It is a pity this work has not been heard more often.  As mentioned in the program notes, Janáček drew his inspiration from a military-style fanfare he had heard in a park in Brno, and the work was offered to celebrate Czech independence gained following the end of WWI.  The OSM gave a stirring performance whose detail and clarity blended perfectly with the numerous trumpets.  All five of the brief movements showed the orchestra at its best, including the rousing conclusion.

Next on our musical journey was a trip to Vienna to hear the celebrated Brazilian-born pianist Nelson Freire as soloist in the Piano Concerto No 20 of Mozart.  Given the stirring nature of the Janáček piece, one might have thought programming Mozart next was a risky choice.  After all, with the current vogue of “historical authenticity”, Mozart can sometimes sound as exciting as reading aloud the periodic table of the elements.

Happily this was not to be the case.  From the urgent notes of the opening allegro through its second movement Romance and the wonderful coda of the third movement, the orchestra and soloist worked together in perfect harmony characterized by beauty and emotion.  A warm applause from the audience was well-earned.

It is interesting to note that in February 2012, Mr Nagano led the OSM in a memorable concert of Mozart’s Symphony No 25 and of the Requiem, both of which were written in a minor key.  Does the fact that this piano concerto was also written in a minor key help explain the emotional punch of the OSM performances?  An interesting question to ponder.

After the intermission, it was off to the USA with the New World Symphony of Antonín Dvořák which he composed in 1893 based on his musical observations gained touring that country.  This is one of the most famous of all symphonies and has been recorded and played so often by so many orchestras (not to mention the Largo movement’s popularization as music for the song Goin’ Home) that it almost suffers from the Beethoven’s Fifth effect.  Are we concertgoers hearing the live orchestra playing before us or are we really listening to our memory of the piece?

Even though many in the audience might have known what was coming next during the Dvořák, the way in which Mr Nagano and the musicians presented it left one awestruck.  Each one of the four movements was a gem.  My highlight was not the numerous and powerful crescendos, as stirring was they were, but Mr Nagano’s very effective use of two rests during a passage when only the front bench string members were playing.  These two pauses of total silence in the hall were very impressive.  This New World Symphony provided concertgoers with a whole new aural memory to treasure.

A symphonic encore is a rare event with the OSM, and we were treated to the orchestral part of the grand march in Verdi’s Aida.  The 12 additional trumpets played once again from their perches joining in as the whole orchestra gave a virtuoso rendition of this showpiece.  It was a dazzling end to a most enjoyable evening.

Postscript — Montreal 10 years after the departure of Charles Dutoit

As the OSM winds down its first season in its new musical home, the Maison symphonique, it is hard to believe that 10 years have passed since Charles Dutoit tendered his resignation as Music Director on 11 April 2002.  During Mr Dutoit’s 24-season leadership, the OSM gained widespread international respect but principally in one style of music, that of French composers such as Ravel and Debussy.

When Kent Nagano took over as Music Director in 2006, he announced his intention to continue this OSM’s tradition of excellence, yet broaden its repertoire and as well as playing works which it had performed only occasionally in the past, or not at all.  Judging by the current season including this latest concert featuring familiar and not too familiar works of non-French composers, we can safely say “mission accomplished”.  With its high level of musicianship clearly entrenched in a more expansive repertoire, we cannot wait to see and hear what the OSM has in store for subscribers next season.

————–

Program

Kent Nagano, conductor
Nelson Freire, piano, soloist
Orchestre Symphonique de Montréal
Leoš Janáček, Sinfonietta (1926)
Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, Piano Concerto No 20 in D minor, K. 466 (1785)
Antonín Dvořák, Symphony No 9 in E minor, op. 95, “New World” (1893)
Encore: Giuseppe Verdi, Marcia Triofale (Triumphal March) from Aida, Act 2, Scene 2 (1871)
Concerts presented at the Maison symphonique de Montréal

3, 5 and 6 May 2012

Photo credit:  Stephen Fogarty, © 2012.  Maestro Kent Nagano and the OSM receive audience applause following their concert in Montreal on 5/5/2012.

New language proficiency requirement

Now the first change announced by Minister Kenney involves language competency. At present, individuals seeking Canadian Citizenship are supposed to have an adequate knowledge of either English or French but this requirement has been applied in an inconsistent manner.  According to Mr Kenney, he is often confronted with examples of individuals who have lived many years in Canada and who have become Citizens even though their skills in either language are so poor that they cannot carry on a simple conversation.  The Minister stated that he finds this situation unacceptable.

“The changes I’ve announced are to ensure that immigrants who come to Canada can contribute to the economy quickly,” Minister Kenney said. “And the cornerstone of success is being able to speak one of Canada’s official languages. That is why the government is also proposing changes to the Citizenship rules so that new Citizens have the language abilities they need to succeed.”

Under the proposed amendments to the Citizenship Regulations, which govern the implementation of Canada’s Citizenship Act, prospective Citizens would be required to provide objective evidence of their language ability with their applications. They could do so by submitting a variety of objective evidence, including the results of approved third-party tests, evidence of completion of secondary or post-secondary education in English or French, or evidence of successfully reaching a set level of proficiency in certain government funded language training programs.

“The proposed change would encourage Citizenship applicants to ensure that they can speak English or French when they apply,” Minister Kenney said. “Language is an important component of the successful integration of immigrants and new Citizens.”  Inability to communicate in one of Canada’s two main languages is a major barrier to social mobility and integration, he added.

The author shares the Minister’s concerns but notes that there are already long delays for persons to obtain language testing in permanent residency files.  With the added demand of language testing for Citizenship applications, waiting times are sure to increase and testing agencies will be tempted to raise their prices.

Physical presence to be test for residency requirement

Another important issue addressed by Minister Kenney at the luncheon came in reply to a question from the audience.  The Minister confirmed that it will be his intention to require physical presence in Canada as the only way for an individual to amass the required number of residency days for Citizenship.

This will prove to be an important reform of the law.  Under the present system, an individual is required to establish that he or she has resided in Canada for at least 3 years out of the 4 years dating back from their Citizenship application.  However, the legislation does not define what constitutes “residency”.  Some Citizenship Judges require physical presence in Canada and some do not.  For example, some Judges have said it is sufficient for an individual to have “centralized” his or her life in Canada (for example by maintaining a residence and presence of a spouse and children in Canada), even though the applicant himself might work outside the country.  Although an applicant can appeal from the Citizenship Court to the Federal Court, different Judges therein also have divergent views so confusion and lack of consistency reigns supreme.

The Minister did not indicate whether he intends to maintain the present 3 years out of 4 years as the benchmark, or whether there might be an easier test, such as 3 out of 5 years.

It is hoped that the Minister will tie the residency reform in the Citizenship Act to measures to standardize what does and does not count as proof of residency, because there are divergent views among Citizenship Judges on that issue right now as well.  For example, in one decision I read recently the Citizenship Court rejected an application because the candidate could not prove to the Judge’s satisfaction that he had worked in Canada. However, his passport showed quite clearly from various visa stamps that he appeared to have met the strict physical presence test of 3 years out of 4 in Canada.

It would also be advisable for the Minister to make arrangements with his colleague, Minister of Public Safety, the Honourable Vic Toews, who is in charge of the Canada Border Services Agency, to ensure that border agents stamp the (foreign) passport of permanent residents every time they return to Canada to help ensure accuracy in assessing Citizenship applications down the road.  Now some border agents do not bother to stamp the passports and I have had clients inform me that border agents have refused even when asked to do so.

Conclusion

The Minister stated that he plans to introduce these changes by the end of 2012.  A few weeks ago he announced his intention to require that the tradition of persons acquiring Citizenship by simple birth in Canada even when neither parent is a Citizen.

These will be major changes and the details remain to be worked out.  It is also be interesting to see whether the changes will be applied with retroactive effect to applications already in the system.

For professional guidance on these matters and assistance for your Citizenship file you are invited to contact us at the Fogarty Law Firm.

It is ironic that these modern day self-styled defenders of human rights who tried to disrupt this event believe that freedom of speech protected in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees that right for themselves only and not for others with differing viewpoints. They would be advised to go back to the library and learn some basic rules of democracy since they almost seem to be guided only by strong-arm tactics and bullying.

Stephen Fogarty is a member of the Quebec Bar and of the Law Society of Upper Canada.  He practises immigration and Citizenship law at his office Fogarty Law Firm in Montreal.  His Twitter handle is @Stephen_Fogarty and the Firm’s website is www.fogartylaw.ca.

Photo:  The Honourable Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration of Canada, © by Stephen Fogarty, 20 April 2012

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person.

Made in America 1900-1950 features some 130 photographs of American masters such as by Alfred Stieglitz, Edward Steichen, Clarence White, Paul Strand, Walker Evans, Margaret Bourke-White, Dorothea Lange, Berenice Abbott, Ansel Adams, Lisette Model, Weegee, and members of New York’s Photo League.

The exhibit takes museum-goers through the two main tendencies in the development of photography during this period.  On the one hand, there were those photographers who viewed the medium as another way to express images, shapes, forms and feelings.  This is art for art’s sake, and in some of the photos displayed it is almost as if we are looking at black and white works by the impressionist painters themselves.

The other trend displayed is the documentary approach.  These photographers were highly skilled and their images are imbued with great use of forms and placement of the subject matter, but there is an underlying message, often one of social commentary.  And so there are many photos showing the disadvantaged as well as ordinary working people, children, cities and the country.  But as we are reminded looking at one of images featured in the exhibit, Ansel Adam’s Moonrise, Hernandez, New Mexico, the scenes presented to us on photographic paper are not necessarily free from manipulation even if the image is incredibly clear and detailed.

Opening Night at the Opera

My personal favourite among the works on display is Arthur Leipzig’s photo Opening Night at the Opera, New York 1945, shown above.  What a story one could write with this wonderful image as a starting point.  Here we see what at first blush looks like a confident and arrogant couple.  Not only do they have a seat unlike most of the lesser members of high society we see in the background, our featured couple has a table that is “reserved”.  They must be important.  But what else is going on here?  Have the couple just had a spat?  She appears to be looking away from the man, likely her husband.  Has she turned her back on him, too?  Maybe she is not pleased with the table they ended up with and has just finished blaming her husband for its location. “Our table is too close to those other people crowding in on us”, she might have said.  “You should be happy we got a table at all”, he probably replied.

Even if they had a spat, appearance must be kept up.  The wife is checking her hair and making sure her expensive earring is not covered from view.  Her chin is out, her head tilted slightly backward, and she has put on a look of disdain for all others around her.  Her actions appear to be saying, “I am the elite of the elite.”   Her husband stills seems annoyed following their likely argument, and it could not be worse timing for the photographer to snap this picture.  “How dare you intrude on our table”, the man’s eyes tell us.

But maybe our couple is not so self-confident as we thought at first. Could they be a little uncomfortable in their surroundings?  Maybe madam’s hair touching is a sign of nerves.  And note how although the gentleman is already smoking and has more than half his cigarette left in its holder, his cigarette case remains open on the table.  It looks like he will be lighting up again soon.  Champagne alone will not be enough to calm his jitters on this opening night.

Conclusion

You owe it to yourself to see Made in America 1900-1950 and “listen” to the many stories told by each one of its photographs.  The exhibit also includes a nice display of some famous cameras, including an original Leica.

All in all, Ann Thomas, curator of the exhibit, has done a marvellous job putting this together.  I do have a minor criticism.  The small wall signs referencing each photograph are placed inconsistently, sometimes beside the right side of a photo, sometimes beside the left.  This even occurs with photographs on the same wall of the exhibit.  This arrangement does not make for a smooth visit to the exhibit, and museum goers do not know in which direction to walk, leading to numerous “head-on collisions”. Consistent positioning of these signs coupled with discreetly placed arrows on the walls would make for less confusion and more enjoyment, especially when large crowds are in attendance.

It is unfortunate that the exhibit will end on April 1^st. Casual museum goers are more likely to visit on long weekends, but this terrific exhibit will be gone from the National Gallery once Easter Weekend rolls around. If you cannot make it to Ottawa, Made in America will be presented at the Art Gallery of Windsor, Ontario, across the river from Detroit, MI, from 3 June to 3 September, 2012.

If you cannot make it to Ottawa or later on to Windsor, you would do well to consider purchasing the exhibit’s 196-page catalogue, which reproduces in vivid detail all of the images on display.  It is available for $49 Canadian at the NGC Bookstore or online at www.shopngc.ca

For information on admission fees and how to get to the National Gallery of Canada, which has many other fine exhibits and works on display, go to www.gallery.ca.

Photo credit:  Arthur Leipzig, Opening Night at the Opera, New York, 1945
Gelatin silver print, 27 X 34.1 cm
National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa
© Arthur Leipzig/Courtesy Howard Greenberg Gallery
Image reproduced with permission.  Copying is prohibited by law.

What is a Work Permit?  How is it renewed?

A Work Permit (WP) grants a foreign national the right to work in Canada for an employer for a temporary period of time, usually two or three years.

As a general rule, unless a foreign worker falls within certain exemptions, which would take another entire article to describe, a complicated set of procedures must be followed as a pre-condition to renewing the employee’s WP.  This normally requires advertising to ensure that Canadians or permanent residents have an opportunity to apply for the position, then requesting a Labour Market Opinion or LMO from Service Canada.  In Quebec, there is an additional requirement, which is that the employee must apply for and obtain a Quebec Acceptance Certificate or CAQ.

Due to the human trait of procrastination, whether on the part of the employee or employer or both, many people seem to wait until the last few weeks or even days prior to expiry of their WPs before starting the renewal process.

Until recently, when faced with such a situation, so long as the WP had not yet expired, lawyers would submit the LMO and CAQ applications to the appropriate government offices and at the same time send the WP renewal application to Immigration Canada.  Eventually, when Immigration Canada would get around to studying the WP file, we would have already sent them a copy of the approved LMO and CAQ, and a new WP would be issued.  During the LMO/CAQ/WP processing time, the employee was permitted to continue working legally in Canada for the employer under implied status.

Procrastinators beware

Flash forward to winter 2012.  The new LMO screening procedures in place since summer 2011 have led to increased processing times at Service Canada, even doubling in some Canadian centres to three or four months or longer.  Naturally more documents to review means longer processing times.   But due to the improvements in the WP renewal process at Immigration Canada, processing times there have been reduced from three or four months last year to less than one month today.

On top of all this there is apparently an internal directive at Immigration Canada whereby WP renewal applications will not be kept on hold for more than 60 days when the file is missing the approved LMO, and for Quebec files, the CAQ as well.  As a result, once the 60 day limit is passed, since their old WP has expired and their WP application is now being refused as incomplete, individuals are losing their right to work in Canada, at least temporarily.  At the same time, employers are being placed in very difficult situations when they are legally obliged to suspend employment of such employees who may occupy key posts in their businesses.

Restoring lost status

The only possible solution in such a circumstance is to wait for approval of the LMO (and CAQ in Quebec), then make a new WP application combined with a special request to Immigration Canada to restore the employee’s legal status in Canada.  Such further procedures will take another month or longer.  Naturally, when applying to restore status, Immigration must be convinced that the employee did not work illegally at any time he or she was without a valid WP.

Now it must be kept in mind that restoration of status is a privilege, not a right, and can be refused.  The lesson in all of this is that procrastinators may well lose out, with the employee having to leave Canada and the employer obliged to start searching for someone new to fill the job.

Vigilance is the key

The wise employee and employer must be vigilant in Immigration matters.

Considering the long combined processing times for advertising, then the LMO and CAQ (if for Quebec), then the WP, and to allow for possible problems, it is highly advisable to start working on the complicated renewal procedures at least six or seven months prior to the WP expiry date.

Stephen Fogarty is a member of the Quebec Bar and of the Law Society of Upper Canada.  He practises immigration and citizenship law at his office Fogarty Law Firm in Montreal.  His Twitter handle is @Stephen_Fogarty and the Firm’s website is www.fogartylaw.ca.

Photo:  Sample of a Work Permit.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person. A slightly modified version of this article first appeared in the Winter 2012 newsletter of the Ireland-Canada Chamber of Commerce, Montreal Chapter, www.icccmtl.com.

We all benefit when close attention is paid to passports to verify the identity of travellers.  Similarly, CBSA officers often play a key role in thwarting international arms smuggling and child kidnapping.

Canada Customs: not the place to seek sympathy

However, the more intense scrutiny by CBSA officers can have some less than pleasant consequences for the great majority who do not consider themselves criminals or terrorists.  In addition to sending what appears to be a higher percentage of persons to ‘secondary’ inspection when arriving in Canada, whether by land or air, which can lead to long delays clearing customs, there is a heightened scrutiny of goods being brought into the country.

Persons entering Canada are finding that CBSA officers are showing very little leniency in cases where the officers believe one has under evaluated some goods purchased outside the country or failed to declare all of them.  Of course this flows from the government’s desire to tax, tax, tax whenever possible.  Claiming you just plain forgot all about that brand new Donegal knit sweater in your bag will not get you very far, even if you protest that the garment is destined for a poor orphan you met at Mass.

A full and complete declaration is always the best policy.  Obtain receipts for any items purchased outside the country and have the receipts on hand when entering Canada.  This will help determine duties or taxes owing, considering your eligible deductible amount in relation to the length of your trip outside Canada, if applicable.  The receipts must show the full value actually paid for the merchandise.  Do not be tempted to obtain false or misleading receipts.  CBSA officers are well-trained to sniff out suspicious situations and have access to many sources to verify the market value of goods in the country where you purchased them.

If you are caught and you choose to bring the goods into Canada rather than to forfeit them at Customs, you will be obliged to pay the regular taxes and duties as well as a significant penalty.

Possible immigration consequences

It is important to underline that if you are not a Canadian citizen, given the above-mentioned vigilance, it is very likely you will face proceedings under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.  The result could well be a Deportation Order for having made the false or misleading declaration to the CBSA official.  If you are a Permanent Resident, the only way to remedy a Deportation Order would be through an appeal at the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), a process which takes about two years until the IRB studies your case.  Then you might lose your appeal and have to leave Canada, or, even if you are permitted to remain, strict conditions may be imposed for three, five or even seven years.  Any plan you might have had to apply for Canadian citizenship will be on hold throughout this period.

If you are in Canada with status only as a visitor, worker or student, unless there were some technical errors of law behind the Deportation Order (not likely), you will have no appeal rights.  You will have to leave Canada and obtain special permission if you wish to return.  In addition, if you ever seek admission to any other country, you would likely have to declare your deportation from Canada on immigration forms of such other government, which would surely complicate matters.

Possible criminal consequences

If all of this is not enough, and especially in cases of false declarations and phony receipts, the CBSA officer may recommend that the RCMP be brought in to lay criminal charges whether under the Customs Act or possibly the Criminal Code.  You would be looking at a possible fine or even imprisonment and a resulting criminal record, as well as immigration problems for non-citizens (Deportation Order) and potential employment and travel issues for citizens and non-citizens alike. For example, the USA is well-known for prohibiting entry to a person whom it considers to have been convicted of an offence involving dishonesty or what they term ‘moral turpitude’.

Play it safe

So the next time you are coming to or returning to Canada, do not take chances with your future.  It is better to pay some duties if necessary rather than to face potentially severe consequences for a little bit of dishonesty.

Stephen Fogarty is a member of the Quebec Bar and of the Law Society of Upper Canada.  He practises immigration and citizenship law at his office Fogarty Law Firm in Montreal.  His Twitter handle is @Stephen_Fogarty and the Firm’s website is www.fogartylaw.ca.

Photo credit:  Cars approaching Canada Customs at Surrey, B.C., 2008/07/07, by dherrera_96, Wikimedia commons.

The opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of any other person.   An earlier version of this article appeared in the Fall 2011 newsletter of the Ireland-Canada Chamber of Commerce, Montreal Chapter, www.icccmtl.com.

Although Amadeus was not mentioned anywhere in the program notes, the dramatic initial passages of Mozart’s Symphony number 25, showcased in the opening sequences of Miloš Forman’s 1984 Best Picture, were familiar to almost everyone in the hall.

Mozart is said to have composed this work, his first symphony written in a minor key, over a period of only two days during the summer of 1773.  He was just 17 years old at the time, but the work shows the hands of a master.  Although the Symphony contains many tuneful passages, it marks a break with his simpler, “pretty” style of composing.

The OSM’s performance was aural excellence, showing great precision, yet forceful and full of energy.  The first and second violins were placed on either side of Mr Nagano with great effect.  Mozart’s affection for the oboe is well-known and he would have been pleased with the wonderful work of OSM principal Theodore Baskin in the many passages featuring the instrument.

The main attraction of the concert was Mozart’s Requiem, upon which the composer was working during his final illness at the young age of 36.  Mozart died before its completion, and apparently his widow requested one of his pupils, Franz Xaver Sussmayer, to finish the score.  The idea presented in Amadeus that “rival” composer Antonio Salieri was at the dying Mozart’s bedside, urging the genius on to complete the work, with the intent to pilfer it and present it as his own composition, appears to be fiction.

Some musicologists might view the finished Requiem as flawed, but there was nothing wanting in the OSM’s performance which was spot-on perfect, with the instrumental musicians and choir working at a very high artistic level.  The four vocal soloists, all of whom are Canadian, sang with beauty, clarity and conviction.  In keeping with the film theme of this Blog, we might say, using an analogy from this year’s Oscar nominated film Moneyball, that the OSM players, choir and guest soloists hit a musical home run.

The first composition performed at the concert was by contemporary artist Pierre Boulez which, according to the program notes, he revised several times from 1948 until 1965.  Despite the explanation with which Maestro Nagano favoured the audience prior to the first downbeat, this composition’s overall feeling of jolting dissonance and ‘60s musical effects led to only polite applause at the conclusion of its two movements totalling some 11 minutes duration.  This was too bad considering the fine playing of the musicians and exceptional performance by soprano Rayanne Dupuis.

All in all, this was a memorable concert.

————

Your blogger and his wife had the opportunity to meet the two male soloists and a choir member after the Saturday evening concert, the three of whom were very friendly and gracious indeed.

Concert presented in Montreal, Quebec, Canada, at the Maison Symphonique, February 22, 23 and 25 (twice), 2012:

Photo: First page of Mozart’s Requiem, in the master’s own hand.  Wikimedia commons.

This latest example of state intervention involves the imposition by secularists of their ideology by force of law so that the ability of parents to decide on the content of their own children’s daycare programs and activities will be severely curtailed.

For example, words such as “Christmas” and “Passover” will no longer be permitted to be uttered in hearing distance of toddlers’ sensitive ears.

State-enforced secularism is much more than just removal of religion and religious expression – words, songs, modes of dress, or uses of symbols – in the public and publicly funded sphere. Secularism is itself a way of life, a type of social organization. As such, secularism should be open to the same level of scrutiny and analysis as any other ideology, whether conservatism, liberalism or socialism.

However, in Quebec certain matters are off limits, and secularism seems to be first on the list.

This lack of willingness to engage in true, open debate on many fundamental issues is an unfortunate trait of Quebec society.

Witness the rather lacklustre discussions in wake of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission on reasonable accommodation, and the current musings on what is painted by intelligentsia here as the inferior Canadian brand of multiculturalism vs. a kind of morally superior Quebec-made “interculturalism.”

Part of the reason secularism has itself almost become sacred in Quebec is that it has historical roots in both Quebec nationalist federalism and in the sovereignty movement.

The modern Quebec labour movement was born out of struggle to gain influence on society independent from the powerful Duplessis government on the one hand and what was viewed as the shackles of the established Roman Catholic Church on the other.

Thus, beginning in the late 1940s (championed by the likes of Jean Marchand, Gérard Pelletier and to a lesser extent Pierre Trudeau), the anti-clerical spirit was closely entwined with the rise of the unions.

That was followed by the emergence of the Quiet Revolution of the early 1960s, led by the likes of Premier Jean Lesage and his famous slogan “Maîtres chez nous,” and by René Lévesque, both as a remarkable provincial Liberal government minister entrusted with the nationalization of hydroelectric power, and later as the spiritual father of sovereignty and founder of the Parti Québécois.

The ever-present influence of the unions in Quebec society, and their blind support for the PQ and the sovereignty movement, ensure that secularism will never be far from the forefront.

With such a deep pedigree, it is no wonder that secularism (and to a somewhat lesser extent its intellectual twin, atheism) holds such sway in Quebec.

However, like any ideology, secularism may be become prone to extremism.

In the case of Quebec daycares, the extremist rules being imposed almost remind me of the jihadists and other religious fanatics against which these secularists purport to protect Quebec society.

My family and I will be attending one of the opening concerts at the Montreal Symphony Orchestra’s new hall this coming September. On the program is the incomparable 9th Symphony of Beethoven.

This work concludes with the famous Ode to Joy choral movement in which Beethoven set to music Schiller’s poem of the same name.

But when we look at Schiller’s original text, we find it includes German-language words conveying the dangerous ideas “Creator” and “God,” not to mention “brotherhood” (surely a sexist concept).

The radical Quebec secularists must find this reprehensible.

How can the largely publicly funded MSO be permitted to perform a work of such religious indoctrination at the publicly funded new concert hall?

Imagine the horrors if children happen to be in attendance.

Secularists will want all parents to help protect Quebec youth from Beethoven.

Even worse, later this year our world-famous orchestra is scheduled to perform Handel’s Messiah, a three-hour choral composition replete with Biblical texts praising “God” and, yes, “Christ.”

Perhaps the secularists will seek an injunction to stop any public funding of the MSO until such time as it bans God from all performances, or, taking inspiration from the old Soviet Union’s rules against public religious expression, demand that the work’s name be changed to Handel’s “Comrade.”

Secularists might want to consider the simplest way to protect Quebec’s secular values from any such possible religious dangers: placing a complete ban on music in the province.

Specially trained police could patrol daycares, schools, parks and shopping malls to enforce the prohibition, with wide powers to arrest and punish transgressors on the spot.

Iran has a very effective morality police brigade that could serve as the perfect model to help achieve these important goals for our modern Quebec society.

This Blog was first published on the Opinion page of the Montreal Gazette newspaper on June 8, 2011.  The text is reproduced with permission.

Immigration, border security concerns, and citizenship

On immigration matters, the government did not propose any comprehensive reform. It intends to proceed with previously announced plans to tackle smuggling as well as the problem of marriage fraud in relation to sponsorship applications. The government also said it plans to cooperate with the Obama administration to “streamline and secure our border and enhance regulatory cooperation” to promote security while supposedly enhancing the movement of goods and persons between Canada and the U.S.

Surprisingly, the Speech from the Throne contained nothing to indicate the government intends to make long overdue changes to Canada’s citizenship legislation.

Seven main priorities

Here is what the government states are its main priorities:

• Supporting jobs and growth by implementing the Next Phase of Canada’s Economic Action Plan, which will include further steps to promote a stable, low-tax environment; develop a highly skilled and flexible workforce; support innovation and the adoption of new technologies, and expand access to markets abroad.

• Eliminating the deficit by 2015 by making responsible choices and reducing the cost of government, ensuring that the economy can continue to grow and create jobs.

• Supporting hard-working families by helping seniors make ends meet and continuing to help Canadians save for their retirement; by supporting family caregivers; by helping parents who want to provide their children with opportunities to discover their creative passions; and by working with the provinces and territories to ensure that the health care system is sustainable and delivers results for Canadians.

• Standing on guard for Canada by celebrating our heritage; by developing Canada’s extraordinary resource wealth in a way that protects the environment; and by continuing to stand for what is right on the world stage, including through our missions in Afghanistan and Libya.

• Supporting law-abiding Canadians by reintroducing comprehensive law-and-order legislation to combat crime and terrorism; by protecting the most vulnerable and working to prevent crime; by addressing the problem of violence against women and girls; and by reintroducing legislation to clarify and strengthen laws on self-defence, defence of property and citizen’s arrest.

• Helping communities and industries by ending the long-gun registry; by continuing to support Canada’s traditional industries; and by addressing the barriers to social and economic participation faced by many Aboriginal Canadians.

• Promoting integrity and accountability by reintroducing legislation to reform the Senate and restore fair representation in the House of Commons; by taking steps to phase out direct taxpayer subsidies to federal political parties; and by ensuring that citizens, the private sector and other partners have improved access to the workings of government.

Source: www.speech.gc.ca

Photo: Governor-General David Johnston reads the Speech from the Throne, 3 June 2011, from official television broadcast.

Mr Harper’s Conservative Party won a solid victory in the May 2^nd Canadian federal election, taking 166 ridings out of the 308 comprising the House of Commons. This was Canada’s fourth election in the last seven years, and the first majority government since the 2000 victory by then Liberal PM Jean Chretien. The only sour note for the Conservatives was its showing in the province of Québec, where support declined, and its total of elected MPs fell from 10 down to five.

The biggest losers

The biggest losers nationally were the Liberal Party and its leader Michael Ignatieff.  The Liberals, known for decades by commentators as “Canada’s naturally governing party”, were reduced to their all-time low, falling from 77 seats in the previous election down to 34. Mr Ignatieff resigned as leader on May 3^rd, quickly accepting a university teaching post. The Liberals appointed Bob Rae as their interim leader, but have not yet set their sights on any soul searching or long-term planning.

The other biggest losers were the Bloc Québécois and its leader Gilles Duceppe. The BQ runs candidates only in the province of Québec. For some 20 years, it had pushed for its pro-sovereignty agenda while maintaining at every possible occasion that Québec is a victim of the federal system. This time around, the province’s voters got tired of the old music, and dealt a crushing blow to the Bloc, reducing their seat total from 49 of the 75 ridings in Québec down to only four. Duceppe did come first in the resignation game, however, quitting as leader a good 12 hours earlier than did Mr Ignatieff. And at least from now on the Bloc will be able to economize by renting a car instead of a bus for parliamentary caucus functions.

The new official opposition

Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP), presented a very strong election campaign calling on citizens to abandon Conservatives’ and Liberals’ “old policies”.  Although the NDP’s advertising spots did not shy from criticizing other parties, they tended to do so with a touch of humour compared with the nastiness of messages which ran for the other parties. Mr Layton campaigned following health setbacks (prostate cancer treatment) and recent hip surgery. Looking increasingly fit as the campaign wore on, the cane Mr Layton had to lean on heavily at the outset became more of a prop and underdog symbol by the end of the race.

No one would have expected when the election was called five weeks earlier that the NDP would come in second place, winning 103 ridings, compared with their 37 in the last Parliament. Even more stunning was that out of the 103 total, 59 new NDP MPs were elected in Québec, up from their previous total of one.

PM Harper and the art of Cabinet-making

Turning to the Cabinet, the new 39-member Conservative ministry is one of the largest in many years.

Its size has led to some criticism in of that many were expecting a smaller group of perhaps 22 or 24 members to show a lean approach to dealing with Canada’s debt and economic recovery in the years ahead.  Nevertheless, selection of a Cabinet is always a difficult task in Canada where the PM must try to balance the need to have strong and competent persons in charge of the various government departments against demands for representation along language, regional, ethnic and gender lines.

Mr Harper’s selection of ministers shows a well-crafted consideration of all these issues.  He has put together a balanced team with probably the highest level of representation of minority groups and new Canadians compared with any previous government.  In the case of Québec, Mr Harper showed respect for its voters by appointing to the Cabinet four of the five Conservative members elected in the province. It would have been a likely impossible task to reflect all of these interests and keep the Cabinet team down to 24 or so ministers.  This writer will therefore give the PM benefit of the doubt on the size of Cabinet issue.

Fear-mongering and the “secret agenda”

During the election campaign, it was alleged by BQ leader Duceppe and others that Mr Harper had a hidden right-wing agenda. On election night and thereafter, the Prime Minister took pains to reject this claim. He stated that his government would stick to its program, knowing well that Canadians would not react favourably to radical deviations from stated policies. As an important indicator of stability, Mr Harper kept several key posts the same: Peter MacKay at National Defence, Rob Nicolson at Justice, Vic Toews at Public Security, Jim Flaherty at Finance, Jason Kenney at Citizenship and Immigration, and Rona Ambrose at Public Works and Government Services . The main change sees John Baird promoted to Foreign Affairs necessitated by the electoral defeat of the well-respected Lawrence Cannon. Mr Baird was characterized by some opposition members and journalists as being somewhat partisan, so it will be interesting to see how he rates in Foreign Affairs a year or so from now.

What lies ahead?

A majority government should help engender stability. The new Official Opposition of Mr Layton’s left-leaning NDP should be an effective balance against the Conservative government. The government now has a golden opportunity to demonstrate its claimed expertise dealing with economic management as well as international and national political concerns.

The previous administration of Mr Harper had to deal with a minority situation in Parliament.  In some respects, his team appeared almost desperate to try to implement their ideas as fast as possible against the constant threat of possible removal from office. Now that according to law the next election will not take place until October 2015, the government will have the opportunity to breathe a little, think a little more deeply, and look at the larger picture. What we hope will come to pass will be a more comprehensive approach to law-making, rather than the piecemeal statecraft which seemed to characterize the last administration. Canada, and to some extent the world, would be the better for it.

Canadian election results

Photo credit: Trees spring to life in Ottawa framing Parliament’s Peace Tower. Photo © Stephen Fogarty

Curbing abuse of the system

Canadian Immigration wishes to target “abusers” of the Immigration system who use sponsorship as a means to scam their way into Canada.

First, the government wishes to prevent persons, who themselves have been sponsored to Canada, from sponsoring a new (second) spouse, common law or conjugal partner for a period of five years following the date the now new sponsor originally gained permanent residency, and this even if by that time the new sponsor has become a citizen.

Second, the government wants to create a new category of permanent residents. Persons who have been in their amorous relationship for two years or less and are sponsored to come to or remain in Canada as a spouse, common law or conjugal partner will have “conditional” permanent residency status for two years (or perhaps longer) after acceptance. If the new resident splits with their sponsor during the two years following acceptance, the new resident might face removal procedures where Immigration authorities determine that the relationship behind the sponsorship was not genuine.

Why is the Canadian government doing this? This is really an instance of a relatively small group of fraudsters spoiling it for the majority of person who have genuine relationships and want to bring their spouse here.

Sponsorship Bridge

Canada is trying to deal with an old Immigration game. Sometimes all three players are willing participants in the charade. Let’s call it “Sponsorship Bridge”. We mention Canada but this same game is played out in many countries around the world.

The game may have variations, but often looks like this. An individual, we will call “A”, is sponsored by their new spouse, we will call “B”, or even better “Bridge”, to come live in Canada. The paperwork goes through, and A arrives with permanent resident status to join Bridge. But after only a few months or maybe even weeks, A splits from Bridge. A seeks a divorce as soon as legally possible. To help avoid suspicion, A might throw in allegations of mistreatment. Once the divorce goes through, after waiting a while to make events seem natural, A will wed or otherwise make a show of establishing a recognized relationship with another person, we will call “C”. Then C is sponsored by A to come live with A in Canada.

However, A never had any intention of living with Bridge; in fact, C was A’s love interest all along. They kept their relationship low key. B really was nothing more than the Bridge to the new destination for both A and C.

Notice that since both A and C was sponsored, neither of them had to worry about having sufficient educational levels or job experience to qualify as skilled workers, for example. Eventually, A and C will be able to sponsor their own other family members to join them. They may all become happy citizens of their new country. Not a bad scam if you can get away with it.

As we have seen, B, our Bridge, is the key part of the puzzle.

In some cases, Bridge might be a cousin who is eager to promote the interests of his extended family. Or Bridge might be an acquaintance or a stranger who will receive monetary or other compensation for his assistance. (Remember the film “Green Card”?)

However, more often than not, Bridge is in complete good faith, actually in love, but in the love triangle, he or she ends up with a broken heart, and sometimes a lot more. That’s because in many countries, the Bridge or sponsor remains financially responsible for the new resident (A) for a period of time even after the split. I have seen some pretty painful situations when A has split after a few months and is basically laughing in B’s face, but B has to keep paying for A’s upkeep for three years after her arrival.

Concerns with the proposed sponsorship changes

Some women’s and immigrant rights groups have warned that the proposed new rules amount to discrimination. Why should people be prevented from sponsoring a new spouse for five years when their first marriage really did have problems? In addition, they argue the new rules will create a legal trap for A (usually women) who come to Canada in good faith, but face abuse from sponsor B and/or his family members in Canada.  Such women will be afraid to leave the abusive relationship for fear of being removed from Canada because of the two-year conditional residence rule.

The government has promised to create a “process for allowing bona fide spouses and partners in such [abusive] situations to come forward without facing enforcement action…”

That is a rather vague reassurance. Hopefully there will be clear guidelines and special training for officers deciding such files. For example, it takes courage to leave any abusive relationship, especially when the victim may be from a culture wherein men’s actions are never questioned by women, and/or spousal abuse is the norm. As a bare minimum, the government should ensure that such matters are handled at the screening level by Immigration officers, and not deportation teams of the Canada Border Services Agency.

Curbing violence

The government is also proposing to enlarge the circumstances according to which persons will not be eligible to sponsor any family member, not just spouses, for a period of five years following completion of their sentence for certain criminal offences.

For the most part, these proposed changes have been met with approval. After all, if an individual has been found guilty of violent crimes, we as a society want some reassurances that they will not inflict violent acts upon persons they bring to Canada.

This Blog has been written just prior to the Canadian federal election of May 2nd, 2011. Depending on the results thereof, the proposed changes may not all become law or may be modified prior to their adoption.

Credits

The official Canadian government announcements for the changes referred to may be found at the following links:

Five-year rule: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2011/2011-04-02/html/reg3-eng.html

Two-year rule: http://canadagazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2011/2011-03-26/html/notice-avis-eng.html

Curbing violence: http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2011/2011-04-02/html/reg2-eng.html

Photo by Patcard, Wikimedia Commons, “Air Canada Boeing 777-333ER just about to touch down at Montreal Pierre Elliot Trudeau International Airport … arriving from Paris”