism, religionism, elitism, nationalism, patriotism, colonialism, ethnocentrism, Orientalism, or whatever else might offend progressive values and the feelings of others, with the notable exception of those whose feelings it is permissible to offend.

None of this has been conducive to independence or subtlety of thought, let alone to irony or humor; combine it with a growing antagonism toward Israel and its Jewish supporters, now squarely placed by many young Americans in the camp of the oppressor, and you get the imbecility of “Go, Hamas, we love you! We support your rockets, too!” But whence all that rage, whence all that hate?

This is a question worth pondering. After all, the student demonstrators of the 1960s had much better reason to be consumed by such emotions (and some were) than those today. The government they were protesting against was sending them to fight, and possibly to die, in a war they considered immoral and unjust. What comparable threat does Israel, however immoral or unjust it may strike them as being, pose to students on American campuses now? What is all the screaming at it about?

The stock answer given by Israel’s supporters is: anti-Semitism. It’s hard to argue with that. When a Jewish state is vilified by mobs of students for supposed atrocities the likes of which leave them indifferent when committed by other nations, an antipathy toward Jews clearly has something to do with it.

But rampant anti-Semitism, as we know, does not spring from nowhere. It’s always an expression of some deep fear or resentment that the anti-Semite projects onto the Jew. What are today’s student demonstrators projecting that students in the 1960s were not?

Possibly, the loss of hope.

The demonstrators of the 60s were, like all rebellious young people since at least the time of the American and French Revolutions, a hopeful lot. They believed, however naively, in their power to make a better world than the one they were born into. They may have been the last generation in human history to do so. They were certainly the last in a chain going back two centuries or more, since what young person today honestly thinks life might get better in his lifetime? At most, it might be kept from not getting too much worse: too much hotter, too much more spun out of control by blind, unstoppable forces, too much more stripped of its human face by technology and artificial intelligence. The young generation’s task as the world passes into its hands will be to fight a holding action to stave off disaster, not to try creating something freer, more loving, and more joyous. If it doesn’t already know this, it surely feels it in its bones.

I would be full of anger, too, if such a world were passed on to me. Projecting such anger on a traditionally American-backed Israel that has almost nothing to do with the overall state of things is a tempting way to vent it. The more intelligent of today’s demonstrators will one day look back with embarrassment at the slogans they shouted. They will understand that they were shouting about something else.

Source: Why Are the Anti-Israel Chants So Tedious? » Mosaic

Filed under Antisemitism, Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

I always thought immigrant Germans would vote against the far right. I was wrong

2024/05/03 Leave a comment

A bit naive as all immigrant groups have a range of views. That being said, AfD, like other overtly anti-immigrant and/or xenophobic politicians, are a concern:

….It pains me, but I understand where this drawbridge mentality comes from. Immigrants who have “made it” often seek to melt into the middle class by moving away from ethnic neighbourhoods, putting a distance between themselves and those who aren’t affluent or don’t speak the language. In the hierarchy of society they look up, not down. Rivalries might also play a role: I have met Russians who distrust Turks, Vietnamese who don’t like Chinese, Iranians who feel superior to Egyptians.

On X, I come across a post by one of Lambrou’s colleagues, Anna Nguyen, a second-generation Vietnamese like me, and a new member of the AfD’s parliamentary group in Hesse. Another Vietnamese-German wrote to her: “As a Vietnamese with the same last name, I feel ashamed for you. You’re blind! You’re hoping for a steep career in an inhuman party. But according to them, you and I will never be German. Wake up!” To which Nguyen replied: “I’m terribly sorry, but I didn’t realise that I wasn’t allowed to have a different political opinion.”

According to the migration researcher Naika Foroutan, social media has become a powerful tool for the AfD to target immigrant voters. She noticed that on TikTok, AfD members have begun posting videos aimed at the conservative German-Turkish community – and some influencers have picked up their message, ranting about there being “too many refugees”.

Just as not all women are feminists, not all people with immigrant heritage are fans of an open-door policy. Think of Suella Braverman, former British home secretary, Vivek Ramaswamy, a former candidate for the Republican nomination in the US and Jordan Bardella, president of the National Rally in France. Do they, subconsciously, think that by slamming others into the category of “bad immigrants” they will be seen as “the good ones”? Are they trying to be overzealous nationalists because they want to demonstrate how British, American or French they really are?

….Rightwing parties have always exploited the narrative of “good” versus “bad” immigrants. Now the AfD seems to have discovered a new group of voters among immigrant Germans, some of whom seem all too willing to embrace its message and support the party. This doesn’t mean the AfD is any more tolerant, but it has become smarter, and therefore even more threatening.

  • Khuê Phạm is a German journalist and writer. Her debut novel, Brothers and Ghosts, which is inspired by her Vietnamese family, has just been released

Source: I always thought immigrant Germans would vote against the far right. I was wrong

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , ,

Un service de Québec dédié aux nouveaux arrivants rate la cible

2024/05/03 Leave a comment

Of note. Those in the rest of Canada shouldn’t feel to smug as they also have gaps in settlement services:

Le service Accompagnement Québec, visant à guider les nouveaux arrivants dans leurs démarches d’installation et d’intégration, rate sa cible. Alors que certains organismes d’aide aux immigrants s’interrogent sur son utilité, les plus récentes données démontrent que le service est très peu utilisé, voire carrément méconnu.

En 2023-2024, à peine plus de 12 000 personnes ont bénéficié d’une évaluation de leurs besoins par Accompagnement Québec, révèlent les plus récentes données du ministère de l’Immigration, de la Francisation et de l’Intégration (MIFI). L’année précédente, en 2022-2023, près de 10 000 personnes immigrantes avaient eu une rencontre avec un agent du service.

Pour Stephan Reichhold, directeur de la Table de concertation des organismes au service des réfugiés et immigrants, atteindre quelques milliers de personnes sur un total de centaines de milliers d’immigrants qui arrivent ici, « c’est rien ! »

Selon lui, la centaine d’organismes d’aide aux immigrants qu’il représente et qui sont aussi financés par le MIFI pour soutenir et accompagner les immigrants en a accueilli bien plus : soit près de 100 000 personnes au cours des 12 derniers mois. « Tout le monde est d’accord pour dire qu’[Accompagnement Québec], ça ne fonctionne pas », a-t-il déclaré. « C’est une marque de commerce du gouvernement, mais [en fait], ça ne peut pas continuer. »

Parachevé en mai 2023, un sondage réalisé par le MIFI obtenu par Le Devoir révèle que 70 % des répondants affirmaient ne pas connaître Accompagnement Québec. De plus, environ la moitié des personnes interrogées indiquaient ne pas connaître les étapes à suivre pour immigrer, pour chercher un emploi ou pour faire reconnaître leurs compétences.

Qu’il soit ici ou dans son pays d’origine, un immigrant qui reçoit un certificat pour résider au Québec de manière permanente ou temporaire devrait être invité par courriel à s’inscrire à Accompagnement Québec par l’entremise de la plateforme Arrima. Il sera par la suite contacté par un agent d’aide à l’intégration qui lui concoctera un plan individualisé en fonction de ses besoins (francisation, emploi, etc.) et le dirigera vers un organisme sur le terrain.

Un service qui fait doublon

À l’été 2019, le ministre de l’Immigration d’alors, Simon Jolin-Barrette, avait bonifié le service Accompagnement Québec en ouvrant plus de bureaux régionaux et en augmentant l’effectif en région. Il réagissait ainsi aux critiques dans le rapport de la vérificatrice générale, qui reprochait au gouvernement de ne pas connaître les besoins réels des immigrants et d’échouer à les orienter vers les bons services.

Depuis la réforme, Accompagnement Québec a plus spécifiquement comme mission d’inciter les immigrants à s’installer en région et d’aider les employeurs à recruter ces derniers. Mais, sur le terrain, certains organismes se questionnent sur le rôle que joue le service.

À l’organisme Groupe Inclusia, au Saguenay, très peu d’immigrants — environ 5 % — ont été envoyés par Accompagnement Québec. « La grande majorité des gens qui viennent à nous, c’est grâce au bouche à oreille ou à des employeurs qui recrutent à l’international », explique la coordonnatrice, Sylvie Pedneault. Même si plusieurs rencontres ont lieu par année avec les fonctionnaires de Québec et les organismes de la région afin d’arrimer leur travail, elle constate qu’il y a quand même « des doublons ». « Nous, les organismes d’accueil, on a toujours fait des plans d’intégration pour diriger la personne immigrante vers les ressources appropriées. Mais c’est le rôle qu’Accompagnement Québec a pris », dit-elle. « Concrètement, ce que ce service fait de plus, je ne le sais pas. »

Le fait que les immigrants doivent eux-mêmes s’inscrire aux services d’Accompagnement Québec dans Arrima ajoute une certaine « lourdeur » pour eux, croit Mme Pedneault. « C’est comme une étape qui se rajoute dans leur parcours, alors qu’ils ont déjà un paquet d’autres choses à faire. Ce n’est pas optimal. » Cette lourdeur s’étend aussi aux organismes vers qui les immigrants sont de toute manière redirigés et qui ont la charge de les accompagner dans les méandres d’Arrima.

Pour plus d’efficacité, Sylvie Pedneault suggère qu’Accompagnement Québec s’occupe des personnes qui ne tombent pas dans les critères de financement de son organisme, comme les demandeurs d’asile, par exemple.

Des dirigeants d’un centre de francisation en région se sont également montrés très critiques à l’endroit de ce service gouvernemental. « C’est quoi, leur mission ? On ne le sait pas », a indiqué au Devoir l’un de ces dirigeants, qui demeure anonyme pour ne pas nuire à ses relations avec le MIFI. Il dit avoir contacté à maintes reprises les agents pour mieux connaître leurs services et savoir comment conseiller des immigrants qui ont des besoins excédant la francisation… en vain. « On dirait que personne ne travaille là. On ne sait pas ce qu’ils font. C’est très flou », avance cette personne. « Les organismes d’aide aux immigrants, on voit leurs actions sur le terrain, mais Accompagnement Québec… on ne sait pas trop. »

Peu d’accueils à l’aéroport

À l’aéroport de Montréal, le service d’accueil pour immigrants, notamment censé les diriger vers Accompagnement Québec, est un échec. Selon le rapport annuel de gestion de 2022-2023, à peine 9 % des immigrants adultes ayant transité par ce comptoir d’accueil se sont véritablement inscrits à Accompagnement Québec, ce qui rate complètement la cible de 75 % qui avait été fixée.

Selon le MIFI, la non-atteinte de l’objectif s’explique par le fait que les immigrants sont, depuis le printemps 2021, invités à s’inscrire en ligne directement sur la plateforme Arrima. Depuis 2020, le nombre de personnes accueillies par le service à l’aéroport est en chute libre, selon des données obtenues par la Loi sur l’accès à l’information. Les travailleurs étrangers temporaires, qui sont à peine quelques dizaines à être passés par ce comptoir, ne sont pas reçus « systématiquement » par le service d’accueil de l’aéroport. « Une réflexion plus large est en cours », lit-on dans le rapport.

Source: Un service de Québec dédié aux nouveaux arrivants rate la cible

Filed under Immigration, Integration Tagged with , ,

Nicolas | Paix sociale à la montréalaise

2024/05/03 Leave a comment

Interesting differences based on geography but the camp-in at McGill may change that:

Alors que tous les yeux sont rivés sur le campement propalestinien à McGill, j’ai envie de vous parler non pas de ce qui se passe, mais de ce qui ne se passe pas à Montréal.

Certes, l’attaque du 7 octobre contre Israël et les bombes qui n’en finissent plus de tomber sur Gaza ont élevé le niveau de tensions intercommunautaires un peu partout dans la ville. Il suffit toutefois de se comparer pour prendre la mesure de la résilience particulière du tissu social montréalais — jusqu’à présent. Il y a plusieurs pistes d’explication à ce phénomène.

D’abord, ça peut sembler étrange à dire, mais la géographie de la ville nous aide. À Toronto, plusieurs des institutions phares de la communauté juive sont en plein centre-ville, sur les grandes artères qui balisent le parcours normal des manifestations. La situation donne lieu à des moments surréels que l’on s’est épargnés ici.

Par exemple, lors d’une grande manifestation, le 12 février dernier, le Spider-Man de Toronto — un peu l’équivalent de l’Anarchopanda du printemps étudiant de Montréal — était parmi la foule à escalader les édifices le long du parcours. Une fois rendu sur la University Avenue, le personnage anonyme a grimpé sur la façade de l’hôpital Mount Sinai avant de continuer son chemin.

Des Canadiens d’origine palestinienne qui ont de la famille à Gaza ont pris la parole lors de cette manifestation, alors que l’armée israélienne annonçait vouloir se lancer dans une offensive sur Rafah. Leur message n’a pas passé. Le lendemain, toute la classe politique canadienne était en train de dénoncer… la présence de Spider-Man et de son drapeau palestinien sur un hôpital fondé par la communauté juive. Même le premier ministre Justin Trudeau a déploré sur X « cette démonstration d’antisémitisme ».

Ce n’était pas la première affaire du genre. Parce que les manifestations se retrouvent parfois en face de leurs institutions, plusieurs membres de la communauté juive de Toronto sentent qu’on manifeste contre eux, personnellement, et non contre le gouvernement d’Israël. Les organisateurs se défendent, bien sûr, d’avoir de telles intentions. Après près de sept mois de telles tensions, le dialogue social, là-bas, est devenu presque impossible.

Par « chance », à Montréal, l’Hôpital général juif n’est pas sur la rue Sherbrooke, et la plupart des écoles, des synagogues et des centres communautaires juifs de Montréal sont situés plus loin du coeur de l’action. On ne se pile pas sur les pieds de la même manière.

On a fait aussi des choix tactiques différents de ceux d’ici. Là-bas, on a manifesté à quelques reprises contre des commerces qui ont des activités dans les territoires palestiniens occupés ou qui soutiennent financièrement l’armée israélienne — et qui sont par ailleurs dirigés par des personnes juives. Alors que, d’un côté, on voit dans ces gestes une dénonciation politique de ce qui est perpétré par Israël, de l’autre, on ne voit là qu’une forme de pogrom. Là aussi, tout le monde est à cran. Plus qu’ici.

À Montréal, le plus important édifice à avoir été ciblé de la sorte est celui de Radio-Canada, qui a fait l’objet de graffitis dénonçant une « complicité avec le génocide » en novembre dernier. Le débat sur l’antisémitisme ne fait pas écran au message des manifestants de la même manière.

Je ne veux pas non plus peindre un portrait trop rose de notre situation. On se souviendra, par exemple, du discours tout à fait inacceptable prononcé par Adil Charkaoui durant la manifestation du 28 octobre dernier. Seulement, à ce point-ci, toute personne qui comprend un peu les mouvements sociaux montréalais sait que l’homme est une espèce de patate chaude opportuniste qui émerge chaque fois qu’il y a de l’action pour faire déraper le dialogue public. Personne de sérieux ne le considère comme une voix rassembleuse.

Par ailleurs, les coups de feu contre deux écoles juives de Côte-des-Neiges ont choqué la ville en novembre dernier. L’affaire a éveillé les craintes des parents, et à juste titre. Notons que des mois plus tard, aucune information ne permet d’établir l’identité ou les motifs des responsables de ces crimes haineux.

Depuis l’automne dernier, on n’a pratiquement pas entendu parler, dans les médias, de la mairesse de Côte-des-Neiges–Notre-Dame-de-Grâce, Gracia Kasoki Katahwa. Si la réponse de son équipe aux attaques commises dans son arrondissement avait été complètement dépourvue de sensibilité, son nom serait partout. Le travail consistant à rassurer les communautés et à faire baisser la tension dans nos quartiers se fait loin des projecteurs. C’est par ce qui ne fait pas la nouvelle, parfois, qu’on peut comprendre que, même si la situation est loin d’être facile, les choses pourraient aller beaucoup, beaucoup plus mal.

Finalement, durant ces presque sept mois d’une guerre qui met bien des gens d’ici sur les nerfs, le Service de police de la Ville de Montréal (SPVM) n’a presque pas fait les manchettes. Non pas parce que la police est inactive. Mais parce que des choix ont été faits, jusqu’à présent, sur la manière d’intervenir dans les manifestations et de répondre aux plaintes pour discours haineux antisémite, antipalestinien ou islamophobe. Quand on ne parle pratiquement pas du SPVM, bien qu’on marche à Montréal semaine après semaine, c’est que, là aussi, ça pourrait aller beaucoup plus mal que ça ne va jusqu’à présent.

Cette relative paix sociale montréalaise qui subsiste malgré tout dans le contexte — j’insiste sur le mot « relative » —, elle est précieuse. Et très fragile. Les décisions du SPVM, de nos tribunaux et de l’administration de l’Université McGill cette semaine pourraient nous rapprocher du niveau de tension qui mine la plupart des grandes villes nord-américaines.

Aujourd’hui, Montréal peut décider d’asseoir fièrement sa différence, ou de l’effacer. La métropole peut se rapprocher de Toronto ou de New York, ou faire les choses à sa manière. Dans les jours, voire les heures qui suivent, son leadership choisira.

Source: Chronique | Paix sociale à la montréalaise

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , ,

Jonathan Kay: Just ignore Sarah Jama’s keffiyeh. Next she’ll be wearing a turban, Kaveh Shahrooz: The Queen’s Park keffiyeh kerfuffle proves the wisdom of keeping political symbols out of the legislature

2024/05/03 Leave a comment

Two contrasting views on the right, starting with Kay:

…If legislators at work are to be governed by a rule that forbids political symbols, then that category should be defined narrowly — which means permitting any symbol, such as a keffiyeh, whose use doesn’t necessarily convey a political meaning. In a liberal society, it is much more important to guard against false positives than false negatives when defining classes of banned expression. And Jama’s antics shouldn’t be seized upon as an excuse to err in an illiberal direction.

One reason I’m wary of any kind of keffiyeh ban is that we’re just coming out of a period of progressive social panic in Canada, during which even the mildest articulation of conservative viewpoints, or display of traditional Canadian symbols, was denounced as a “dog whistle” for white supremacy or some such. (To take one particularly ludicrous example: Recall that in 2022, an “anti-racist” group got a six-figure grant from Justin Trudeau’s government so it could author a report denouncing the Red Ensign flag — Canada’s national symbol until about 60 years ago — as a coded endorsement of white supremacism.) We’re all sick of this type of phobic mindset being displayed on the left, and I’m wary of conservatives copying the worst habits of their enemies now that the cultural tide is starting to turn.

One of those bad habits is catastrophizing. When I first mentioned on social media that I thought Jama should get her way on the keffiyeh issue, I got a chorus of pushback to the effect that she was channelling antisemitism — because what else except Jew-hatred would motivate anyone to take up the keffiyeh in the shadow of 10/7? To allow her to continue dressing in this way, the claim goes, is to make Jews across Ontario feel unsafe.

But I doubt that Jama is any kind of true bigot (even if the stridency of her anti-Israeli statements raises the possibility). What seems more likely is that she’s one of those serial activists whose focus will flit from cause to cause over the years, based on what’s in the news and what brings out the cameras. Once Gaza cools down and other conflicts take centre stage, who knows? We may see Sarah Jama in a turban, or a Ukrainian vyshyvanka, or perhaps even some kind of fez.

Whatever adornments Jama chooses, the best course is to simply ignore them, and leave it to Hamilton Centre voters to assess her wardrobe choices in the next election.

Source: Jonathan Kay: Just ignore Sarah Jama’s keffiyeh. Next she’ll be wearing a turban

Contrary view by Kaveh Shahrooz:

…The legislature holds a unique place in our polity and should aspire to more. While it should serve as the forum for political disagreement and debate, it should not itself be seen as partisan. And it should elevate our public discourse, instead of becoming yet another force that reduces nuanced topics to signs, pins, stickers, and placards. 

Opposing the keffiyeh for its alleged bad meaning naturally draws out the battle over that meaning, and invites another battle over the freedom of expression. It also invites future fights about the meaning of every other symbol that MPPs will hereinafter try to bring into the legislature. Is the Ukraine pin a good or bad symbol? The Black Lives Matter badge? What about the MAGA hat? Open this door just a little and we will be mired in a thousand battles about a thousand causes, logos, and signs.

The solution, then, is not to engage in a futile line-drawing exercise which will leave many stakeholders unhappy much of the time. Instead, it is to maintain the existing nearly blanket ban on political symbols. (I say “nearly blanket” because symbols like the Remembrance Day poppy are now permitted at Queen’s Park. But even that required a special exemption.) The ban avoids the problem altogether, allowing our core deliberative body to remain a place for reason above passion. 

We will likely never agree on the precise meaning of the keffiyeh (though we should at least strive to be honest in its interpretation; something the “it’s just a cultural symbol” crowd is not doing.) 

But we should agree that some corners of our society should be reserved for deliberation and debate instead of cheap appeals to emotion and tribalism. What better place for that than Queen’s Park?

Source: Kaveh Shahrooz: The Queen’s Park keffiyeh kerfuffle proves the wisdom of keeping political symbols out of the legislature

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , , , , , ,

Jen Gerson: The Conservative case for the CBC

2024/05/02 Leave a comment

Comments on immigrant communities and their media consumption from country of origin sources as a reason to revitalize the CBC. Her reform suggestions have merit:

It was at the recent Canada Strong and Free Network conference — formerly known by the much less awkward title the “Manning Centre” conference — in which I overheard one of those conversations that is so often considered taboo in tête-à-têtes that are more Liberal or NDP-adjacent. It was a discussion on immigration, and specifically, on the obstacles to cultural integration that rapid immigration can sometimes entail. 

The speaker noted with some dismay the number of satellite TV dishes affixed to the balconies of apartments in urban areas that tend to become the first homes of new arrivals to the country. With the advent of affordable global satellite television, those who had relocated to Canada could keep abreast of news at home, in the languages they were most comfortable with. This influx included not only the plethora of private television networks, but also their public counterparts: RT, IRA, CCTV — virtually every country in the world invests in some content offering, and makes that offering widely available both domestically and abroad. 

In liberal democracies, public broadcasting tends to value at least a degree of journalistic independence. In authoritarian nations, well, not so much. But they broadcast just the same. 

Of course there’s nothing inherently wrong with seeking news and entertainment from one’s homeland. Nothing could be more natural than the desire to seek out the familiar, especially while adapting to a new culture and a new home. My fellow conversationalist was not unsympathetic to that desire, yet those satellite dishes concerned him, nonetheless. Canada is welcoming a nearly unprecedented number of new immigrants at the same moment in which its sense of itself as a nation has, arguably, never been weaker. Or, as Justin Trudeau himself once put it “There is no core identity, no mainstream in Canada.” 

If that’s so, how do we expect this influx of new Canadians to cohere to the vacant identity of their adopted homeland? Is the move to Canada a thing that exists in the body only; the spirit to remain entrenched in the values, language, news and entertainment of the citizen’s soul? His homeland? How does a nation as widely dispersed and malleable as ours, one that welcomes people from around the world, create some kind of pan-Canadian values and identity? How the hell do we actually work together?  

I don’t have an easy answer to that question, but I did note at the time that this individual had unwittingly articulated the best Conservative case for the CBC. 

And he had done it in a place where promises to “defund the CBC” generated unabashed whoops of glee. 

“Perhaps don’t defund the CBC” is a contrarian position in my circles, of late. Conservatives hate this institution — and I don’t use the word “hate” lightly. It may be too late to make an appeal for reform, caution or reason. Blood is high. 

They are angry that the CBC sued the Conservative party — and only the Conservative party — for a fair use of news material in political advertising. They are angry at an organization that seems to be ideologically driven to, and hell bent on, closing the Overton window on a range of policy positions and values that many of them care about. They resent being forced to pay for a public broadcaster that they feel has alienated them. 

While I think some of these positions are clouded by the poor judgment that inevitably accompanies anger, many of these grievances are valid. And, privately, I know at least some employees in the CBC will admit to it. The CBC is not what it ought to have been in recent years, and calls for it to be defunded are a predictable and inevitable consequence of adopting a set of cultural values that are openly at odds with a plurality of the taxpayers that fund it. 

The organization still does necessary work, and employs many hundreds of diligent and grounded journalists. However, at least some sections of the organization do come off as high handed and patronizing, as if the outlet sees its role as imposing a set of Canadian Values onto a benighted populace eager for the Call On High of the Annex, rather than as an institution whose fundamental role is to serve those very masses. 

Take the carbon tax, MAID, government spending, contentious protests, gender identity, sex work, safe supply, diversity and inclusion, homelessness, and crime — these are some of the most pressing and contentious issues facing Canadians today. These are complicated issues, often morally fraught, and offer rich opportunities for real debate, reporting, and investigation. I don’t think that’s what we’re getting from the CBC right now. That is a problem, and an abrogation of the CBC’s duty to inform and serve a geographically and ideologically diverse public. Hence the anger. 

However, I cannot pin this failure solely on the CBC. 

If our public broadcaster is not producing the kind of journalism that we want, need and expect, then the negligence lies also within ourselves. We taxpayers, political leaders, and citizens have failed to communicate to the CBC what we expect. And weak management, poorly guided by a vague mandate, has been unable to establish a clear vision of what the outlet needs to prioritize — and, more crucially, what it must deprioritize. 

What I see when I look at the CBC is a Byzantine hall, ruled by competing fiefdoms, and dug five stories deep into the forbidding earth. What I see is mandate creep.

Is there anyone in senior management who can seriously blank-face defend CBC Gem? Or CBC Comedy? Why is the CBC replicating widely available language learning apps with their own version, Mauril? Or how about its vertical devoted to first-person opinion pieces? In an era of Substack and Medium and X, is there market failure that a public broadcaster really needs to address, here? A real lack of opportunity to write articles like: After coming out as trans, my return to sex work has been unexpectedly rewarding.

I could go on, but you get the point. Is there anyone, anywhere, within the CBC hierarchy who can say: “No”? 

All of these efforts reek of a senior management that so lacks a sense of self direction that it instead tries to be everything to everybody, and then blames its lack of adequate funding when it fails to do anything particularly well. And that’s before we get into the management bonuses, and last minute budget top ups. This isn’t sustainable. And it’s why I don’t find arguments for increasing funding right now compelling — absent a clear mandate and strong internal management, the government could double or even triple the CBC’s funding and not create anything better; all we’d get is an even more sprawling bureaucracy trying to churn out more #content in categories that are already amply if not ably served by the private sector. 

So, yeah, I understand the emotion, here. I understand how gratifying it is for Conservatives who squeal with delight when Pierre Poilievre screams “defund the CBC.” Whatever that means. 

All I’d ask is for such people to consider that this is, indeed, an emotional response generated by feelings of grievance and alienation. It’s not a rational policy position. Shut down the CBC tomorrow, and Canada is not suddenly going to host 1,000 ideologically grounded private media organizations. That’s a fantasy, totally detached from a solid understanding of the modern media market. The only problem defunding the CBC solves is the continued public funding of the CBC. 

Local news — real reporting that involves sending actual people to write about quotidian court cases and city hall meetings week after week — is a very hard business case in an environment that generates revenue by virality and clicks. There are going to be some successes in this sphere, but not enough to replicate a tenth of even the current skeletal coverage. 

Privatizing the CBC will do nothing other than to create another failing private media outlet. And defunding or shuttering it outright is only going to eliminate what’s left of an already battered local news system at the very moment that the private media sector is heading into its senescence. This is going to contribute to already expansive news deserts, with citizens turning to things like Facebook groups and closed group chats in order to share local knowledge. 

Some of these quasi-outlets will be fine, and even useful. Ordinary journalism doesn’t require special training or a credential. 

But it does mean that more Canadians over time are going to grow increasingly reliant on sources of information that may or may not have any attachment to how the world around them actually functions. Not only is this going to have an impact on our concepts of a shared national identity, but in some cases, even consensus reality. 

We don’t have to peer too deep into the darkness of our hearts to get a sense of where this is going. Travel just a little ways outside a major city and you’ll quickly run into news deserts where a significant subsection of the population already believes that the Canadian government is controlled by Klaus Schwab for the benefit of Satanic, adrenochrome-swilling pedophiles. 

To put it more bluntly: Conservatives, it’s one thing to burn CBC’s downtown Toronto HQ. By all means, paint your bodies in the ashes and scream at the moon until she hears your victory. Revel in it. But then you’re actually going to have to govern people. How long do you think the current crop of “hang the elites” stand by you when you’re the elite

The CBC in its current state is not sustainable. It needs a radical overhaul that includes an extensive mandate review that sets clear expectations for content, tone, and objective outcomes. Personally, I’d cleave everything related to entertainment and leave that to die. The CBC ought to be an exclusively journalistic organization, with a particular focus on local news, beat reporting, and investigations. I’d take the CBC’s mandate out of the Broadcasting Act and create a standalone statute that enshrines objective journalistic standards and practices in law so internal committees can’t dick around with journalistic fads. (I have no objection to “activist” journalism, or concepts like “moral clarity” in private business, or even grant-supported niche outlets; but a national public broadcaster ought to adopt broadly unobjectionable and historically grounded journalistic standards when serving an audience that cannot escape footing the bill.)

I’d demand the CBC create a functional, independent newsroom in every city over 100,000 people in this country. I’d assign specific beats like health, upper courts, legislatures and the like, and I’d write those expectations straight into the mandate. 

Most importantly, I’d have both the CBC and its critics understand that it is one of the most important repositories of institutional knowledge in this country — it is not only a reservoir of Canada’s culture and history, but also an irreplaceable living resource for the craft and practice of journalism itself. I wish the CBC considered itself not as a competitor to private journalistic enterprise, but more like a public service, akin to a library. An institution whose role is to help foster regional journalistic talent — perhaps through workshops, internships, or even equipment or facility rentals. 

If a local journalism student wants to start a podcast in, say, Medicine Hat, the local CBC outlet ought to be a resource to help her make that project a success. The local CBC outlet ought to be her champion. 

In this lurid dream vision, I would make all the CBC’s written and audio-visual materials freely available to any Canadian media outlet. Further, the CBC should be allergic to private advertising. 

I would also put some serious thought into the CBC’s role as a guardian of this country’s digital and physical news archives. If much private media is about to collapse, we risk losing an extraordinary amount of our shared cultural heritage, unless some entity is willing to take on the care, organization, and access of historic documents and material. 

All the above is a napkin sketch for a sustainable CBC mandate. One that fosters an innovative private media sector while ensuring that Canadians will be reasonably well served by a grounded and objective information environment. If Canadians want to wander into QAnon conspiracy land, that’s not for me, or for any government, to restrict. However, in the face of market failure — and objective news reporting is one such imminent failure — there is room for the public sector to act. We should ensure that Canadians have real choices. 

Funnily, when I spelled out that vision of a CBC, most of the Conservatives I spoke to at the conference in Ottawa could get behind it, or some version of it. And that didn’t surprise me. Most Conservatives in this country are not libertarians or even, frankly, true populists. Most, I think, grant that there is some role for a federal government to play in the promotion of a Canadian culture and identity, particularly where the preservation of history and institutions are concerned. I am aligned to the role of a free market in media, as in anything else (like and subscribe!), but I would remind everybody that the media industry doesn’t exist in a pure free market in the Platonic world of ideal forms, and never has. There are bad ways to intervene in it (ahem, the Online News Act) and there are good ways — ways grounded in historic success, both here and in other countries. Public broadcasting is tried and true, which is why almost every country has some version of it in accordance with its national values, needs, and insecurities. 

Ironically, the cultural conditions that prompted the creation of the CBC in 1936 are more prevalent now than at any time previous in living memory. There is more need now for a shared sense of Canadian identity. We need a revitalized social understanding about how to mediate access to information and power in a democracy. I would remind Conservatives of this, and I would ask: if you destroy the CBC, would you have to replace it with something else? I would ask you to put a pin in the anger, and consider how Canada and her people will be best served after the impending collapse of traditional media infrastructure. Lastly, I would remind you of all those satellites on all those apartment blocks and ask: if the CBC, or something like it, isn’t going to fill the gap, who will? 

Source: Jen Gerson: The Conservative case for the CBC

Filed under Immigration, Multiculturalism Tagged with ,

Ottawa to propose new asylum rules to allow for faster deportations

2024/05/02 Leave a comment

Of note. This has been a longstanding issue for many governments, the excessive multiple processes that clog the system. Predictable and not entirely illegitimate fears by immigration lawyers but current system is neither sustainable nor fair:

The Liberal government is proposing to make changes to Canada’s asylum claim system which could speed up the deportation process for rejected applicants from the country.

The proposed amendments were quietly announced two weeks ago in the 2024 federal budget and come as Canada deals with a record number of asylum seekers.

“Budget 2024 also proposes to introduce changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to simplify and streamline the claims process in support of faster decisions and quicker removals,” it reads.

Immigration Minister Marc Miller’s office would not provide additional information to Global News, with his press secretary Bahoz Dara Aziz citing “parliamentary privilege.”

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) did not provide clarity either, instead issuing a statement that closely resembled what was in the budget.

IRCC says the new measures will “improve the efficiency of the asylum system without compromising fairness or compassion for those in need of protection

“Whenever lawyers hear the government say the word ‘streamline’ or make things more efficient, we always know that people’s rights are about to get sacrificed on the altar of administrative efficiency,” said immigration and refugee lawyer Chantal Desloges in an interview with Global News.

“The government is being very tight lipped about what they’re planning to actually change, which also makes me a little bit nervous,” Desloges added.

Since March of this year, 46,736 people have applied for asylum in Canada, according to the IRB. That is a 62 per cent increase from the same period in 2023, while the backlog stands at 186,000, according to the agency.

An increase in temporary immigration has also been linked in part to Canada’s housing crisis. Earlier this month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau warned the situation needs to be brought “under control,” saying temporary immigration has “grown at a rate far beyond what Canada has been able to absorb.”

As the numbers of applicants surge, so have wait times for asylum seekers.

It can take years for cases to be heard by the IRB.

How hard is it to remove people?

The Canada Border Services Agency has struggled to remove applicants whose claims have been rejected or withdrawn.

As of this February, the CBSA issued more than 28,000 “active warrants” to “failed refugee claimants.”

“We as a country need to invest in the refugee determination process so that they get a fair opportunity to have their case [and] their fear understood and a decision made,” said immigration and refugee lawyer Warren Creates.

“The ones who fail, whose cases are rejected, should be removed. I think justice requires that.”

Ottawa has pledged $743.5 million over five years to the CBSA, IRCC and the IRB to try to deal with the backlog of 186,000 asylum claims. More than 141,000 were filed last year alone.

“The IRB is resourced to handle 50,000 intaking claims a year,” Creates said. “They’re not resourced for the 140,000 that came last year. … To tread water, they need to triple their budgets and their adjudication.”

The proposed changes to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are part of a series of new measures announced by Ottawa.

The immigration minister has reinstated the visa requirement for Mexican nationals, introduced a cap on international students, and more recently reduced the amount they can work to 24 hours per week.

Up to now, Miller has ruled out changing the asylum criteria which could make it more difficult for claimants to remain in Canada.

Source: Ottawa to propose new asylum rules to allow for faster deportations

Filed under Immigration Tagged with , , ,

Conestoga is a foreign student mecca. Is its climb to riches leading it off a cliff?

2024/05/01 Leave a comment

The poster child for the abuse of the international student program reflecting complicity of the federal government, Ontario government, and educational institutions. Good in-depth reporting:

The smell of South Asian spices wafts from the “Blends and Curries” food counter.

Conversations in Hindi and Gujurati flood the bustling hallways, which quickly get packed as students pour in and out of classes.

Cliques of Indian youth, who appear to make up a majority of the student population, take full advantage of common areas to study, lounge around or wait for class to begin.

Everywhere you look at the main campus of Conestoga College, there’s ample proof of an explosion of international students.

The school has become a poster child for aggressive international student recruitment.

Its efforts have brought in a flood of new money — a stark contrast to the financial pressures students themselves face — but also raised questions within the institution about the sustainability of that growth, and the motivations behind it.

And as the federal government seeks to stem international student flows with a two-year cap on study permits, even the immigration minister has singled the college out.

The southwestern Ontario college had 37,000 study permits approved and extended in 2023 — the most in Canada — which marks a 31-per-cent increase from the previous year.Click here to post your thoughts

Its student population has more than doubled in four years to about 45,000, and international students now vastly outnumber domestic ones. The main campus in Kitchener, Ont., alone is now home to more than 20,000 students.

Faculty and students seem to agree things have gone too far.

“No organization can grow at that pace, and do it right, that quickly,” said Leopold Koff, a union leader representing faculty, counsellors and librarians at Conestoga.

Faculty members have turned into nomads with no fixed desks, a change the union says was prompted by the college’s desire to build more classrooms to accommodate a larger student population. The college says the change reflects a post-pandemic hybrid working model.

At the student union office, more than a hundred students come in and out within an hour to grab a free snack — one of many programs Conestoga Students Inc. offers to help a growing number of food-insecure students.

Instructors are complaining that many students lack fundamental skills, which in turn makes their jobs more difficult, said Koff.

“They don’t have the basic three Rs: reading, writing, arithmetic,” he said.

Making matters worse, Koff said students have been too busy working to focus on their studies. He singled out Ottawa’s decision during the pandemic to temporarily allow international students to work more than 20 hours a week.

“That is opening up a huge catastrophe for the students,” he said. “They will take advantage of that. … They need the money.”

Vikki Poirier, another union leader who represents support staff, conceded the college has hired more people to keep up with the school’s growth.

But she said new hires need time to get up to speed, and in the meantime, staff are facing massive workloads as they process more students.

Both union leaders said they have raised concerns with the school’s administration — but they don’t feel heard.

“Our perception of administration of the college these days … is that it’s a river of money. And if you get in the way of that river of money, you’re going to be plowed over,” Koff said.

Conestoga’s finances have been generously padded by international student tuition fees, which can sometimes be three times more than those for Canadian students.

Financial statements show the public college had a $106-million surplus for the 2022-23 year. That’s up from just $2.5 million in 2014-2015.

Conestoga declined a request to interview its administration.

In a statement, the college defended its recruitment levels.

“Colleges and universities across the country have been welcoming international students as part of their financial viability strategy given the flatlining of public funding in recent years,” the statement said.

“Students who come to Conestoga from other countries have enabled us to reinvest our surplus in new buildings and in-demand programs, both of which drive economic growth. Domestic and international students now enjoy best-in-class facilities funded by the surplus.”

Conestoga also touted the contribution its students make to the regional economy and the role they play in filling labour shortages. It also defended its admissions standards, noting its requirements are “similar to, or higher, than other colleges.”

The individual stories of international students at Conestoga suggest many of them are experiencing hardship, at the same time as the college amasses a fortune.

While some students are lucky enough that their parents can afford to pay for their tuition and living expenses, others must take out loans and rely on employment to pay their bills.

Bijith Powathu and Fredin Benny both took out educational loans in India to pay for their first-year tuition.

Now, they’re working full-time jobs at a factory and warehouse, respectively, to pay for their second-year fees.

The young men said balancing work and school means sleep often goes to the wayside.

When Powathu is scheduled for a night shift at his factory job in Mount Forest, Ont., he drives 85 kilometres directly to class in the morning.

“Straight from work I have to come here to manage. Sometimes sleepless nights,” Powathu said.

Many Indian students describe how challenging it is to find work back home, where youth unemployment is sky-high. According to the Centre for Indian Economy, the unemployment rate for youth aged 20 to 24 in India was 44 per cent between October and December 2023.

But jobs are becoming harder to find for young people in Canada, too.

Nelson Chukwuma, president of Conestoga Students Inc. said that’s top of mind for students right now.

“Our students are having a hard time finding jobs,” he said.

Some Conestoga scholars attribute the scarcity to the increase of students in the region.

“A couple years ago, the condition was different. But now it is entirely changed. Mainly the job market,” Powathu said, describing the plight of his unemployed peers.

“So based on that, they just want to go back (home).”

Several students with anxious faces described handing out resumes on a consistent basis since arriving to Canada last September, with no success. They said there’s significant guilt in relying on their parents for support.

Chukwuma used to be an international student himself, and he has watched the campus change over time — and that change has been dramatic over the past five years amid unprecedented growth.

“We don’t think it’s sustainable,” he said.

Although his organization has financially benefited from the higher enrolments, Chukwuma said it is constantly playing catch-up when it comes to meeting students’ needs.

“I think the college needs to definitely re-evaluate their strategy because (of) the flack that we’ve gotten, not just from the professors (and) staff, but also just from the community,” Chukwuma said.

He noted that local governments didn’t have the housing and transit infrastructure to accommodate the influx.

Conestoga said it invested in eight new properties last year to address housing needs.

Many at the college also lay blame at the feet of long-term provincial underfunding coupled with few federal limits on the international student population.

For decades, a cost-of-living financial requirement tied to student permits sat at $10,000 — an amount that significantly underestimates the amount students spend on basic housing and food.

As part of a broader effort to rein in the number of temporary residents in Canada — a political liability for the Liberal government because of its impact on housing affordability — Immigration Minister Marc Miller has more than doubled the amount to $20,635.

Miller also announced that work permits for international students’ spouses would only be available for those in master’s or doctoral programs.

And in January, Miller announced that Canada would impose a two-year cap on study permits, reducing the number of new study visas by 35 per cent.

At Conestoga, this will mean a massive reduction. The Ontario government has allocated the public college just 15,000 permits out of its national share — less than half of what was approved the previous year.

While many international students have applauded the changes, the shifting goalposts are also causing anger.

One 29-year-old Nigerian student said the spousal work visa change means his wife and two daughters can’t join him in Canada as he expected.

“I’m so angry,” said the student, who did not want to be named because of concerns he could face repercussions.

“You brought me here and told me I can bring them. Now I’m here and you’re telling me I can’t bring them.”

Another federal rule change could have a significant impact on those who are working full time.

Miller announced on Monday that the temporary waiver to the limit on work hours would expire as scheduled on Tuesday. In the fall, the federal government plans to implement a new cap of 24 hours a week.

“To be clear, the purpose of the international student program is to study and not to work,” Miller said.

The immigration minister said the new cap reflects the fact that the overwhelming majority of international students work more than 20 hours a week. At the same time, it keeps students from prioritizing work over school, he said.

“We know from studies as well that when you start working in and around 30-hour levels, there is a material impact on the quality of your studies,” Miller said.

For international students such as Powathu and Benny, it’s going to mean working about 16 hours less every week — a significant financial impact.

Prior to the announcement, Powathu and Benny both said a return to 20 hours would be untenable.

Asked if they’d survive, both said: “No.”

Source: Conestoga is a foreign student mecca. Is its climb to riches leading it off a cliff?

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

Canada needs to do more to prepare for an aging, and more diverse population

2024/05/01 Leave a comment

Good analysis and prescription:

….Since 2018, Andrew Pinto and his team at Upstream Lab at the University of Toronto have been working on a tool called SPARK, a list of standardized questions designed for primary caregivers to collect information from patients, including race and ethnicity. Dr. Pinto hopes the questionnaire becomes standard in healthcare settings across the country.

It also includes socioeconomic questions – about income, education, disability status, housing, food security – recognizing that race and ethnicity are just part of the many factors that influence a person’s health outcomes.

“We all come from different cultures, with different ways of relating to health providers, and have different needs,” Dr. Pinto said.

“By asking these questions, we can get a better understanding of what people need.”

Source: Canada needs to do more to prepare for an aging, and more diverse population

Filed under Multiculturalism Tagged with , ,

Canada urgently needs an equitable immigration system

2024/05/01 Leave a comment

The activist view, with little awareness of the practicalities:

…It is time to embrace a new vision of immigration. Rather than viewing it as a strategy to meet short-term labour market or demographic needs, we must recognize its key role in building a more equitable world, grounded in shared well-being. The 2021 mandate letter on regularization offers a stepping stone to develop a progressive immigration system. 

Canada has implemented regularization and permanent residency fast-tracking programs a number of times in the past. However, these have been limited in scope with many conditions. The success of broad regularization programs in Italy, Spain, and Germany highlight that inclusive large-scale regularization—including at a scale of 500,000 people or more—is not just feasible, but offers long-term benefits to migrant families and the host countries. Canada needs to expand on this success.  

The Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration (GCM) led by the United Nations Network on Migration can serve as a guidepost for an inclusive human rights-based immigration framework. The GCM calls on member states to ensure the “protection and fulfillment of the human rights of all migrants, regardless of their migration status, across all stages of the migration cycle.” It also emphasizes the need to expand pathways for safe and regular migration, especially for vulnerable migrants. In 2020, Canada signed on to become a “champion” country to implement the GCM. 

We urge the Canadian government to honour the GCM commitment and its mandate on regularization. We call on the immigration minister to urgently enact comprehensive regularization so that no undocumented person is left behind. It is important that we prioritize and support undocumented people from marginalized backgrounds through the regularization process instead of excluding them with unfair requirements that they are barred from engaging in. At the same time, we need to build accessible pathways to permanent residency for temporary migrants; and irrespective of whether they apply for permanent residency or not, it is crucial that all temporary migrants are supported with equitable rights, protections, and services. 

This is what migrant justice organizations, settlement agencies, labour unions, and advocates across Canada have been calling for. This is the necessary path that Canada needs to take to become a global champion for legislating an equitable and just immigration system. 

Yogendra Shakya is a research and policy analyst focused on immigrant issues. Axelle Janczur is the executive director of Access Alliance Multicultural Health and Community Services. 

Source: Canada urgently needs an equitable immigration system

Filed under Immigration Tagged with ,

← Older posts