Race and Ethnicity - Multiculturalism in Canada - Essay Example

Multiculturalism in Canada Canada is home to a vast diversity of cultural heritages and racial groups. This multicultural diversity is a result of centuries of immigration. About 500 years ago, Europeans arrived in Canada. In 1867, thousands of Irish and Chinese laborers were imported as workers to build the Canadian Pacific Railway. Canada needed more people to work in forests, factories and mines, and to build the country. Since the early 1970s, the majority of immigrants have been "people of color," coming to Canada from the developing world or other areas of non-European population. Immigrants and their children cross lines of wealth, neighborhood, education and profession. For example, a recent study of first year students at the University of Toronto showed that more than half identify themselves as non-white by race. Approximately 40 percent are Asians. Only about one third came from homes where English is the only language spoken. Toronto and Vancouver stand out as the most culturally and racially diverse cities in Canada, although the cultural mix in other Canadian cities also exist in varying proportions. (About Canada) Earlier Multiculturalism Policy In 1971, the federal government announced its policy of multiculturalism. It challenged all Canadians to accept cultural diversity, while encouraging them to participate fully and equally in the Canadian society. Many urban English-speaking Canadians supported the policy, looking at it as a timely recognition of pluralism. When the policy was announced, the Canadian ethnic mosaic was still very much dominated by those of European heritage and was designed to recognize their contribution to Canada. As immigration to Canada from the developing world increased, the multiculturalism policy had to deal with the concerns of visible minorities. These new and emerging communities were more concerned about the elimination of racial prejudice and discrimination. They wanted to ensure equal access to jobs, housing and education. (About Canada) Multiculturalism Policy in the 21st Century The public education sector faces greater challenges as demographic trends are constantly changing the composition of Canadian classrooms. Canada educate its increasingly diverse student population, as well as facilitate their transitions into the work force to help ensure the country's economic success. Classrooms are evolving in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, as the majority of new Canadians, some 250,000 of them annually, take up residence in these cities. (Drummond and Lacey, 2007) A holistic approach to education is required in the light of the most recent controversies in Herouxville, Quebec, some 200 kilometres northeast of Montreal, resulting from the passage of a controversial code of behavior aimed at potential Muslim immigrants. Last February 11, six women, accompanied by a handful of male and female Muslim students, appealed in Quebec for changes to the so-called "code of life," which lays out societal norms for Herouxville. May Haidar, one of the women, said "It's apparent there is a misconception and a wrong view of Muslim women, so we want to open a dialogue to let them (the non-Muslim Canadians) know us and, of course, we want to know them." (Moore, 2007) Andre Drouin, the town councilor behind the code of behavior for immigrants, said the residents in Quebec are eager to welcome the visitors and prove that they are not racists. But Drouin was unrepentant about the code and said it will stay put. The debate over accommodation of ethnic, cultural and religious minorities continues to rage in Quebec and its Premier Jean Charest has named a special commission to study the issue. The Canadian Islamic Congress considered filing a human rights complaint against the Herouxville council. (Moore, 2007) The controversial five-page immigrants' code, passed by the Herouxville town council in January, says a person's face should not be covered, except at Halloween, and that children should sing Christmas songs in December. It informs would-be immigrants that women in Canada can vote, drive and dance if they choose. It says adults can drink alcohol and children cannot bring weapons, religiously symbolic or not, to school despite a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that has already upheld that right for Sikh Canadians. (Moore, 2007) There was also prohibition on stoning, , live burning or disfiguring women with acid. (Aubin and Gatehouse, 2007) A more recent report this March said the controversy about the code had become global, eliciting passionate reactions around the country and as far as Turkey, Russia, and Australia, thus causing global embarrassment. The code was intended to educate newcomers but its authors were accused of xenophobia, and such question as "Has Canada finally reached the limits of tolerance" was being asked. (Aubin and Gatehouse, 2007) Surveys have been seeking signs of a growing intolerance, but support for immigration have been strong. More Canadians still believe that the new arrivals should be free to maintain their religious and cultural practices than be required to "blend in." Some opined that the apparent multiculturalism bashing is an artificial phenomenon masquerading as academic and political discourse. (Aubin and Gatehouse, 2007) Councilor Drouin of Quebec lamented that people failed to understand that the Herouxville code was a friendly gesture. The council just wanted the officials in Quebec City and Ottawa to include the code in their information packages for future immigrants. Drouin said he should not be branded as a racist. He insinuated that behind the controversy was the fanaticism of a few religious groups. (Aubin and Gatehouse, 2007) Canada already have rules for immigrants long before the code adapted by the Herouxville council. Explicit legal lines have been drawn in outlawing cultural practices like polygamy and female circumcision. Children are required to attend school and that violence toward them is unacceptable. Women's equality with men are stated, although the Herouxville code is very explicit and detailed in its listing a woman's right to drive a car, vote, sign cheques, dance, decide for herself, speak her mind, and dress as she sees fit. Conclusion According to Aubin and Gatehouse (2007), the general impression is that Canada accepts diversity but balances it.. Students are allowed to wear veils in class because it is a statement of religious expression. But there are limits such as faith leaders are not allowed to come to schools and lead prayer sessions. Scholars are open to recommendations on how Canadians may better live with one another, but are not comfortable in turning suggestions into rules, because such "brings flashbacks of Nazi attitudes toward the Jews or apartheid attitudes toward blacks." The greater the diversity of the racial and cultural mix, the greater the need for tolerance and openness in accepting one another as fellow Canadians. With globalization and the ever-increasing movement of people from one country to another, the challenge of appreciating and accommodating cultural differences has become a universal experience. Canada's future depends on the commitments of all its citizens to a unified Canadian identity, while still taking pride in the uniqueness of individual cultures of its ethnic groups. (About Canada) References About Canada: Multiculturalism in Canada. 13 March 2007 . Aubin, Benoit and Gatehouse, Jonathan. "Do immigrants need rules," Macleans (2007). 13 March 2007 . Drummond, Dan and Lacey, Veronica. "Teaching in an increasingly diverse classroom," Globe and Mail (2007). 13 March 2007 . Moore, Dene. "Muslim women visit Quebec town which has contrived code aimed at immigrants," Macleans (2007). 13 March 2007 Appendices News Clip # 1 Do immigrants need rules The debate rages on Hrouxville's clumsy effort at creating some sparks questions on the limits of tolerance BENOIT AUBIN AND JONATHON GATEHOUSE | Mar 5, 2007 | It's impossible to miss the twice-a-day passage of the freight train that rips through Hrouxville, horn blaring, wheels clattering, bells ringing at the crossing: the track cuts through the main thoroughfare, and traffic stops for several long minutes. Then, after the train has vanished in a cloud of smoke and whirling snow, silence and quiet regain their rights, and the people of Hrouxville can mark the time, knowing that very little else will come to stir their peace and tranquility until the same train roars back in the opposite direction 12 hours later. That was life for the 1,300 inhabitants of the small Mauricie village, 200 km northeast of Montreal, until, that is, they became the focus of a global controversy that touched off passionate, and often strident, reactions across the country and as far away as Turkey, Russia and Australia. "I don't know if life will ever go back to normal, if we will ever be the same again," says Nicole Jubinville, who runs a small B&B frequented mostly by European tourists seeking northern adventure on snowmobile and dog sled. "Who would have thought, a small village like here, causing a stir that goes all around the world" Tap Hrouxville into Google News, U.K., and you'll get 18 pages of headlines. Search for Hrouxville in the French, Italian, or Spanish media, and you'll learn how to spell "beheading" and "stoning" in as many languages. The five-page document that the Hrouxville town council adopted on Jan. 25, purporting, somewhat naively, to inform immigrants of what to expect if they choose to set up shop in this corner of Quebec's snowy heartland (an occurrence that has yet to happen) has become a worldwide embarrassment. The list of community "standards," which draws on the results of a crude, 20-question opinion poll of 196 area residents, managed to offend practically everyone. Muslims felt they were slurred by advice that the only time you may mask or cover your face in Hrouxville is at Halloween. (Not to mention an express prohibition on stoning, live burning or disfiguring women with acid.) Sikhs saw a slight in the rule that children may not carry any weapons "real or fake, symbolic or not" to school, a clear reference to a high-profile court battle that gave a Montreal boy the right to carry a religious kirpan dagger to school. Jews could find echoes of a recent dust-up between a Hasidic synagogue and a neighbouring YMCA in Outremont in the proclamation that gyms in Hrouxville have windows through which you might glimpse women working out in "appropriate exercise wear." The townsfolk even included a message for born-again Christians: biology is taught in local schools. The media had a field day. Montreal's La Presse touched off the frenzy with a front-page story on Jan. 27. "I woke up the morning after, and there were three satellite trucks parked at my door, antennas deployed, and I went: whoa, what's going on" says Luc Paquin, whose small, brightly lit greasy spoon, Le Thimote, across the street from the church, constitutes the village's downtown core. Hordes of reporters descended. City Hall -- a part-time mayor, six part-time councillors, and a budget of $1.1 million -- was swamped. Vandals, sneaking in at night, smeared buildings and signs with graffiti calling them fascists. A delegation of Muslim women -- sponsored by the Canadian Islamic Congress -- arrived from Montreal, bearing Middle-Eastern pastries and small gifts. The photo that made most of the papers showed a hijab-wearing visitor wagging her finger in a townswoman's face. The locals despaired. "We've pulled a fire alarm here, but everyone is calling us arsonists," says Paquin. In Montreal, the good burghers of Hrouxville became the butt of hickster jokes on radio phone-ins and late-night talk shows. France's Libration newspaper accused them of embarking on a "xenophobic crusade." But as the furor subsides, there are signs that their ham-handed attempts to educate newcomers may have struck a deeper chord. The town claims it has received several thousand "mostly approving" emails from all over the world. Quebec Premier Jean Charest has created a high-profile commission of inquiry into how the province accommodates new arrivals. And all of a sudden, Canadians are talking about the previously unthinkable. Have we reached the point where we need hard and fast rules for immigrants A code that spells out just what is expected of newcomers, and how far society is willing to go to help them feel comfortable in their new home Just such a debate has been raging for months in Quebec. Now it shows signs of spreading to the rest of Canada. Has a country that ranks multiculturalism alongside free health care and hockey in the pantheon of its greatest achievements finally reached the limits of tolerance Budget meetings have a way of making the mind wander. And so it was late last fall, during one interminable number-crunching exercise that Hrouxville town council hit upon an idea that sounded like a lot more fun. "We were preparing a 10-year development plan for the city, looking for elements that could favour, or hamper growth," says Andr Drouin, the motor-mouthed political godfather of the immigrants' code, "when someone mentioned 'reasonable accommodations' as a potential cost factor in the future." Over the past few years, accommodations -- the polite, proactive label affixed to a series of divisive skirmishes between religious groups and civil society -- have become a hot topic in Quebec. Recent examples include: female inspectors prevented from road-testing Hasidic Jews seeking a driver's licence, an ambulance driver expelled from a Jewish hospital for eating a ham sandwich in a kosher part of the cafeteria, Muslim women demanding that men be barred from prenatal courses, and a father stopped from accompanying his young son to the pool during women's swimming hours. "To me, the problem is obvious: if these people come here, and then make such outlandish demands, it must be because they were not well informed of how we do things here in the first place," says Drouin. The solution was quickly sketched out, a simple document outlining how things work -- right down to the decorations on the Christmas tree -- in a small, rural Quebec town. "Not everyone realized ours was a friendly gesture, No one was trying to legislate new rules, says the councillor (municipalities don't have that sort of power anyway), they just wanted officials in Quebec City and Ottawa to include the document in their information packages for would-be immigrants.a gesture of welcoming, not of rejection or exclusion," says Drouin. "If I plan to live in Saudi Arabia or Patagonia, I'll want information about what I'll find there. Immigrants should be informed of what they'll find here." The 60-year-old former military man takes pains to explain that he travelled the world before retiring in Hrouxville and can speak several languages. "I shouldn't be branded a racist just because I explain who we are," he says. Besides, says Drouin, the debate over reasonable accommodation isn't about race anyway but "the fanaticism of three or four religious groups" he refuses to name. In the past, that sort of corrosive political discourse has always made Canadians -- both inside and outside of Quebec -- deeply uneasy. But there are signs that may be changing in the post-9/11 world. In Europe, there's a lengthening list of formerly open societies that have chosen to raise the drawbridge. Terrorist attacks in Madrid and London, widespread rioting in France, and the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh have stoked fears that allowing immigrants -- especially Muslims -- to keep their own cultures has created a growing "us and them" divide. France has banned the wearing of the hijab in schools, and the Netherlands is debating whether to go even further, outlawing veils, burkas and head coverings in all public places. (The once-liberal Dutch already boast the toughest immigration rules in Europe, testing the tolerance of would-be newcomers by gauging their reaction to scenes of homosexuals kissing and nude beaches.) Norway now requires citizenship applicants to take 300 hours of language classes. And the U.K. has introduced legislation that will see all non-European workers (including Canadians) start carrying biometric ID cards next year. Support for similar measures in Canada is by no means overwhelming, but it can be found in some surprising corners. "Multiculturalism allows people to accentuate our differences," says Tarek Fatah, founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, a liberal advocacy group. "It's really forcing people not to be part of a cohesive society." Fatah would like to see Canadian authorities go even further than their Dutch counterparts, educating all would-be immigrants about not just what to expect in Canada, but the values of social progress, equality and democracy they will be required to embrace here. "I'm talking about promoting this country with a passion," he says. Canadians' well-mannered reluctance to talk openly about our expectations of immigrants simply masks a growing latent anger, says Fatah. "I ask my non-Muslim friends, tell me honestly, when no one else is around, don't you say, 'Who the f--- are these guys' " Canada is welcoming a quarter-million new arrivals every year, most of them visible minorities, hailing from countries where English or French is not the predominant language, and practices and traditions differ greatly from daily life in Halifax, Montreal or Saskatoon. In the past, the country's largest urban centres have borne the brunt of that transformation (visible minorities now make up 43 per cent of Toronto's population, and 49 per cent of its residents were born outside of Canada) but that too is changing. In the mid-1990s, the southern Alberta community of Brooks looked like much of small-town Canada -- white and Christian. Today, thanks to the voracious labour needs of one local employer -- the giant Lakeside meat-packing plant -- it's one of the most diverse centres in the country: 25 per cent of its 12,000 residents are visible minorities, representing every nation in Africa and speaking 76 different languages. Mayor Don Weisbeck makes it clear that Brooks is proud of its changing face. But such massive change doesn't happen smoothly. Some locals have groused about the accommodations, including curtains at the community pool so Muslim women can swim without worrying about the gaze of men. Other difficulties like the language barriers, or the arrivals' "total distrust and fear of police or any uniformed authority" (most new residents of Brooks are refugees from war-torn countries), are harder to solve. More money, support and programs to educate immigrants about the Canadian way of life are needed, says the mayor. "I don't think we should be apologetic about the fact that we want these people to learn our language, to learn our culture, and be able to work with us." Doreen Medway, the executive director of the Global Friendship Immigration Centre, says few of the newcomers she deals with seem to understand the Canadian vision of democracy and respect for the country's diversity. She tells the tale of a potluck dinner the centre held last year to celebrate Stop Racism day. Medway had brought along tiny flags to stick in the various dishes. An attempt to plant the Ethiopian banner in a meal prepared by some arrivals from the Oromo region in the south of the country almost touched off a riot. Perhaps the flag was ill-advised -- the Muslim Oromo have frequently been at odds with the Christian Amhara -- but that's not the point, says Medway. "We need to instill tolerance in these people or we're going to have big problems down the road." The pattern of immigration in Canada has always been fairly predictable. Successive waves of new arrivals have found comfort and support within their own communities, creating enclaves that allowed them to live, work and shop in their mother tongues. It's their kids and grandchildren who have mastered English or French, moved to the suburbs and become fully integrated Canadians. But these days, there are troubling signs that the tried and true methods of assimilation may no longer be working. A recent Statistics Canada study concluded that the low-income rate ($26,800 for a family of four) among recent immigrant families is now three times higher than for those born in Canada. Unemployment and underemployment rates remain stubbornly high. The study that has caused the most consternation, however, is a recent paper by University of Toronto sociologist Jeffrey Reitz and economist Rupa Banerjee, which found the children of visible minority immigrants not only feel "less Canadian" than their white counterparts, but report more discrimination than their parents. The place where they encounter most racism Work. "Thirty-five per cent of visible minorities report some discrimination," says Reitz. "That certainly sounds to me like the system is broken." The conditions for a debate about how we treat newcomers, he adds, and what we expect in return, are certainly falling into place. The question is, what's really driving the agenda Ever since Sept. 11, pollsters have been poking and prodding Canadians, seeking signs of a growing intolerance. But support for immigration -- even at Canada's relatively high levels -- has remained robust. We firmly reject the notion that would-be Canadians should have their religious beliefs and values screened before admittance -- 68 per cent according to an Environics poll last fall. And more of us -- 49 per cent -- believe new arrivals should be free to maintain their religious and cultural practices, than be required to "blend in" (40 per cent). In turn, a recent CBC poll of Canada's Muslim community showed more than 80 per cent of respondents said they were broadly satisfied with their lives in this country. Seventy-three per cent were "very proud" to be Canadian; only 17 per cent thought their fellow citizens were hostile to Islam. The most frequent complaint was this country's cold weather. Jack Jedwab, executive director of the Association for Canadian Studies in Montreal, says the growing debate over accommodation is a phony one -- old-time "multiculturalism bashing" masquerading as academic and political discourse. "It's as though a group of people have a set idea and are very uncomfortable about how our diversity is evolving," he says, noting polls that suggest just six per cent of Canadians are uneasy with the idea of a Muslim next-door neighbour. "I think there's a backlash among opinion leaders, but not among the general population." And certainly it's not true to suggest that the country doesn't already have rules for immigrants. We've drawn explicit legal lines outlawing cultural practices like polygamy and female circumcision. And we do make efforts to educate arrivals about how to fit in. For example, "A Newcomer's Introduction to Canada," a pamphlet published by the federal Department of Citizenship and Immigration, bears more than a passing resemblance to the Hrouxville declaration. Both agree, in similar language, that children are required to attend school, and that violence toward them is unacceptable. Both frankly raise the issue of same-sex parenting, and both note women's equality to men, although the Hrouxville code leaves nothing to the imagination, listing a woman's right to "drive a car, vote, sign cheques, dance, decide for herself, speak her piece, dress as she sees fit." The crux of the debate, it seems, is how pointed we are willing to be with our advice, rules and guidelines. The most striking element of the current government guide is what it barely touches -- social standards. Our best advice to immigrants on how to fit in Avoid littering, learn to wait in line, and "bargaining for a better price is not common." And whether or not we want to discuss them, accommodations for immigrants are now a daily fact of life in Canada. Peel District School Board, just west of Toronto, has one of the most diverse student bodies in the country. It was one of the first boards to allow students to wear kirpans to school, and boasts policies and procedures that are all-embracing. "We acknowledge everything from Devali to Eid to Hanukkah to Christmas," says director of communications Brian Woodland. Students are allowed to wear veils in class "because that's a statement of religious expression." If parents oppose art classes in which their child must draw people, which is common in some faiths, they alter the curriculum. "It's our understanding that we all need to change. It's not just the people who come to the school system who make the concessions," says Woodland. But there are limits. For example, the board won't let faith leaders come into the schools and lead prayer sessions. "There are times when people want accommodation to the point where the heart of the curriculum isn't left," says Woodland. "And we say no to that." Even the immigrant communities themselves aren't so sure how far all of this should go. Professor Mohamed Elmasry, national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress, likes the idea of the blue-ribbon panel that will make recommendations on how Quebecers might better live with one another, but he balks at turning suggestions into guidelines or rules. "It brings a flashback of Nazi attitudes toward Jews, or apartheid attitudes toward blacks," he says. Since it's almost impossible to "narrowly define what are Canadian values and culture," Elmasry says, supply and demand should be the rule of thumb. If a "critical mass" of people demand only male driver's licence inspectors, then meet the need, he says. "Canada is a mosaic of minorities. We should accommodate one another." Our checkered history suggests that Canada -- a nation of immigrants -- has frequently been caught up in the uncomfortable business of balancing the interests of established citizens and newer arrivals. The principle difference in recent years is that the immigrants don't automatically lose. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms has altered the playing field, and ushered in court decisions that have changed the face of Canada at a dizzying clip. The pendulum, however, shows signs of swinging back. The Toronto terror arrests and last summer's evacuations from Lebanon have sparked a new debate about what citizens, new and old, owe Canada. And there are many who think we've been a little too flexible, and not quite demanding enough. Adrienne Clarkson, Canada's former governor general, argues that there is a pressing need to better integrate newcomers into the mainstream. "We used to say that these people will become Canadians in two or three generations, but I don't think we have time for that anymore," says Clarkson, who now heads the Institute for Canadian Citizenship, an organization that promotes civic participation and integration. "It should be accomplished within five to 10 years." If Canada is going to continue to successfully absorb 250,000 people a year, Clarkson says we need more public debate and education about our national values, not less. Simply focusing on enhanced rules, or more flexible accommodation, won't do the trick. New and old Canadians will have to learn to adapt to the changing realities -- everything from head scarves to same-sex marriages -- just as their predecessors did in the past. "We all have to get over the idea that these differences are important. That's basically fear," says Clarkson. This too shall pass. "Remember when we worried so much about somebody in the RCMP with a turban" she asks. "Well, the last time I saw the Musical Ride, there were two turbans, and no one seemed to care." With Cathy Gulli and Nancy Macdonald To comment, email letters@macleans.ca Source: Macleans.ca http://www.macleans.ca/homepage/magazine/article.jspcontent=20070305_103084_103084 News Clip # 2 Muslim women visit Que. town which has controversial code aimed at immigrants February 11, 2007 - 19:40 DENE MOORE HEROUXVILLE, Que. (CP) - Clad in traditional Islamic head scarves, a delegation of Muslim women paid a visit Sunday to the Quebec town that passed a controversial code aimed at potential immigrants. Six women, accompanied by a handful of male and female Muslim students, appealed for changes to a so-called "code of life," which lays out societal norms for Herouxville, 165 kilometres northeast of Montreal. The declaration, passed by the town council last month, says a person's face should not be covered, except at Halloween, and that children should sing Christmas songs in December. It warns would-be immigrants that women can vote, drive and dance if they choose. It says adults can drink alcohol and children cannot bring weapons, religiously symbolic or not, to school despite a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that has already upheld that right for Sikh Canadians. Although the list has no legal weight, it clearly targets religious minorities, said May Haidar, one of the women who made the journey to the community of 1,300 on Sunday afternoon. "We're disappointed by this 'code of life,"' Haidar said. "It's apparent there is a misconception and a wrong view of Muslim women, so we want to open a dialogue to let them know us and, of course, we want to know them." The town has already toned down the declaration, handing out another version Sunday that removed references to stoning women to death or burning them with acid. The council said in a statement that the media misinterpreted some aspects of the documents. But much of the code remained the same and the council repeated a call for changes to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to avoid "unreasonable accommodation" of minorities. Andre Drouin, the town councillor behind the list of norms, said residents were eager to welcome the visitors and prove they are not racists. But Drouin was unrepentant about the list and said it will stay put. "No major change," he told reporters. He said the council has received thousands of e-mails from all over the world. "We're not alone in this," Drouin said. "The e-mails we've received... they all say the same thing: 'We're behind you."' One nearby town has passed a resolution in support of Herouxville but has not adopted their own "norms." Another has passed a resolution in support of multiculturalism. The debate over accommodation of ethnic, cultural and religious minorities continues to rage in Quebec and Premier Jean Charest has named a special commission to study the issue. The Canadian Islamic Congress is still considering a human rights complaint against the Herouxville council. Haidar, a member of the congress, said no decision has been made. "We're going to see what is the reaction from officials in Herouxville and then we'll see," she said. About 50 residents came out to meet the women Sunday, sipping coffee as they waited. Louise Trudel spoke at length with one of the visitors. She said it was nice but accomplished nothing. "We didn't even speak about the 'code de vie,"' she said. "At a certain point it (accommodation of minorities) must stop." Her debate partner, Samira Laouni, felt differently. "For me it was very beneficial," she said. "I didn't leave my kids with my husband for nothing." Source: http://www.macleans.ca/education/wire/article.jspcontent=n021126A News Clip # 3 Posted AT 8:00 AM EDT on 06/03/07 Teaching in an increasingly diverse classroom DON DRUMMOND AND VERONICA LACEY From Tuesday's Globe and Mail Demographic trends are placing new challenges on our public education system, forever changing the composition of Canadian classrooms. How well we educate our increasingly diverse student population and, in turn, facilitate their transitions into the work force will largely determine our future economic success. Classrooms are evolving in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal, as the majority of new Canadians -- 250,000 annually -- take up residence in these cities. Source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com, Viewed 13 March 2007 Table Of Contents Immigration: The Early Years Attitudes Toward Immigrants Immigration in the Modern Era Ethnic and Racial Diversity Multicultural Policy Prospects for the Future anada is often described as a multicultural nation. But what does that mean Simply stated, it means that Canadians are not of any one cultural background, race or heritage. Instead, Canadians today reflect a vast diversity of cultural heritages and racial groups. This multicultural diversity is a result of centuries of immigration. All Canadians, including the Native People, can trace their origins to an immigrant past. This does not mean that the majority of Canadians are immigrants. Far from it. Only about 16% of today's Canadian citizens were born outside Canada. Nor does this mean that anyone who wants to immigrate to Canada may do so. Immigration to Canada is a privilege, not a right. Canada remains selective about who may enter and, equally important, who may not. Over the years, attitudes toward immigration and the development of immigration policies have evolved, reflecting economic, political and social issues in our country. Recently, the federal government has announced changes that will both decrease the number of immigrants allowed into Canada and make it more difficult for people in Canada, Canadian born and immigrants alike, to bring family to Canada from abroad. Immigration: The Early Years mmigration has played and continues to play a key role in shaping the character of Canadian society. Although only a minority of Canadians have first-hand experience of immigration, all Canadians have a parent, grandparent or more distant relative who came to Canada as a stranger to a strange land. Because all Canadians share an immigrant past, there would be no Canada without immigration. Tens of thousands of years before the coming of the first European settlers, ancestors of Canada's Native People migrated across a frozen icepack linking Asia to North America. Over many centuries they spread across the continent, forming a rich tapestry of cultural and linguistic groupings. Approximately 500 years ago, Europeans arrived in what would eventually become Canada. First came French colonists who carved out homes along the St. Lawrence River and its tributaries. They were followed by settlers from France and Britain who gradually established competing colonial outposts in the Maritime provinces. The 18th century victory of British arms at Quebec, followed by the British defeat in the American Revolution sent Loyalists northward to British North America (Canada) in search of new homes. During most of the next century and a half, immigration continued. Settlers came mainly from Britain, including English, Scots and Irish. Some were drawn to the opportunities of the new world. Others, including many Scots and Irish famine immigrants, escaped the grinding poverty and starvation which followed crop failures or eviction from their lands. Americans also immigrated. Many were lured north to Canada by Canadian land agents or labour recruiters. Some immigrants came empty-handed and alone. Others came in family groups and with the resources necessary to begin life afresh in a new land. Some succeeded, while others struggled and reaped only misery. While the majority of early immigrants came to Canada from Britain or the United States, other nationalities also came, including non-whites. Many immigrants from continental Europe were drawn to Canada by its economic promise, or as an escape from religious or political threats. In the years before the American Civil War, the Europeans were joined by thousands of black slaves who escaped by following the Underground Railway northward into Canada. After Canadian Confederation in 1867, thousands of Irish and Chinese labourers were imported as workers to build the Canadian Pacific Railway. On the Pacific coast, other Chinese joined the rush of fortune hunters from all over the world who trekked into British Columbia and later the Yukon interior after the discovery of gold. After the turn of the century, hundreds of thousands of American farmers moved northward into the Canadian prairies in search of farm lands. At the same time, many from central and eastern Europe, seeking land, were recruited by Canadian immigration agents anxious to fill the west with farmers. While Canada's western lands filled with settlers, other newcomers laboured in Canada's expanding lumber, mining, railway, manufacturing and construction industries. Some planned to stay and become Canadians; others wished only to save money and then return to their families. Meanwhile, the money these sojourners sent home helped support those who remained behind. But whatever their motives for coming to Canada and whether or not they ended up staying permanently, each newcomer played a role in the building of Canada. Attitudes Toward Immigrants ell before World War II, Canada was already home to people from a wide range of cultural backgrounds. But not everyone was equally welcome in Canada. Canada and North America in general were populated mainly by people of western European culture and tradition. As a result, others who came were often considered "foreigners" because their race, colour, religion, or customs were different from those of the majority of Canadians. To many Canadians of an earlier day, "foreign" meant different and, perhaps, inferior. Why, then, were so many of these immigrants allowed into Canada The reason is simple. Canada needed more people to farm the Prairies, work in forests, factories and mines, and to build the country. Gradually, however, racial fears came more and more to dominate the public agenda. Many doubted that an influx of strange peoples speaking strange languages could be good for Canada. Could these "foreigners" ever assimilate and fit into Canadian society Many Canadians answered "No." Some English-Canadians believed immigrants took jobs away from the native-born and created serious social problems. Certain French-Canadians feared immigrants whose growing numbers might tip Quebec's delicate French-English political and social balance in favour of non-French speakers. As anti-immigrant sentiment spread, the public demanded that the government restrict immigration. The government responded with new regulations. Existing rules prohibiting Asian immigration were further tightened. The admission of eastern Europeans was made more difficult, and Canada's immigration door was closed to most southern Europeans and Jews. With the onset of the Great Depression in the l930s, immigrants seeking jobs were understandably not welcome. Even British immigrants were excluded. Like other countries, Canada locked its doors to the world, a policy which continued through World War II. Following the war, those who believed that immigrants and their children represented a cultural problem saw assimilation as the answer. Public policy pressured immigrants and, more particularly, their children to put aside ethnic traditions and integrate themselves into the ways of English Canada. Government, schools, churches, the media and social service agencies rallied behind the Canadianization effort. In some ways this effort was successful. The vast majority of immigrants and their children learned English or French. Most eased into the social and economic system of the surrounding community. Their children went to public schools, and, while racism and discrimination did exist, most carved out a place for themselves in the Canadian community. But, all the while, many retained ties to family, ethnic group, religious tradition and the culture of parents and grandparents. Immigration in the Modern Era ith the end of World War II, the Canadian economy began a period of expansion. Indeed, the economy grew so rapidly that soon there were too few workers in Canada to meet the demand. Fearing that the economy might stall, Canada lifted its restrictions on immigration to bring in tens of thousands of workers and their families from Europe. While preference was still given to people from Britain and western Europe, the need for workers remained so great that the door was gradually opened to other Europeans as well. Immigrants from southern Europe and refugees from then-Soviet occupied Europe arrived. Unlike earlier waves of immigrants, most who came after World War II did not settle on farms or in remote mining and lumbering towns. The majority settled in cities. Nor were they all labourers. Many were well-educated and trained professionals. In the years that followed, Canada became home to waves of refugees fleeing from behind the Iron Curtain -- from Hungary (l956), Czechoslovakia (l968) and Poland (l982-85). Canadian attitudes toward immigrants became more welcoming. As Canadians supported efforts to end racism and discrimination in Canadian law, the last racial and ethnic barriers to Canadian immigration were finally removed in 1967. The result was a dramatic change in the sources of immigrants. Non-Europeans, especially immigrants from Asia and the Caribbean, arrived in increasing numbers. Today, immigrants and refugees from the developing world and from other non-European sources outnumber European immigrants by about three to one. As a result, visible minorities have become an increasingly important part of the national fabric. Ethnic and Racial Diversity he diverse population is now one of the distinctive features of Canadian society. Of course, not all parts of Canada have the same population mix. In the 1991 census more than 30% of Canadians reported an origin other than British or French. But that percentage is most heavily concentrated in Ontario and western Canada. When one looks only at the 16% of Canadians who were born outside Canada, the regional variations are even more striking. Rural areas, small towns, Quebec and Atlantic Canada are home to fewer foreign-born people than is the rest of Canada. In rural Quebec, for example, the vast majority of the population was not only born in Canada but so were their parents, grandparents and great grandparents. By contrast, approximately 90% of foreign-born Canadians live in Canada's 15 largest urban centres. But, here again, the distribution of foreign-born is uneven. Some cities, notably in the Maritime provinces and in Quebec (outside Montreal), have relatively fewer foreign born. On the other hand, 30% of all Vancouver residents and 38% of all Toronto residents (more than a million people in Toronto alone) were born outside Canada. In all this, two facts stand out above all others. First, since the early 1970s, the majority of immigrants have been "people of colour," coming to Canada from what used to be called "non-traditional" sources of immigration--that is, the developing world or other areas of non-European population. Secondly, immigrants and their children cross lines of wealth, neighbourhood, education and profession. For example, a recent study of first year students at the University of Toronto found that more than half identify themselves as non-white by race. Approximately 40% are of Asian heritage. Only about one third came from homes where English is the only language spoken. Accordingly, as the century draws to a close, Toronto and Vancouver may stand out as the most culturally and racially diverse cities in Canada. But they do not stand alone. The cultural mix in other Canadian cities may be of different proportions, but pluralism is a fact of Canadian urban life. Multicultural Policy ow should Canadians deal with this pluralism of origin In 1971, the federal government announced its policy of multiculturalism. The policy not only recognized the reality of pluralism in Canada, but seemed to reverse the earlier attempt to assimilate immigrants. It challenged all Canadians to accept cultural pluralism, while encouraging them to participate fully and equally in Canadian society. Many factors influenced the introduction of the multiculturalism policy. Most of all, it must be seen as a product of its time. The mid-1960s were marked by increasingly troubled English-French relations in Canada. The government appointed a Royal Commission to study and recommend solutions to outstanding problems. The Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism held hearings across Canada. The commissioners heard about more than just English and French relations. Ethnic spokespersons everywhere argued that the old policy of assimilation was both unjust and a failure. They told the commissioners that immigrants and their children had endured the Great Depression side-by-side with other Canadians; they had sacrificed sons and daughters to the national war effort, and they now reaped the benefits of Canada's economic revival and their own hard work. They might not be of English or French heritage, but they declared themselves to be not one bit less Canadian, and they would not be excluded from the public debate. They urged that a new model of citizen participation in the larger society be adopted--one that addressed the pluralism of ethnic groups that were part of the Canadian family. They offered a blueprint for a Canadian identity based on public acceptance of difference and support of cultural pluralism. Unlike the melting pot model of the United States, they preferred the idea of a cultural mosaic--unique parts fitting together into a unified whole. Ethnicity, they argued, did not undermine Canadian identity. It was Canadian identity. To the surprise of many, the Commission seemed to agree. In Volume IV of its Report, the Commission presented the government with sweeping recommendations which would both acknowledge the value of cultural pluralism to Canadian identity and encourage Canadian institutions to reflect this pluralism in their policies and programs. When the policy was announced, it was one of multiculturalism within a bilingual framework. Multiculturalism affirmed English and French as the two official languages of Canada. But ethnic pluralism was declared to be a positive feature of Canadian society worthy of preservation and development. Many provinces followed the federal lead by introducing multiculturalism policies in their areas of authority. In l988, Bill C-93 was passed as the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. It became the first formal legislative vehicle for Canada's multicultural policy. Not all Canadians supported multiculturalism. For example, in English-speaking Canada some worried that multiculturalism would divide Canadians rather than unite them. Others feared that multiculturalism would erode the rich British heritage of English-speaking Canada. Many in Quebec protested that multiculturalism was designed to undermine Quebec nationalism. Ottawa, they charged, would use multiculturalism to thwart Quebec's aspirations by equating it with "other" ethnic groups in Canada. But many, especially in urban English-speaking Canada, supported the policy. They saw it as a timely recognition of a pluralism that was a fact of Canadian life. When the policy was announced in 1971, the Canadian ethnic mosaic was still very much dominated by those of European heritage and was designed to recognize their contribution to Canada. However, as immigration to Canada from the developing world increased, the multiculturalism policy had to deal with the concerns of visible minorities. These new and emerging communities were less worried about recognition of their heritage in Canada. They looked to the multiculturalism policy, not for support of cultural enrichment but rather for aid in the elimination of racial prejudice and discrimination. They wanted to ensure equal access to jobs, housing and education. The government responded. While it did not turn its back on the kind of culturally-based programming which dominated the early years of the multiculturalism policy, it did address issues important to the newer groups. In 1981, federal multiculturalism officials established a unit devoted to race relations in Canada. This was later expanded to make race relations a primary focus of the multicultural policy. Most provinces and many larger municipalities have followed suit within their areas of jurisdiction, primarily education, policing, social services and the protection of human rights. In Quebec, which still had difficulty with the term multiculturalism, the provincial government has developed its own programs in response to the new ethnic and racial reality. These programs are similar in many ways to those of the other provinces and the federal government. Today, most federal multicultural programs focus on institutional change, race relations and citizen integration and participation. The federal multiculturalism policy costs Canadians about one dollar each per year. Prospects for the Future he future of multiculturalism is unclear. History has shown that the rise and fall of economic prosperity and the need for a larger labour force affect our society's openness toward new immigrants to our shores. Some fear that multicultural programs have encouraged immigrants, particularly recent ones, to stand apart from the majority of Canadians. Whether or not this is true, those who oppose multiculturalism advocate reducing the number of immigrants allowed into Canada. These critics would admit only those most able to assimilate quickly into mainstream Canadian society. Who are the new Canadians The greater the diversity of the racial and cultural mix, the greater the need for tolerance and openness in accepting one another as fellow Canadians. With globalization and the ever-increasing movement of people from one country to another, the challenge of appreciating and accommodating cultural differences has become a universal experience. A multicultural policy that is sensitive to the needs of both long-time residents and the newly arrived will probably meet with the greatest success. Canada's future depends on the commitments of all its citizens to a unified Canadian identity, while still taking pride in the uniqueness of their individual heritage. [Version Franaise] | [Canadian Studies] Source: http://www.mta.ca/faculty/arts/canadian_studies/english/about/multi/ Read More