lordmandeep
Banned
no it because people just do not trust him.
|
|
|
Conservative Immigration Policy
- Thread starter kEiThZ
- Start date
afransen
Senior Member
And I'd imagine rural and small town Canadians will stick with their Tories.... Ignatieff is seen as a posh American transplant in the "rest of Canada."
As it stands, Harper may be PM longer than you Libs think....
I doubt it will be all that long even if the CPC survive the next election. I doubt they will increase their standing, and failing to do so will cost Harper his job. As it is, some of his caucus are laying the groundwork for the race to replace him.
afransen
Senior Member
Ethnic background? Because he's white?
Huh?
Huh?
urbandreamer
recession proof
Because he's perceived as being an uptight WASP is what I meant. Just an idea, because many ppl I'm around (all non-Waspy) say he's "terrible" without really saying why, and sometimes I get that feeling....
Or maybe he's just another boring Taurus white middle-aged man, like that other fella, Michael Ignatieff?
Or maybe he's just another boring Taurus white middle-aged man, like that other fella, Michael Ignatieff?
H
Hydrogen
Guest
afransen
Senior Member
I wouldn't call Harper a WASP in the strictest sense. But no. I think his ethnicity is waaaaay down the list in terms of reasons people dislike Harper. I would think his politics, his personality/lack of charisma, and perhaps religion would factor in.
adma
Superstar
"Adopted Calgarian" may count negatively as "ethnic background" in some circles. And it wouldn't even matter if Harper's skin were tinted like Bobby Jindal...
Brandon716
Senior Member
Did somebody say WASP?
Where is the pesticide, especially made with a mixture of holy water AND death.
Where is the pesticide, especially made with a mixture of holy water AND death.
kEiThZ
Superstar
PUBLICATION: National Post
DATE: 2009.04.16
EDITION: National
SECTION: Issues & Ideas
PAGE: A21
ILLUSTRATION: Black & White Photo: Carlo Allegri, National Post / A familyrecites the oath of citizenship during a swearing-in ceremony at Toronto's Harbourfront during Canada Day festivities in 2003. ;
BYLINE: Rudyard Griffiths
SOURCE: National Post
WORD COUNT: 672
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The meaning of Canadian citizenship
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tomorrow, April 17, an important change to our citizenship laws comes into effect, one that will strengthen what it means to be Canadian in new and positive ways.
From this point forward, any person born abroad to Canadian parents will be a Canadian only if their father or mother was born in Canada, or if one or more of their parents became a citizen by immigrating to this country.
At long last, the absurd practice of allowing hundreds of thousands of citizens who have no real connection to Canada pass on the remarkable benefits of Canadian citizenship to their descendants, in perpetuity, has come to an end.
This simple reform embodies what was best in the ideals of our country's founders, who believed that full citizenship was attained through the act of physical settlement -- in their time, the backbreaking working of the land--and by contributing to the social betterment of your local community.
In our own time, it represents a first step toward correcting a long-standing slight against newcomers who settle in Canada permanently.
Specifically, by bestowing on "citizens of convenience" the generous bundle of privileges of full citizenship -- everything from subsidized education to public health care to full consular services -- without asking anything in return, we devalue the commitment of the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who choose to stay in Canada permanently, raise their families, learn French or English, pay taxes and generally help build a better country.
I would argue that the lack of a clearly defined set of benefits that accrue only to citizens who form a lifelong attachment to Canada is largely
responsible for our dismal retention of newcomers. With an ageing (and shrinking) workforce, Canada can ill afford having, as we do today, 40% of skilled and professional male immigrants leaving the country permanently within 10 years.
More policy changes may be on the way soon: On Tuesday, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney declared that the federal government will modify Canada's citizenship program to include greater emphasis on Canadian "values." Let's hope that this week's rule change -- and those envisioned by Mr. Kenney -- represents the start of an overhaul of our citizenship laws aimed at drawing a sharper set of distinctions between Canadians who demonstrate an active commitment to their country and those who don't.
For instance, why shouldn't we follow the U. S. example by taxing our two-million-plus non-resident citizens on their worldwide earnings? The goal of attaching a monetary price to Canadian citizenship
is not to fill government coffers. Rather, it is to advance an important principle: Non-residents should not enjoy a free ride when it comes to sustaining the benefits of the citizenship they enjoy.
Also, surely the time has come to re-examine the practice of dual citizenship, especially among those fortunate enough to be Canadian-born.
Today, there are as many as 2.5 million Canadian dual citizens living in Canada and abroad. Of this group, fully 750,000 are Canadian-born persons who have formally acquired the citizenship of another country.
The practice of dual citizenship, especially among the Canadianborn, does a disservice to a country that gives us so much and asks for little in return. It needlessly conflicts our loyalties, weakens whatever sense of common purpose we have in this diverse nation of ours, and perpetuates a minimalist vision of what we owe each other and Canada as fellow citizens.
For all these reasons, the federal government should consider adopting a modified version of the pre-1977 practice of revoking the citizenship of Canadian adults who voluntarily acquire a second nationality. In our era, such a law would apply immediately to the Canadian-born but exempt newcomers who often require a second passport to enter their birth country and who bring to Canada global business linkages and know-how.
For second-generation Canadians, whether they are born in Canada or abroad, the realities of such a reform would be clear: If being Canadian alone isn't good enough for you, then you risk losing forever the rights and privileges of one of the world's great citizenships.
-Rudyard Griffiths is the co-founder of the Dominion Institute and the author of Who We Are: A Citizen's Manifesto (Douglas &McIntyre).
DATE: 2009.04.16
EDITION: National
SECTION: Issues & Ideas
PAGE: A21
ILLUSTRATION: Black & White Photo: Carlo Allegri, National Post / A familyrecites the oath of citizenship during a swearing-in ceremony at Toronto's Harbourfront during Canada Day festivities in 2003. ;
BYLINE: Rudyard Griffiths
SOURCE: National Post
WORD COUNT: 672
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The meaning of Canadian citizenship
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tomorrow, April 17, an important change to our citizenship laws comes into effect, one that will strengthen what it means to be Canadian in new and positive ways.
From this point forward, any person born abroad to Canadian parents will be a Canadian only if their father or mother was born in Canada, or if one or more of their parents became a citizen by immigrating to this country.
At long last, the absurd practice of allowing hundreds of thousands of citizens who have no real connection to Canada pass on the remarkable benefits of Canadian citizenship to their descendants, in perpetuity, has come to an end.
This simple reform embodies what was best in the ideals of our country's founders, who believed that full citizenship was attained through the act of physical settlement -- in their time, the backbreaking working of the land--and by contributing to the social betterment of your local community.
In our own time, it represents a first step toward correcting a long-standing slight against newcomers who settle in Canada permanently.
Specifically, by bestowing on "citizens of convenience" the generous bundle of privileges of full citizenship -- everything from subsidized education to public health care to full consular services -- without asking anything in return, we devalue the commitment of the hundreds of thousands of immigrants who choose to stay in Canada permanently, raise their families, learn French or English, pay taxes and generally help build a better country.
I would argue that the lack of a clearly defined set of benefits that accrue only to citizens who form a lifelong attachment to Canada is largely
responsible for our dismal retention of newcomers. With an ageing (and shrinking) workforce, Canada can ill afford having, as we do today, 40% of skilled and professional male immigrants leaving the country permanently within 10 years.
More policy changes may be on the way soon: On Tuesday, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney declared that the federal government will modify Canada's citizenship program to include greater emphasis on Canadian "values." Let's hope that this week's rule change -- and those envisioned by Mr. Kenney -- represents the start of an overhaul of our citizenship laws aimed at drawing a sharper set of distinctions between Canadians who demonstrate an active commitment to their country and those who don't.
For instance, why shouldn't we follow the U. S. example by taxing our two-million-plus non-resident citizens on their worldwide earnings? The goal of attaching a monetary price to Canadian citizenship
is not to fill government coffers. Rather, it is to advance an important principle: Non-residents should not enjoy a free ride when it comes to sustaining the benefits of the citizenship they enjoy.
Also, surely the time has come to re-examine the practice of dual citizenship, especially among those fortunate enough to be Canadian-born.
Today, there are as many as 2.5 million Canadian dual citizens living in Canada and abroad. Of this group, fully 750,000 are Canadian-born persons who have formally acquired the citizenship of another country.
The practice of dual citizenship, especially among the Canadianborn, does a disservice to a country that gives us so much and asks for little in return. It needlessly conflicts our loyalties, weakens whatever sense of common purpose we have in this diverse nation of ours, and perpetuates a minimalist vision of what we owe each other and Canada as fellow citizens.
For all these reasons, the federal government should consider adopting a modified version of the pre-1977 practice of revoking the citizenship of Canadian adults who voluntarily acquire a second nationality. In our era, such a law would apply immediately to the Canadian-born but exempt newcomers who often require a second passport to enter their birth country and who bring to Canada global business linkages and know-how.
For second-generation Canadians, whether they are born in Canada or abroad, the realities of such a reform would be clear: If being Canadian alone isn't good enough for you, then you risk losing forever the rights and privileges of one of the world's great citizenships.
-Rudyard Griffiths is the co-founder of the Dominion Institute and the author of Who We Are: A Citizen's Manifesto (Douglas &McIntyre).
jade_lee
Active Member
I think it has more to do with him not being Canadian enough for our Canadian taste. Harper shames us with his lack of character to defend the rights of Canadian citizens and this hopefully will get him spanked come the next election when the majority of us Canadians get our voice back. The liberal leadership appeared weak only because lots of dollars have been spent to send that message out. Hopefully many see clearly past that lame "americanized" dirty strategy to discredit people with false talking points.
Us Canadians don't require any government to explain to us what being a Canadian means, we know. Harper and his lot need to be reminded of such.
Last edited:
Tewder
Senior Member
What does this even mean? Whose definition of 'Canadian', yours? Trust me, I've read your posts and you don't speak for me!
'Us Canadians'? You would circumscribe all Canadians as thinking the way you do yet criticize the PM for 'allegedly' doing the same?
To suggest that the Prime Minister and our government are somehow misstepping their bounds in dealing with the issue of absue of 'Canadian' citizenship is patently ludicrous.
On the contrary, he is protecting the 'rights' of citizens by clarifying them and addressing the abuse of them. Aside from the basic human rights of the Charter there are no citizenship 'rights' that do not come without responsibilities. That's the deal, the social contract we all agree to. It's nice to see this bargain being respected and enforced for all of us.
kEiThZ
Superstar
PUBLICATION: GLOBE AND MAIL
IDN: 091070145
DATE: 2009.04.17
PAGE: A14
BYLINE:
SECTION: Editorial
EDITION: Metro
DATELINE:
WORDS: 453
WORD COUNT: 472
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANADIAN VALUES AND HISTORY Strengthening citizenship
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposal by the federal government to change Canada's citizenship program to place greater emphasis on the country's values, history and institutions has the potential to strengthen the sense of belonging among new Canadians.
The process for acquiring citizenship should not allow for fundamental misunderstandings at the outset, and federal Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's plan to make sure newcomers have a fuller appreciation of basic Canadian values, such as equality between men and women and liberal democracy, would reduce the risk of confusion.
Canadian citizenship confers great privileges, but it should also demand something in return.
Enjoyment of citizenship likewise requires understanding of Canada's history and institutions. The current citizenship booklet includes 2 1/2 pages on recycling, but just one paragraph on Confederation.
While correctly celebrating "our international role as peacekeepers," it does not mention the tremendous sacrifice of veterans during times of war, a much greater contribution to the international order.
In other words, the current manual tries to make up in earnestness for what it lacks in seriousness. This fails both immigrants and the country. Mr. Kenney says that when people join the Canadian family, they need to understand "Canadian history becomes their history, Canadian values become their values." That is not to say immigrants have to forsake their deep and abiding attachment to their lands of origin, that they have to give up the hyphen. Integration does not mean assimilation. Ultimately, how much people choose to leave at the door is their decision alone.
But the Harper government is right to place greater emphasis on the meaning of Canadian citizenship and identity. Those who immigrate to Canada owe more than a perfunctory allegiance to the place where they have chosen to make their lives. Canada is more than a job mart. Most immigrants understand that and will seize on the opportunity to better belong.
The problem has had less to do with the expectations of newcomers, than with government multiculturalism policies dating from the 1970s that tried to encourage differences.
Mr. Kenney, who has already spoken out on the need to strengthen the language skills of newcomers, says the government is committed to "addressing the concrete challenges of integration." As he recently told a Calgary Chamber of Commerce audience, "We want to make sure that the people who are joining our political community as Canadian citizens have a full appreciation for the values, symbols and institutions that define Canada and which are rooted in our history." To that end, the department is consulting widely with organizations and experts to improve the citizenship program. The move should be welcomed, but should not end there. Immigrants are not the only Canadians needing a civics and history lesson.
IDN: 091070145
DATE: 2009.04.17
PAGE: A14
BYLINE:
SECTION: Editorial
EDITION: Metro
DATELINE:
WORDS: 453
WORD COUNT: 472
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CANADIAN VALUES AND HISTORY Strengthening citizenship
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposal by the federal government to change Canada's citizenship program to place greater emphasis on the country's values, history and institutions has the potential to strengthen the sense of belonging among new Canadians.
The process for acquiring citizenship should not allow for fundamental misunderstandings at the outset, and federal Citizenship and Immigration Minister Jason Kenney's plan to make sure newcomers have a fuller appreciation of basic Canadian values, such as equality between men and women and liberal democracy, would reduce the risk of confusion.
Canadian citizenship confers great privileges, but it should also demand something in return.
Enjoyment of citizenship likewise requires understanding of Canada's history and institutions. The current citizenship booklet includes 2 1/2 pages on recycling, but just one paragraph on Confederation.
While correctly celebrating "our international role as peacekeepers," it does not mention the tremendous sacrifice of veterans during times of war, a much greater contribution to the international order.
In other words, the current manual tries to make up in earnestness for what it lacks in seriousness. This fails both immigrants and the country. Mr. Kenney says that when people join the Canadian family, they need to understand "Canadian history becomes their history, Canadian values become their values." That is not to say immigrants have to forsake their deep and abiding attachment to their lands of origin, that they have to give up the hyphen. Integration does not mean assimilation. Ultimately, how much people choose to leave at the door is their decision alone.
But the Harper government is right to place greater emphasis on the meaning of Canadian citizenship and identity. Those who immigrate to Canada owe more than a perfunctory allegiance to the place where they have chosen to make their lives. Canada is more than a job mart. Most immigrants understand that and will seize on the opportunity to better belong.
The problem has had less to do with the expectations of newcomers, than with government multiculturalism policies dating from the 1970s that tried to encourage differences.
Mr. Kenney, who has already spoken out on the need to strengthen the language skills of newcomers, says the government is committed to "addressing the concrete challenges of integration." As he recently told a Calgary Chamber of Commerce audience, "We want to make sure that the people who are joining our political community as Canadian citizens have a full appreciation for the values, symbols and institutions that define Canada and which are rooted in our history." To that end, the department is consulting widely with organizations and experts to improve the citizenship program. The move should be welcomed, but should not end there. Immigrants are not the only Canadians needing a civics and history lesson.
lordmandeep
Banned
I remember about three years ago in Ottawa me, my mom and dad, sister were waiting in line to get into the House of Commons for a tour.
The tour lady while we waited asked the group random trivia questions about Canada's govt and its history.
She asked about 15 questions and my dad, myself and some Tamil guy got all the right answers. Stuff about when was confederation, how many MP's, who is head of state, first Pm, Longest serving Pm... stuff like that.
So don't be so quick to say immigrants know nothing about this country. Many immigrants do not and that should be addressed. However, the greater shame is for those who are native to the land who know nothing about it.
jenny_zhang
Active Member
Overall though I would say about 70% of my immigrant relatives couldn't answer any question about Canadian history. Actually some of them were criticizing me for taking Canadian history courses in university, they said `you should be studying Chinese history instead`. So much for that, huh. I`m not sure how appropriate it is to use my family as a representation of all immigrants...maybe there are some immigrant groups who are overall more interested in Canadian history/knowledge than others.
afransen
Senior Member
Sounds about right. It takes time for some people to let go of the old country. I guess it also goes to show that many citizens still hold themselves apart from Canada, and still identify with another place.