Kellie Leitch became a sitting member of Stephen Harper's Conservative government in 2011.She served as Minister of Labour and Minister of The Status Of Women.In 2015,the Progressive Conservative Party was defeated in the general election.Kellie Leitch,however retained her seat in Parliament.On April 6th she declared her intentions to run for the leadership of the Progressive Conservatives.
It would be hard to argue that Kellie Leitch lacks the qualifications of someone seeking Canada's highest office.She is a doctor and a professor and has been involved in the Conservative Party from a young age,in addition to her experience as an elected Member Of Parliament.Indeed,some nations would do well to emulate Canada in their choice of leadership hopefuls,in terms of quality that is.
But we need to pay some attention to some of the rhetoric currently issuing from Kellie Leitch's corner.Specifically,she's asking if we should be screening immigrants for"anti-Canadian values".A politically fashionable,if not altogether politically correct question.And one that in 2016 is likely to gain a lot of political traction.
The problem with this question is that it's really pandering to populist views in a rather simplistic manner.Conservatives will ultimately be the ones to decide what constitutes policy in regards to this question.And perhaps they have a better understanding of the issue,being as they are more politically active and astute than the average Canadian.It's up to them to decide how to answer this question in a way that allows them to be as politically relevant to voters at large as they can be.The goal,after all is to get elected,whether led by Kellie Leitch or someone else.
But how will Conservatives define "Anti-Canadian values" in today's world? Most likely by looking to the south.Most likely by identifying populations who are predominately Muslim,as has been the fashion since 9/11.,as those most likely to offend our sense of values.
What exactly are Canadian values.Democracy?Liberalism? Multi-culturalism? Those would be some of the ones that most readily come to my mind,but there are others as well.The problem is that Canada is a very large country,and even those expressed values don't take the same form in every region,relative to every other region.That is no more true than in the realm of politics.For instance,the Province Of Alberta is culturally,and politically until just recently,very conservative.The Province Of Ontario is not.So,I tend to get a bit uncomfortable about the idea of conservatives defining "Canadian values" And I'm certain that conservatives feel likewise about liberals.Moreover,the bulk of the population of Canada resides in Ontario and Quebec and,consequently so does the voting power.There could thus be a regional bias in determining normal values.And,it should be noted,the regions farthest from those two provinces tend to be the regions most diverse in the values they hold.That is to mention nothing of the fact that we have over thirty million people living here,none of whom are going to see Canadian values in exactly the same way,even assuming a general sort of agreement on those values in a macro sense.
We really have no means to define Canadian values.Thus we have no truly definitive way of identifying "Anti-Canadian" values and applying them to immigrants.Is the ideal immigrant Christian? Surely not,at least in terms of necessity.Does the ideal immigrant hold secular views,to the exclusion of religious beliefs of any sort? Does modesty sufficiently offend Canadian values as to disqualify a would be immigrant? That question seems downright silly to me,but one only has to look at what's been going on in France of late.Should immigrants be liberal or conservative? I'm sure Kellie Leitch has her own way of answering that question,in a very broad sense,but should that answer ever impose a restriction on public policy to the point of denying some persons immigration status,while denying others the same? And of course that coin has two sides.How often have we heard that Liberal policy in this regard being criticized as vote stacking?
As far as immigrants are concerned we should be concerned that they are willing to be fully participating members of Canadian society,given that our society functions with a lot of division between us at times.That is not only implied by the term "Democracy",but it is also implied as being alright and even necessary to a well functioning democracy. Further,we should be concerned that would be immigrants will follow Rule Of Law in the Canadian sense.This may have to be explained to new Canadians,but I see no need to define certain values on immigrants apart from already existing laws.
In proposing this question,Kellie Leitch doesn't seem to be proposing particular values.But we can speculate that she is asking for permission to follow the lead of conservatives in other places regarding policy.And it should be pointed out,this pandering is taking place with very little risk to any given candidate.After all,there will be plenty of time for conservatives here to watch what has at times been a dog and pony show with respect to immigration going on south of our border,and to improve on that process.
I would much rather Kellie Leitch involve herself in a meaningful debate as to what exactly Canadian values are,or should be,than proposing restrictions on immigration based on conformity to ideals that we can presently only guess at,and will likely change in relation to their perceived value in terms of forming the next government.
blyndpapaya
No comments:
Post a Comment