HESA: The Contemptible OSAP Cover-Up

Yet another example of mismanagement:

….The first part I know for sure – it’s how the federal government got drawn into this mess and also why it eventually cut all private institutions out of the grants systems in last year’s federal budget (something I wrote about back here before I had any of this context). The feds don’t have the power to cut out any single institution from the program (only provinces have that), and so the feds spent most of 2025 asking Ontario “what the hell is going on in those institutions”? And when they were fobbed off with various weak-ass answers (”it’s a post-COVID thing…online education is big now, we shouldn’t try to stifle innovation…”), the feds pulled the plug. So, important data point here: the feds knew there was something bad in a specific few institutions over a year ago and asked the province to do something. The province chose not to act.

The second part, re: the nature of the scam, I don’t know for sure. Details will presumably come out in county at some point: Allison Jones of the Canadian Press published some juicy preliminary tidbits about ten days ago. But just for now, assume that something was happening, something bad enough that Career Colleges Ontario (CCO), the association which represents private post-secondary institutions in Ontario, was moved to tell the government – “we have bad actors in our sector and you need to act”. We know this is the case because the government said so in its press release last week. But again, check the date. CCO did this in January 2025. So why did it take so long for the province to move?
(I assume there are journalists out there looking at political contributions made by the owners of these institutions. This work will be helpful in understanding provincial government motivations).

One might try to excuse the government’s lengthy time-to-get-off-its-ass by saying “oh that’s just the speed of government, it never does anything quickly.” But this is not true. The government may have waited until this summer to move against bad actor private colleges, but it used the crisis to attack students and OSAP itself much earlier….

Source: The Contemptible OSAP Cover-Up

While I was away: Antisemitism and Antizionism

Embarrassment of articles and commentary. My selection is by definition selec

Chris Selley: Avi Lewis embraces collective guilt for Jews, but never for Muslims

Valid critique:

…“Indeed, I’m old enough to remember the aftermath of 9/11, when New Democrats — and many others, particularly on the left — admonished us not to do to Muslims precisely what Lewis did to his fellow Jews. (The admonishment was often a bit much, but I fully agreed with the message and still do, no matter what group we’re talking about.)

One very common commentary trope back then was, “Well why can’t Muslims at least apologize for what was done in their name?” It was ugly and un-Canadian, and it rightly got called out. And now, a quarter-century later, Lewis is doing the same thing.

Anyway: By way of follow-up, Lewis bizarrely insisted that he had not held Jews collectively responsible for the wreck of Gaza … which he unambiguously had, including himself among the guilty.  He accused those criticizing him of being “partisan.” Lewis’s fellow travellers insisted, among other things, that Lewis’s critics were acting “in bad faith”— which is, ironically, a very bad-faith argument.

I also have to say I’m intrigued to know what Lewis imagines he or any other Jewish Canadian should have done to stop what he claims is an “ongoing genocide.” Does he have special powers we don’t know about? The anti-Israel rabble isn’t easily placated by empty statements of support and solidary from their politicians. They want Canada to Do Something, or at least be more virulently anti-Israel in its policies and messaging.

“People like Lewis rely on the notion that “criticizing Israel is not the same as criticizing Jews,” which I certainly agree with. But you don’t hear that argument so often nowadays. Protestors seem less and less interested in picking targets that we’re supposed to believe are extra-supportive of Israel. Once you start marching through Jewish-populated neighbourhoods, the argument is laughable. You don’t know who lives there. This is just pure harassment.

Does Lewis realize he’s inviting misery upon himself, for that matter? It’s not hard to imagine the rabble turning on him. They don’t care who he is, or who his father was, or where he sits on the political spectrum. They just want more Canadian politicians to say they hate Israel. And Lewis just made that quit a bit easier.

Lipstadt: Jews targeted by antisemitism need more than statements of sympathy from politicians

Yes, thoughts and prayers without meaningful action…:

… No, what has left me sick and tired are the pious sympathies and sincere regrets issued by government leaders, Prime Ministers (UK, Canada), Mayors (London, Manchester, New York), University presidents (worldwide) and so many others.  Their aides must have a file on their computers which they can expeditiously open when something happens.  Maybe it’s entitled: “Reactions to Attacks on Jews.”  They just need cut and paste from previous declarations.  Last year, in the wake of the Golders Green stabbing, this newspaper put those platitudes on its front page.  I was exhausted just reading them.   [“Our thoughts and prayers are with you”; “An attack on one of us is an attack on all of us”; “We stand with you.” And the one that I find most infuriating: “This hate has no place in our society.”  Has no place? It’s already here… and it’s thriving.]

Do I think leaders should condemn these acts?  Of course.  They must speak out unequivocally and expeditiously and with no contextual hesitations.  But those condemnations must be accompanied by action, including difficult actions, ones that might have political costs. Political leaders must be willing to name the source of these attacks, call them out specifically, and demand that the communities and political enclaves spit out the hate mongers who have taken refuge in their midst.

Leaders must do this even at the risk of losing votes. They must also recognise, as those in the United Kingdom, Canada, and France, among other places, have failed to do, that when their most energetic foreign policy actions are aimed at Israel, when they reward Hamas even when it has made no moves towards peace, the attackers are invigorated.  Despite being warned, as Foreign Secretary Miliband was by Chief Rabbi Mirvis and other Jewish leaders, that this singling out of Israel motivates attackers to harass, attack, and murder Jews worldwide, they ignore the warnings.

Why, my interlocutors ask me, is this happening now? In part because the haters know that there rarely are consequences for attacking Jews.  So please spare me your pious sympathies, sincere regrets, and worn-out protestations. I am not just sick and tired of them, I consider them – and you – to be hypocritical and self-serving.

I – together with so many others – have had enough.

Ambassador (ret.) Deborah E. Lipstadt is the former United States Envoy to Monitor and Combat Antisemitism and is currently Distinguished University Professor at Emory University.

Geist: A Definition That Meets the Moment: Federal Government Recognizes Antisemitism Includes Anti-Zionism

Geist has been a regular commentator on antisemitism and anti-zionism from the  Jewish mainstream perspective:

… Public Safety Canada released its summer progress report on the National Commitments to Combat Antisemitism yesterday, days after the Yom Kippur attack on the Sons of Jacob synagogue in Belleville. Most of the report tracks activities related to police training, funding programs, and provincial initiatives. But what makes the report consequential is the government’s clear recognition in a pair of statements that antisemitism includes anti-Zionism. The statements are sure to attract criticism in some quarters, but anti-Zionism is too often thinly veiled antisemitism, as if substituting the word Zionist for Jew renders the unacceptable acceptable. Given the rising antisemitic violence, culminating in this week’s terror attack, combatting antisemitism requires definitions that safeguard the Jewish community while remaining consistent with protecting freedom of expression. The government’s approach, which relies on a definition of antisemitism based on the lived reality of the Jewish community, does just that.

There is little doubt that the report’s references to anti-Zionism are deliberate. Both fall within Pillar One of the report that focuses on understanding antisemitism. The inclusion is how many in the Jewish community understand and experience antisemitism, facing threats that go to their longstanding beliefs and identity as Jews. For identifying antisemitism, it is that experience that matters, not the intent of the speaker. The report first states that the intended outcome of the pillar is that “Institutions across Canada have increased access to tools, guidance, and training to support the recognition, understanding and response to contemporary manifestations of antisemitism, including anti-Zionism, as outlined in the Canadian Handbook on the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism.” The report says the definition and Handbook “will continue to serve as the foundation of the federal government’s engagement with Jewish communities and its work to fight antisemitism.” Second, in explaining why understanding antisemitism is important, it states:

Antisemitism, which includes anti-Zionism, is not always obvious. While some incidents involve explicit threats, violence, or hate speech, others may take the form of conspiracy theories, Holocaust denial, coded language, stereotypes, or the collective blaming of Jewish people. Recognizing antisemitism consistently is an essential first step toward responding effectively.

The two statements go out of their way to include anti-Zionism in their understanding of antisemitism, which the government rightly notes is essential to an effective response. The report also links antisemitism to national security, stating that “the Government of Canada recognizes that antisemitism can be a matter of national security” and describes antisemitism as “both an indicator and an accelerator of radicalization.” Given the events of the past week, the statements are both critical and self-evident.

Sucharov: Anti-Zionism and antisemitism should not be conflated

While I understand the formal distinctions between antisemitism and antizionism, in practice these have become largely meaningless in demonstrations and commentary. Both sides need to see the others as human and as victims, current and past. And just as debates over Zionism belong not only to Jews, debates over Islamism belong not only to Muslims:

… But I have come to realize that feeling attached to a place should not preclude one from questioning the material effects of a given state’s governing ideology. This shouldn’t be hard for Canadians to understand. Many of Canada’s most patriotic citizens regularly challenge the settler-colonial aspects of our country’s founding ideology. A full-throated call for reconciliation here within our borders is no different than demanding that the State of Israel grant everyone under its rule freedom, dignity and equality.

What’s more, on the very definition of the term Zionism, we are all too often talking past each other. A few years ago, I published the findings of a survey I had recently conducted of American Jews. There, I found that how Zionism is defined has a marked effect on whether respondents identify with the label or not. Specifically, when I presented respondents with a definition of Zionism as “the belief in privileging Jewish rights over non-Jewish rights in Israel,” support for Zionism plummeted. It was 72 per cent when Zionism was defined instead as support for a Jewish and democratic state, but only 10 per cent when I presented that first definition, which is one I know Palestinians have experienced at the hands of Zionism.

Decades after the late Palestinian intellectual, Edward Said, urged us to try to see “Zionism from the standpoint of its victims,” we must realize that debates over Zionism belong not only to Jews.

Geist: Ontario is Done Waiting for Universities to Act on Campus Antisemitism

Enforcement has always been the Achilles heel:

… Nolan Quinn, Ontario’s Minister of Colleges, Universities, Research Excellence, and Security, recently sent an unequivocal message that this isn’t good enough. He issued a revised directive that shifts the emphasis from policies to enforcement. This includes requiring universities to assert authority over student associations and groups, including investigating complaints against them. It also mandates proportionate security measures for campus events and time-and-place restrictions on protests, effectively establishing bubble zones with enforced perimeters around religious and cultural gathering places.

To address concerns about insufficient awareness among students and staff, the directive also requires universities to provide and actively promote training on prevalent forms of hate, developed and delivered with experts trusted by the affected communities. Furthermore, annual reports must now disclose complaint data by category and stage of completion, so universities can no longer hide antisemitism complaints behind a single total.

The directive also addresses the lack of confidence in campus complaints mechanisms. Recent studies, including the CASE report that surveyed 900 Jewish students on campuses across the country and the Benotto report on antisemitism at Toronto Metropolitan University, found that many students did not believe that reporting incidents would result in any action. The province will now require universities to check in with complainants at least every 30 days, until the case is resolved.

Most importantly, the new directive is backed by the threat of real penalties. It expressly puts operating and other provincial funding at risk for non-compliance. Since the prior directive failed to get some Ontario universities’ attention, the possibility of lost revenue might….

Finally, policies and requirements need deadlines. The new directive does not include a deadline for implementation, running the risk that recalcitrant universities will continue to drag their feet on antisemitism.

Tamkin: Mayor Mamdani’s antisemitism strategy doesn’t define antisemitism. That’s a good thing.

Thoughtful commentary on definitions:

Halfway through New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s strategy to combat antisemitism is a page labeled “definitions.” Rather than announce which definition of antisemitism the strategy will use, the page explains why the administration won’t be defining the term.

“Despite antisemitism’s persistent presence throughout history, scholars, community members and community leaders do not agree on certain aspects of what antisemitism is,” it reads. “New York City can and will leverage all of the tools at its disposal to combat antisemitism effectively without needing to adopt a definition for this specific form of hate.”

The strategy instead cites three prominent definitions: the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance or IHRA definition, the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, and the Nexus Document (in the interest of full disclosure,I am a fellow with the Nexus Task Force, though I was in no way involved in the writing of the definition). The strategy also alludes to other frameworks.

That it does not include a definition will be held up by some as proof that the Mamdani administration doesn’t take antisemitism seriously. In fact, the decision not to  select one definition shows that it is focused more on fixing the problem than prematurely picking just one method to solve it.

We do not need a definition to fight hatred. We do not have similar pushes to define, say, racism or sexism or xenophobia. The report itself makes the point that a definition is not “necessary useful” for the Mayor’s Office to Combat Antisemitism to do its work. “Every crime that may be bias motivated is investigated by the NYPD’s Hate Crimes Task Force consistent with New York State law and applicable criminal statutes. Likewise, allegations of anti-Jewish discrimination reported to the New York City Commission on Human Rights are assessed under the City’s Human Rights Law.”

Moreover, what people who want one definition often mean is that they want antisemitism defined as including anti-Zionism, or that they want the administration in question to adopt the IHRA definition of antisemitism, which the Mamdani administration revoked when he came into office. The IHRA definition contains examples of antisemitism that are mostly about Israel and that include “Applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation,” and “Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.”

Critics (including me) have argued that the codification or singular embrace of IHRA threatens to restrict speech around Israel and US foreign policy.

Further, Israeli legal scholars Itamar Mann and Lihi Yona have argued that, in addition to potentially chilling speech about Israel, the push to codify or embrace this one definition is a push for a government-sanctioned understanding of what it is to be Jewish. “It restricts the freedom of Jews to define their own identity, limiting the ways in which Jewish beliefs, thought and activism can be expressed,” they wrote last year. It would be inappropriate for the Mamdani administration, or any government administration, to take it upon itself to decide what it means to be Jewish.

And insisting that our understanding of antisemitism always and only adhere to one definition is like insisting that we always and only use a hammer for home renovation. Sometimes that is useful; sometimes that can result in destroying your house.

There are times that IHRA may be useful in thinking through what is and is not antisemitic. But there may be times that it leads to overuse and political abuse of the term “antisemitism.” A person protesting Israel and not any other country may be applying a double standard; on the other hand, they may be holding Israel to account because they are an American taxpayer and Israel is the top recipient of US aid. By pairing IHRA with other definitions and frameworks, those in office are more, not less, informed and empowered to thoroughly think through how they’re tackling antisemitism.

That isn’t to say there’s nothing to criticize about the Mamdani administration’s strategy. Some might note that it’s heavier on principle than it is on specific policy; others, that it does not mention that, though anti-Zionism and protest of Israel are not inherently antisemitic, both can cross over into antisemitic rhetoric, vandalism, and even violence.

But they don’t need a definition to do any of that. And like the Biden administration’s 2023 national strategy on antisemitism (which also declined to pick one single definition), the Mamdani strategy takes a whole of government approach, stressing that Jews are New Yorkers and allowing them to live as full-fledged members of society safely is everyone’s responsibility, and that it will use the tools at its disposal to do that. You could just have a hammer, but why would you want that when you could also have a screwdriver, a wrench, and your own ingenuity and discernment?

Allen: Turning Hate into Empathy

Of the various commentaries by my former colleagues, I find Jon Allen’s the most balanced. His critique of the failure of multiculturalism to build bridges between communities engaged in foreign conflicts is not limited to Isreal/Palestine:

… Understanding the Israeli Palestinian conflict and its antecedents is complicated, but recognizing the death and destruction that it has produced on both sides shouldn’t have been. It is a sad testament to Canada’s strong multicultural traditions and previous examples where Jews, Christian and Muslims grieved with each other, that many mainstream Jewish and Muslim organizations, including clergy, were, for the most part, silent in the face of atrocities that occurred on both sides at the time….

Holding Multiple Truths

It seems clear, therefore, that post October 7, 2023, now three years later, far too many people, both here in Canada and in the region, continue to operate completely in their own lanes and root only for their own team. Many Jews and Arabs alike, wherever they may be, are simply unable to hold multiple truths in their heads at the same time. They are unable to see and empathize with the suffering and history of trauma that both sides have experienced.

But despite what some might honestly believe, this conflict has no simple good guys and bad guys. Israelis and Palestinians each view themselves as victims, each have real existential fears based in their recent histories, each have valid historical narratives that cannot easily be reconciled and, as noted, each are currently experiencing real and severe trauma. Finally, extremists on both sides, whether Hamas terrorists or the far-right government in power in Israel, bear much of the blame for where Israelis and Palestinians find themselves today and how they got here.

While Israelis and Palestinians are stuck in the middle of an ongoing conflict, Jews and Muslims in Canada are not. Perhaps it is time for both sides here to lower the rhetoric, stop the allegations of perfidy one against the other, and just for a moment try to understand the pain and fear that each are experiencing. Then, hopefully, the anti-Semitism, very real or perceived, and the anger of the Muslim community, sometimes justified and sometimes not, can be turned towards some reconciliation and mutual empathy.

October 7 vigils demonstrations 

Lederman: There’s nothing to praise about the Oct. 7 attacks. A Canadian literary journal disagrees

Indeed. But many left-leaning folks made similar mistakes over China (Jan Wong), Che Guevara, the Soviet Union etc, useful or useless idiots depending on one’s opinion:

… Over here in Canada, a new special issue of the online journal The Ex-Puritan looks at these events through a literary lens, with a special “Resistance & Hope” issue, guest-edited by writer Bahar Orang. It features Ms. Orang’s own poem, Flood.

“Praise the paragliders, their gentle ascension, their unbroken morning, and of course their triumphant descension, their feet touching down,” it begins. “Praise October.”

There’s a lot of praise in the poem – for “the fighters, whose courage nourishes the world.” For “their cunning, their patience, the tanks on fire, the enemy fleeing.” Also for missiles, “the recognitions written in blood on each one, the names carved already into your own flesh.”

I found this hard to read. But not nearly as difficult as other reading I’ve done about that day.

There is nothing poetic about “Silenced No More,” a report by the independent Civil Commission on Oct. 7th Crimes by Hamas against Women and Children. The report was published in May. Canada’s Irwin Cotler is named as a principal contributor….

People are justifiably outraged about the sexual assault allegedly committed by seven men at Cornell University, known as the Cornell 7. Which makes the silence about the genital-burning, body-severing, gang-rapes of Oct. 7 even more outrageous. Not just the silence, but the denial. Erasure. Praise, even.

John Ivison: On the eve of pro-Hamas vigils, universities finally seem ready to tackle campus antisemitism

Finally: 

…The idea of national standards is not terrible, as long as they adopt the tougher options. For example, York University removed an anti-Israel encampment almost immediately, while other campuses, such as McGill, tolerated them. They quickly became the focal points for antisemitism.

Yet, as Justice Benotto concluded, while universities cannot resolve the conflict in the Middle East, or forge a consensus over competing historical narratives, they can establish clear behavioural recommendations and protect the rights of all members of the student and academic community.

“What the university can do is ensure that it has clear policies that are consistently enforced to ensure that people are behaving towards one another in the university environment in a way that’s conducive to higher education,” agreed Shack. “Ultimately, Jewish people in this country are going to be driven out of public institutions, and out of society, in a very scary way that we’ve seen in other countries throughout history and that no one would ever think possible in Canada.”

The argument against tighter rules against intimidation on campus is that it will stifle free expression.

But the right to free speech is always subject to boundaries.

Cary Kogan, a professor of psychology at the University of Ottawa who heads the Network of Engaged Canadian Academics, said that there is a sense in some faculties that academic freedom is a kind of “white magic that protects you from anything and everything.”

“But the right to experience and participate in an educational setting as a full member of a democratic society has to be balanced with the rights of academic freedom,” he said.

The solution is not that complicated. Expressly prohibit intimidation, harassment, discrimination and conduct that interferes with the rights of others, and impose disciplinary sanctions on those who broach those rules.

Criticism of Israel’s government is protected expression.

But anti-Zionism —  the libel that the Jewish collective, Israel, rather than the individual Jew, is uniquely evil — is not. And it is the normalization of anti-Zionism that is driving antisemitism in Canada.

Lederman: Are we on the verge of an exodus? In a hate-filled climate, Canadian Jews are weighing their options

Of note:

… In a thread about encountering protesters outside his Yom Kippur service in Toronto (where a former Israeli official was speaking), CBC journalist Neil Herland revealed that he has obtained an Austrian passport – his Holocaust-surviving father was from there – “in case Canada becomes unsafe for me as a Jew.”

Is that my next move: a Polish passport? Go back to Poland? Give the chanters what they wish?

Of course not. I’m not going anywhere. But if you had told me three years ago me that I would even be asking these questions; that I would travel to Oklahoma of all places to see how former Canadian Jews are living there, and where more want to join, I would have said: you’re crazy. Or you’re joking. We’re good at that, joking. And wandering.

“A line of decency has been crossed in our province,” said Ontario Solicitor General Michael Kerzner at the Belleville news conference about the synagogue attack.

Antisemitism is not simply a Jewish problem. It is a global problem, and right now, it is a serious Canadian problem. I knew the fallout from Oct. 7, 2023 would be bad, and it has been – catastrophic for Gazans, first and foremost. But this, in Canada, I did not expect.

I understand the impulse to leave. I don’t cast judgment on anyone trying to carve out better, safer lives for their families. But I’m with Mr. Farber. This country built us and we helped build this country. I’m going to fight for it. Despite the despondency, I hang onto the hope. I am not without a home. This land is my land.

The Missed Opportunity of NAZA 

Have not yet seen NAZA but valid point in terms of the opportunity for greater self-reflection:

… Abraham and Szor should be commended for making art that peels back the skin and shows us our darkest instincts: our ability to dissociate, to replace people with numbers, to ignore inconvenient suffering. They are now paying a high personal price for the film, subject not just to online hate (from the right, of course, but also from those on the left who boycott and reject any art made by Israelis, no matter how critical). Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has threatened to revoke their citizenship, and they will face very real death threats if and when they return to Israel after touring with the film. I’d like to say that the fact that they are displeasing people on both sides means, as the truism goes, that they are getting something right. But I can’t help feeling that they missed an opportunity.

NAZA is discomfiting, but it could have been even more so if it didn’t divert attention to a familiar and (for some) reassuring narrative about a fundamentally genocidal Israel. If Abraham and Szor had forced viewers to actually see themselves in those silhouetted people, to understand them as individuals, the shock of it might be even greater than imagining that the rest of us are made of purer stuff.

While I was away: Multiculturalism articles of interest

Siddiqui: No, Mark Carney, Canada is not the most European non-European country

Not seeing much evidence for this in polling data and of course lands once occupied by Europeans were also subject in many cases to periods of conquest by other groups and countries:

… Carney has demonstrated no real feel for this new Canada and seems unaware that when he talks of Canada’s great affinity to Europe, he grates on many, especially Indigenous people and Canadians of non-European stock. His enthusiasm is particularly offensive to those of us who’ve come from lands once occupied by European colonialists — racist, cruel and rapacious.

Contrary to Carney’s assertion, Canada is the least Western of Western nations. As philosopher John Ralston Saul has argued, we are a “Métis nation,” shaped by Indigenous Peoples and their values of moderation and compromise — reflected in the 1867 British North America Act, a compact between the Indigenous, the English and the French. We can draw a line from that to this contemporary blessing: Canadians rate pluralism and multiculturalism as our top virtues when Trump and several European populists have turned skin colour into a major fault line of the West.

Anti-immigrant parties are doing well in Britain and across Europe — Germany, France, Italy, Holland, Switzerland, Finland, etc. They are cheered on by Trump who fans the fears of Europe facing “civilizational erasure” and becoming “majority non-European,” i.e. non-white. Far too many mainstream Republicans are proclaiming the United States to be a “Christian nation” and echoing far-right Europeans in asserting that “Christ is king.”

In Canada, however, no overtly anti-immigrant, let alone racist or religion-based party can hope to win a national election or even muster a few seats….

Urback: Woke 1.0 was crazy. And it’s not over yet

Good discussion of how woke should be interpreted and allowance for growth and change: 

… That’s what made, and makes, Woke 1.0 so “crazy,” to borrow Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’s characterization. It wasn’t simply the furor with which the public attacked perceived transgressors, or the haste with which punishments were doled out, but the inherent contradiction of the whole find/shame/banish exercise, which was supposed to be about bettering individuals’ social awareness, but left no space for betterment. “Wokeness” is about recognizing racial (and other) privilege, about understanding our own inherent biases, and about acknowledging the structural barriers that disproportionately affect some people more than others. The whole idea is that through learning and growth, we can make a better, fairer society.

But Woke 1.0 made no allowance for growth – neither past nor present. People were defined by singular statements or actions, flattened into one-dimensional caricatures of themselves. Those who transgressed from accepted dogma were booted from their jobs immediately, without time to actually understand why “reverse racism” could be considered a regressive concept. And those who were fired for historical wrongs were made to wear and serve penance for past indiscretions, even if they could demonstrate they were no longer that person.

Indeed, the moment was all about unlearning prejudices (which is why every company suddenly seemed to have a DEI czar onboard), but no one cared to listen if someone claimed to have already unlearned their prejudices….

Terry Newman: Concordia handbook teaches students to hate Canada, the West, police ….

Link to handbook: https://drive.google.com/file/d/13XQ5sTNcXhrcQfRT73ca-PyuYeeZgzHm/view 

Sigh…Good example of woke 1:

…The next part of the handbook is called a “Survival Guide.” The first section is titled, “Ni Canada, ni Quebec” (neither Canada, nor Quebec). It criticizes Prime Minister Mark Carney for evoking Canada’s “glorified settler colonial past” in his recent forward guidance video, and accuses the Liberals of passing a “massive anti-immigration bill giving the state powers to abandon due legal process and to cancel immigration status for migrants at will.”

The handbook also has strong words for two Quebec political parties. It complains that both the Coalition Avenir Québec (CAQ) and Parti Québécois (PQ) are moving toward more right-wing policies, including the CAQ’s banning prayer in public institutions and the PQ’s call for a referendum. It also complains that: “The Quiet Revolution-era promise of a Québécois welfare state and shared prosperity for all is now more or less a thing of the past, abandoned in favour of xenophobic rhetoric and the so-called “defence of Quebecois and Western culture and values.”

The federal government doesn’t escape the handbook’s criticism either. Students are told that the federal government is only more tolerant of minorities than Quebec “on the surface,” and frames the plight of migrants as one in which they are required to accept that “money rules the land, that you’ll be blamed for the political and economic failures of the government, and that your immigration status can be revoked at any time, resulting in your deportation, especially if you protest in solidarity with Palestine….

Elkouri: Blé d’Inde, hijab, colère

Good column:

…Pour les directions scolaires qui ont l’odieux d’appliquer la loi 94, la situation est intenable sur le plan humain.

Comment annoncer à des parents bénévoles appréciés que l’on ne peut plus accepter leur aide ? Quel message leur envoie-t-on ? Quel message cela envoie-t-il à leurs enfants ?

« Ça nous écœure. On a honte », me confiait la directrice d’une école primaire de la grande région montréalaise. Car cela va fondamentalement à l’encontre des valeurs d’inclusion de la société québécoise.

Comment accepter que l’école québécoise inclusive devienne un lieu d’exclusion ?

Étonnamment, en pleine campagne électorale, cet enjeu qui suscite de vives inquiétudes est passé sous silence.

À la veille des élections, Joanne espère que son cri du cœur nourrira la réflexion et servira surtout à ramener un peu d’amour, d’inclusion et de bon sens dans un monde qui en a bien besoin.

Je l’espère aussi.

Moderate new Muslim group aims to broaden dialogue beyond certain ‘politically charged issues’

Will be interesting to see how active and influential this organization will become:

There are roughly two million Muslims in Canada. But they don’t see themselves in conversations being held in their name in Ottawa, says a leader of the new Muslim Policy Institute (MPI).

The MPI, launched this month, is dedicated to including Canadian Muslims in the dialogue that shapes policy about how they live.

“The questions MPI cares about most, like belonging, opportunity, the pressures families are facing, and what Muslim Canadians actually prioritize, are often overlooked. Meanwhile, the national conversation keeps circling one or two politically charged issues,” said Nika Jabiyeva, the institute’s managing director of operations and partnerships, told National Post.

Jabiyeva said research last year revealed that although Islamophobia was a concern for the community, bigger concerns for Muslim Canadians, like most Canadians in general, were the cost of living and housing.

MPI “doesn’t claim to represent two million people,” she said. The group’s purpose is to learn “what shapes Muslim Canadian life and identity, from youth and professionals to women in leadership and elders, and bringing that to the public and into policy.”…

Immigrants aren’t a monolithic voting bloc in Alberta’s referendum on secession

Immigrants, both overall and within different groups, are never monolithic with considerable variation:

The temptation to portray immigrants as a monolithic pro-Confederation voting bloc, therefore, ignores the complexity of their experience, concerns, and aspirations. Consequently, in this referendum, both sides of the separation debate would be advised to acknowledge that newcomers are neither automatic defenders of the Confederation nor guaranteed supporters of the independence campaign. They are a diverse and evolving constituency whose political choices are formed by the same mixture of fears, hopes and interests that influence every voter.

This referendum may actually prove that the voices of Alberta’s immigrants may not be the loudest in the public square, but they could prove decisive in shaping the province’s political future.

Innocent Madawo is a political commentator based in Edmonton.

Khan: Canadians must not stand for the notwithstanding clause’s pre-emptive use

We will see where the SCC ends up, hopefully with some guardrails given excessive invocation:

…Canada’s judicial system and Charter of Rights say otherwise. When a provincial or federal legislature proposes a law that a court has ruled would deny Canadians of their fundamental freedoms, legal rights or equality rights, it can invoke the notwithstanding clause to override the order. Legislatures can also deny those affected the ability to plead their case before the courts by invoking the clause pre-emptively, as Saskatchewan, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec have done or have threatened to do.

The Supreme Court of Canada has deemed such pre-emptive use legal. But is it just? Quebec’s Bill 21, which the legislature shielded with a pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause in 2019, has been making its way through Canada’s courts. It is now being considered by the Supreme Court – but not because it might violate fundamental individual freedoms. Instead, the case is being heard because it allegedly violates English-language minority rights, which the clause cannot override.

The Supreme Court will also hear a case from Saskatchewan in which the government used the clause pre-emptively to remove any challenge to a law requiring parental consent for students under 16 to use preferred pronouns at school. Unlike the courts in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec, though, Saskatchewan’s appellate court said that it would examine the case despite the clause being used, and let the public know how it violates fundamental freedoms. Pretty bold on its part, in contrast to the helplessness shown by courts in Alberta, Ontario and Quebec. And now Canada’s highest court will decide whether lower courts can do the same: step in and issue a declaration when a Canadian is not allowed to argue for basic freedoms.

So here we are. You can fight a traffic ticket in court; people accused of serious crimes have their day in court to mount a vigorous defence. And yet, our Charter not only allows our legislators the absolute power to override basic rights, it grants the power to deny any opportunity to fight against those violations. It feels Kafkaesque – but the better descriptor might be Trumpian, in how it bullies the powerless. How ironic that Canadians appear largely united in our displeasure with that man, yet accept a system that allows governments to take our vulnerable minorities’ freedoms away without legal recourse….

Amnesty International: Black communities in Canada say reparatory justice must be enshrined in new UN rights declaration

Some issues are more specific to Blacks, some are more generic to all minorities and are class, not identity based. Some are just unrealistic, politically, and are unlikely to change the reality on the ground.

  • Establish an independent Black Equity Commissioner with enforcement authority and protection from political interference
  • Mandate disaggregated race-based data collection under community-controlled governance frameworks grounded in Black data sovereignty
  • Recognize collective rights of historic Black communities, including the ancestral land and cultural rights of African Nova Scotians
  • Invest in Black-led infrastructure through independent institutions, legal-defence capacity, and stable multi-year funding
  • Regulate artificial intelligence and surveillance technologies to eliminate anti-Black bias, including through independent equity audits and meaningful representation in technology governance
  • Reform education systems to centre Black Canadian history, identity, and culturally responsive teaching
  • Address barriers facing Black newcomers in immigration, housing, credential-recognition, and access to culturally appropriate supports

“Black communities in Toronto, Nova Scotia, and Ottawa gave their time and trust to this process, knowing how often consultation has ended without action,” said Lerato Chondoma, a director with the Black Canadians Civil Society Coalition. “They have brought clarity and good faith; the obligation now rests with governments. We call on Canada to show publicly, with timelines and benchmarks, how and when it will act on the recommendations contained in the report.

McWhorter: When White People Like Hannah Gann Pretend to Be Black

Another interesting discussion:

… These cases suggest a subtype of modern white identity. For this person, the commitment to contesting the evil of whiteness is all-consuming, an ideological North Star that orients her entire worldview. It is an extreme expression of the outlook that Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called “Woke 1,” in which the world is always neatly divided into wicked white oppressors and virtuous nonwhite victims. For a white person with these beliefs, it is a short step to wanting not to be white, to escape the original sin of that privilege.

To be the victim is to be not just innocent but also more interesting. It also can provide a sense of meaning in a modern world that no longer gives ready answers to the question of life’s purpose. “Who am I? What am I for? I’m … Black!” The decision may be eccentric — skin darkening as part of your morning routine? — but it is hardly counterintuitive….

Modern cases like Gann’s are something else. And because the fetishizing of Blackness and the reviling of whiteness is a natural outgrowth of our progressive intelligentsia’s worldview, I see little that will stop them from appearing from time to time. While Krug disappeared from public life, Dolezal presses on in her simulation, and recently said she’d like to sit down for a meal with Gann. Perhaps Gann, too, will ultimately decide that her self-identification as Black and Palestinian is valid, regardless of biology and family history.

This sort of thing will remain rare but never go extinct — no more perplexing than the occasional four-leaf clover. Get ready for another case in a year or three.

While I was away: Immigration articles of interest

NYT: Our Interview With Mark Carney [Immigration]

Commentary by the Conservatives and right leaning media has overdramatized the possible shift. Proof will of course be in the forthcoming levels plan:

…What we’ve basically been doing is first getting the system under control. So if we want to let in 500,000 people through formal immigration and some temporary workers and students, we cap things and we let in 500,000 people. There were years where the expectation would have been for example, 700,000 and it ended up 2 million. The overshoots were, and you know it’s a country of 40 million people.

These are big, big overshoots, and it’s not that easy to get to Canada, right? It is from the U.S. but otherwise you’re flying in or taking boats. So we’ve taken measures to get that under control and we have it under control. So students down by 60 percent, temporary foreign workers down by 50 percent. It happens to be the case. Part of this is tightening, but asylum seekers are down by one-third on a flow basis, and now the question starts to become: When do we resume some controlled increase in the population, which is the nature of Canada. So that will happen, and we just want to make sure that we’ve got it under control….

Rob Breakenridge: The Carney honeymoon would end if he opens up immigration again

Depends on what the forthcoming levels plan contains for both permanent and particularly temporary resident numbers:

…Carney’s musings on immigration have also been noticed on the campaign trail in Quebec, where the Parti Québécois (PQ) pushed for limits on immigration in what became a successful campaign.

And even though the PQ has promised to shelve an independence referendum until after Donald Trump leaves office, new premier Paul St-Pierre Plamondon has threatened to hold a referendum on immigration, not dissimilar to what’s on the ballot in Alberta.

It’s hard to imagine that voters in either province won’t or wouldn’t side heavily with their respective premiers on this issue. As such, it’s easy to envision a backlash against Carney’s planned increases.

It may well be that the government is tempted by the GDP boost that high immigration helps to generate, even if it papers over other weaknesses in the economy. Again, Carney himself has noted this phenomenon, calling it a “basic fact,” and that “you can do the math” in terms of how declining population can affect economic growth.

Carney’s political honeymoon is not a political blank cheque and nor should he be so overconfident as to feel as though he’s immune from a similar backlash to his predecessor. This issue has become divisive enough already and it’s playing with fire to thrust this issue back on a fatigued and frustrated Canadian public.

We’ll eventually need a return to responsible immigration growth, but the government has more work to do before that’s feasible and saleable.

Keller: The Canadian population decline that never happened, and what it means for immigration policy

Keller’s latest two part series on immigration following the Carney NYT intv:

… On the same day as Statscan dropped that news, Prime Minister Mark Carney was in New York, sitting for an interview with The New York Times. Among other things, he was asked about Canada’s “population decline,” and when he would begin “reversing” it through higher immigration.

The PM didn’t challenge the mistaken premise that Canada’s population is declining; he was presumably unaware of the new figures. But he gave a long and detailed answer about the immigration system’s recent history, which shows that he has a grasp on how things went off the rails under his predecessor.

I wrote a book last year on what Canada used to get right about immigration, and how after 2015 it got things so badly wrong. Most of what Mr. Carney had to say was on point.

He concluded with this: “Now the question starts to become: When do we resume some controlled increase in the population?”…

Keller: Mark Carney has started fixing immigration. He needs to keep at it 

His concrete recommendations:

…Continue reducing temporary immigration: The temporary-immigration streams used to be small, but they exploded under the Trudeau government. They came to be seen as backdoors to permanent immigration, for those who would not otherwise have scored high enough to secure permission to permanently immigrate.

These pathways need to be wound back, and some need to be wound down. The Carney government has promised to bring temporary-resident numbers down to 5 per cent of the national population by next year, but it’s well behind schedule. In any case, the target is too high.

The C.D. Howe Institute’s expert group on immigration suggests aiming for 3 per cent. I agree. What’s more, the vast majority of future temporary residents should be high-quality visa students or former students on postgraduate work permits.

End the low-wage temporary foreign worker program: It makes sense to give Canadian businesses the flexibility to temporarily hire an aeronautical engineer from overseas. It makes no sense to hand out temporary visas for low-wage work. Canada has a shortage of educated and skilled people in some high-paying fields, but there is no generalized shortage of workers, nor is there a lack of unskilled workers.

Temporary work visas should no longer be available for jobs paying less than $100,000 a year, with the singular exception of the long-standing seasonal agricultural worker program. A reduction in the pool of people available for entry-level jobs should cause wages at the bottom of the income scale to feel some upward pressure. That would be a good thing.

Focus student visas on the best: The limited number of student visas should go to the highest-quality institutions and programs, admitting the most-qualified students, and charging the highest international tuition.

What happened during the Trudeau era was the opposite, as provinces – led by Ontario – took advantage of the unlimited number of student visas to encourage the weakest and lowest-tuition institutions, mostly public and private colleges, to go on a cash grab. What was being sold was entry into Canada, not education.

Our leading public universities, which charge international undergraduate tuition of $50,000 and up, and even more for some master’s programs, should get nearly all of the visas. Private colleges should get none. Public colleges should get few.

Stable permanent immigration: From the early 1990s until the Trudeau government, Canada’s immigration rate was relatively stable, through Liberal and Conservative administrations. It helped to make immigration as boring and unnoticed as functioning plumbing.

Let’s set our immigration rate at 0.7 per cent of the population – that’s about 300,000 new immigrants. Keep the rate there year after year, indefinitely.

An immigration rate of 0.7 per cent would be on par with where things were for the quarter century before the Trudeau government. It would be well below the level Canada hit from 2022 to 2024, and somewhat lower than the figure the Carney government has targeted. But by international standards, it would still be above average.

As I detail in my book on immigration, the U.S. legal-immigration level in the decades before the first election of President Donald Trump was around 0.3 per cent.

As on other key files, the Carney government has started to turn the ship on immigration. As with those other issues, more turning is still needed.

Olive: How Justin Trudeau’s immigration ambitions unravelled

Meanwhile in the Star, Olive seems oblivious to the failings of the philosophy and approach, not just miscalculation:

…Trudeau brought a record number of newcomers to Canada, and that proved to be a test of his governing philosophy. The labour shortages of the post-pandemic gave him the chance to better align economic need with more newcomers. It was a test he failed through miscalculation, but the philosophy was sound.

The weakest links in Carney’s cabinet are still there

The latest in the case for a change in immigration minister with speculation why still in place:

Most Canadians don’t know much about the Singh decision. But if you’re the country’s Immigration Minister, you must.

So it was alarming that Lena Metlege Diab seemed confused when she was asked about the seminal 1985 Supreme Court decision in an interview for a Radio-Canada podcast.

It was the ruling that set the foundations of Canada’s asylum system, and is central to immigration policy. It established that asylum-seekers have Charter rights and a right to an oral hearing, led to the creation of the Immigration and Refugee Board, and is still an issue in reform efforts today.

But it didn’t ring bells for the minister.

Kevin Paquette: The Parti Québécois forced a necessary immigration debate

The more positive approach to integration. Will see what the incoming government changes its electoral approach to a more inclusive governing approach: 

But integration is a concept that goes beyond language. It is also about sharing some basic values, understanding the institutions of the society you are joining and, over time, developing a sense that you belong to something larger than yourself. A society needs that sense of common civic and civilizational belonging if it is to remain cohesive over time.

All of these elements show why the debate over integration capacity deserves better than the familiar accusations and assumptions we have now become accustomed.

Raising questions about our capacity to welcome newcomers does not mean shifting the burden of our collective choices onto immigrants who choose Quebec. On the contrary, it means taking seriously the responsibility we have toward them.

When someone chooses Quebec, we should want them to be able to find their place here, learn French, build a life, and develop a genuine sense of belonging. When our capacity to integrate newcomers is overwhelmed, they pay a price as well.

That is ultimately what the immigration debate should be about: not searching for someone to blame, but making sure that those who choose Quebec have a real chance to succeed here and, over time, to feel fully at home.

Kevin Paquette is a consultant at Crestview Strategy. He was a political advisor to Quebec’s Minister of Public Security and president of the Coalition Avenir Québec’s youth wing. 

Express Entry and Labour Market Outcomes of Economic Immigrants

Unclear whether this will still apply and the CRS gets undermined by increased specialty streams as preliminary evidence suggests it is not:

Four recent studies examine the labour market outcomes of immigrants selected through Express Entry (EE) and assess how well the system’s Comprehensive Ranking System (CRS) identifies applicants with strong economic potential. Using data from the Longitudinal Immigration Database and the linked IMDB–2021 Census, the research examines employment, earnings, wages and occupational mobility among EE immigrants, comparing their outcomes with those of other economic immigrants.

Overall, EE immigrants demonstrate stronger labour market outcomes than non-EE economic immigrants. They are more likely to be employed, earn higher employment income and weekly wages, and remain in their intended occupations. These differences are observed across a range of admission cohorts and demographic and labour market characteristics.

The research also finds that several core CRS selection factors are consistently associated with stronger outcomes. In particular, higher official language proficiency, educational attainment, Canadian work experience and higher pre-admission employment earnings are associated with better post-admission employment and earnings outcomes. Pre-admission employment earnings are among the strongest predictors, suggesting that the quality of applicants’ previous labour market experience may be more informative than simply having Canadian work experience.

Occupation characteristics also matter. Applicants in higher-skilled occupations generally have stronger employment, earnings and occupational retention outcomes, while remaining in an intended occupation is associated with substantially higher earnings. Job offers are associated with somewhat higher post-admission earnings, although their predictive value varies across outcomes and occupational categories.

By contrast, several CRS bonus factors – including Canadian education, French-language bonuses, siblings in Canada and spouse-related characteristics – show limited associations with short- and medium-term labour market outcomes after accounting for other applicant characteristics.

Together, the findings provide evidence on the factors associated with labour market success among EE immigrants and can inform ongoing consideration of the design and selection criteria of economic immigration programs. Because Express Entry was introduced in 2015, additional follow-up will be needed to assess whether these relationships persist over time.

Read the research: Express Entry and Labour Market Outcomes of Economic Immigrants

Canada’s refugee shelters are getting ready for the next surge. Here’s how cities are building a system that works

The key factor is, of course, the reduced number of refugees…:

… The tide, however, has begun to turn. Federal policy shifts aimed at curbing irregular migrants and restricting access to asylum have led to a significant decline in new asylum claimants in the past year — and governments have used the opportunity to build a more sustainable refugee shelter system that would be ready for the next surge. 

Municipalities reporting fewer refugees in shelters 

New refugee claimants dropped from 105,940 in the first seven months of 2024 to 69,410 in the same period in 2025 — and to just 33,415 this year.

Officials attributed the decline to the new visa requirement for Mexican travellers, tightened border enforcement and heightened scrutiny of visa applications. Ontario currently receives about 45 per cent of all claims, followed by Quebec at 38 per cent.

The federal Immigration Department said it closed all the refugee hotels that it directly funded and ran as of October 2025.

In Toronto, the number of claimants in regular shelters fell from 6,490 people in August 2024 to 1,691 this September. As demand declines, the city is closing two of its refugee shelter hotels this fall and the remaining one in 2027.

Calls specific to refugee claimants have dropped from more than 100 a day at times in 2023 to 10 to 20 a week now. During the first six months of 2026, fewer than 500 claimants were admitted into Toronto’s shelter system, while on average 165 have left each month since January. 

“We are generally able to meet demand from refugee claimants,” said Vera Dodic, the city’s director of refugee response. “We are no longer regularly seeing refugee claimants call Central Intake to report no available space.”…

Immigration Department looking into termination of refugee sponsor policy: Diab

Hopefully, with public reporting:

The Immigration Department will monitor for any negative effects from a recent decision not to extend a policy that gave permanent residency sponsorship exemptions to some refugees, Immigration Minister Lena Diab said Wednesday.

The policy was introduced in 2019 to allow some refugees to sponsor some undeclared family members for permanent residency but it expired earlier this month and was not renewed.

Kazemzadeh: Canada’s settlement services are going digital. AI should support workers, not replace them

Overall, balanced but one should expect some staff efficiencies and reductions but hopefully with better outcome reporting (even outputs are updated on opendata and have to be requested):

… Canada should not reject AI in settlement services. The technology has real potential. But governments and settlement agencies should avoid building a digital-only system.

The better model is hybrid: AI for routine information, translation support, navigation and basic triage; humans for complex cases, legal referrals, trauma-informed care, accessibility needs and emotional support.

The future of settlement services will likely be more digital. But success should not be measured by how many workers are replaced. It should be measured by whether newcomers receive faster, safer and more inclusive support.

AI can open the door. Human expertise must remain inside.

While I was away: Citizenship articles of interest

Change in Canada’s citizenship law hitting U.S. archives

More indication of IRCC and PBO underestimating demand by third and earlier generations:

“Sitting in their archive in Lafayette, Louisiana, Barbara Dejean and Stephanie Simon first heard about a change in Canada’s citizenship rules in December, when they read an online news story.

Then the calls started coming in. 

Calls from Americans who wanted to document their Canadian ancestry to apply under the new rules for Canadian citizenship certificates.

“It started a bit earlier in January, but now we have over 450 requests waiting to be processed,” said Simon, associate archivist at the Diocese of Lafayette, whose records include those of many Acadian families.

“The same day that we mail out 40, 40 more come in the mail, so it’s not like we can make some headway on it. It’s just kind of keeping up with them.”

Dejean estimates their two-person archive has received 1,350 requests for records since Bill C-3 went into effect on Dec. 15, 2025. Turnaround time for those requests is currently 12 to 16 weeks. 

It used to be two to three days.

“They’re from all over, all over the United States where we’ve been getting requests for our records,” said Dejean. “A lot of them are no longer here. The families have branched off and moved ”

Brunner: Canada promised a new citizenship guide that better addresses reconciliation a decade ago. It still hasn’t arrived

Good comprehensive review of past and present citizenship guides, with current guide largely unchanged since introduced by former Conservative minister Kenney (over 5 Liberal ministers ago). Over “ideological” approach in terms of how to capture Canadian history, the good and the bad, as the guide needs to thread the needle between celebrating Canada while acknowledging the various missteps and injustices in our history. And yes, more civics and citizenship education required, both in the education system and in settlement:

… Citizenship guides are not neutral study aids. They teach people how to understand a country’s history, its institutions and its political community.

Given that many newcomers arrive in Canada with little exposure to truth and reconciliation, the stories a guide tells, and the silences it keeps, matter.

The fuller, more honest citizenship guide Ottawa has long promised is urgently needed. Still, a booklet alone cannot deliver reconciliation.

Citizenship education also needs support and funding at a time when Ottawa is cutting settlement budgets.

Newcomers have difficult questions about Canada, its history and our responsibilities. Answering them means moving past memorizing facts for a multiple-choice test, toward citizenship education that takes those questions seriously.

Until then, community educators will be left to bridge the gap between Canada’s stated commitment to reconciliation and the very different story Canada tells newcomers about itself.

Blogging Break Until Thanksgiving

Enjoy the fall weather

Canada faces questions over treatment of Iranian conscripts as U.K, Australia take different approach

Would be nice if CBC reporting would focus more on the substantive issue of how Australia and UK have a more nuanced approach than just the individual case stories and hardships:

…U.K., Australia recommend examining cases closely

The United Kingdom and Australian appear to have taken different approaches, where conscripts are not automatically considered “members” of an organization. In March, Australia’s Parliament published guidance on the matter, saying authorities should distinguish involuntary conscripts from supporting members. 

The U.K. government published similar guidance in August, stating military service is compulsory for men and that conscripts are unlikely to be required to commit acts “contrary to the basic rules of human conduct.”…

Source: Canada faces questions over treatment of Iranian conscripts as U.K, Australia take different approach

ChatGPT and IRCC Open Data Tables

Assume many of you may have also tried using ChatGPT to download IRCC data for analysis. Did a quick trial with study permits and remarkably efficient and will likely use it substantially on my next quarterly update as it easily verifiable.

Canada’s largest private English-language school files for bankruptcy, leaving 1,300 students scrambling

Not surprising, given that previous immigration levels were unsustainable, resulting in business models being equally unsustainable. Hard of the students of course:

…According to Languages Canada’s 2025 Annual Survey Report, member institutions welcomed just 81,636 students recently — down nearly half from the 150,112 students enrolled in 2019. The organization attributes the drop to federal study permit caps introduced in January 2024 and unpredictable visa policies, which choked the pipeline of students entering Canadian colleges and universities through preparatory language pathway programs.

In 2019, the language-education sector directly and indirectly generated $6.75 billion in economic activity for Canada and supported 75,000 jobs, Languages Canada reported. Peralta says those revenue figures have now been cut in half.

ILAC’s collapse comes less than a week after another major international chain, EC English, closed its operations around the world, including three campuses in Canada.

Languages Canada told the Star it has found new academic homes for all 471 students impacted by EC English’s closures at its campuses in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver. 

Staff at ILAC were given virtually no notice of the closure. One ILAC teacher, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of harming future employment prospects, described receiving an email late Friday morning urging staff to attend an urgent virtual town hall call at 4:15 p.m.

During the brief meeting, ILAC chief executive officer John DeFranco read a prepared statement informing staff the school was closing immediately after failing to secure new investors….

Source: Canada’s largest private English-language school files for bankruptcy, leaving 1,300 students scrambling

Alberta’s shameless attempt to scapegoat immigrants

Yes, notable change:

…Though never free from the systemic impacts of racism and xenophobia – not to mention the continuing colonial dispossession of First Nations – Alberta has for decades welcomed newcomers, and celebrated them as an engine of economic growth.

Just a few years ago, the UCP was actively courting migrants, while Ms. Smith mused about an Alberta inhabited by 10 million souls. 

Only recently did the party embrace the type of anti-immigrant rhetoric that paints newcomers as a burden. In February, Ms. Smith stated, without evidence, that immigration has “flooded our classrooms, emergency rooms and social support systems.”

This argument falls apart under scrutiny. Immigrants, including temporary residents, pay taxes. If classrooms and hospitals are overflowing, it’s because the UCP has failed to adequately invest in them.

Scapegoating immigrants is a common tactic in Western democracies. But in Alberta, this plays directly into the hands of the separatist movement – a movement that is not only staunchly anti-immigrant, but a hotbed of xenophobia and racist conspiracy theories.

Voting yes to the immigration questions will normalize the type of reactionary politics typically associated with MAGA and far-right movements in Europe….

Richie Assaly is a freelance writer and former Toronto Star culture reporter. He writes about politics, music and books. 

Source: Alberta’s shameless attempt to scapegoat immigrants