On Head-Coverings, Hijabs and Hysterics; Another Tale in Bureaucratic Bungling.
So the news breaks this week that Jason Kenney wants to force all people (read: Muslim women) to show their face during citizenship ceremonies. The reason given is that the Citizenship and Immigration officials need to see the soon-to-be-Canadians actually saying the oath.
Does that sound stupid to you? It is.
I’ve never taken an oath where I’ve actually paid attention to what I was saying. Unless there’s a magic spell spread over the hopeful citizens, saying the oath or not really makes a difference. Legally, they’ve accepted the oath and they’ve signed the social contract and all that BS. Nobody will be able to stand up in court and say “Yes, your honour, I killed the bastard - but I never said the oath! I’m not a Canadian!”
This really doesn’t have to be an issue. Kenney should have immediately said that those who do wear face-coverings will be given the option to do an exclusive oath-swearing. So, for example, a Muslim woman could do the swearing-in with an all-female audience. That would be acceptable for most Muslims.
Predicating their citizenship on removing their hijab/burka/chador/niqab/whatever in the presence of a man is offensive, racist and disgusting. Simply because Western culture doesn’t appreciate the rationale behind the headdress doesn’t mean we should just assume there isn’t one. Most Muslim women, especially those coming into Canada, choose to wear that headdress. Despite all the yammering you hear to the contrary, it is not a punishment or a confinement. This isn’t coming from an ideological standpoint: it’s a fact. Women really do choose to wear it.
Kenney has said very clearly - no, we will not let them remove their covering in a private audience.
In that video, he has the cojones to suggest that women simply don’t have to wear the covering. They do it on the Hajj! He says.
I’d sooner take Islamic doctrinal advice from a Magic 8 Ball than Jason Kenney.
At the same time, there is some legitimacy to the idea that these women need to prove their identity. Is it a major security concern? No. But if Kenney were really intent on making this issue one of security, he would have softened the announcement by making it evident that these women will have the opportunity to remove their covering with no males present. He needs to make that promise.
I don’t buy the idea that this is a culture war. This government may make ignorant decisions, but I really don’t believe it’s born out of ill-will for Muslims. I do believe it is sheer stupidity.
And politics.
ADRIAN WYLD/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Leave the public service out of this.
And it’s a problem with that political pig-headedness trickles through the levels of the government departments.
It is certainly normal for governments to try and mold the public service in their image. That didn’t start with Harper, and it won’t end with him.
The problem is that ministers rarely know what’s best for their department. Bev Oda did not know that KAIROS shouldn’t have received funding - she made a political decision and it was a moronic one that hindered aid and development.
I’m experiencing this first hand. My mother is a long-time Service Canada employee, dealing with the new, “efficient” automated EI system that is supposed to make everything better. When it made everything worse, Diane Finley blamed public service unions for holding up work.
I’ve used that automated system. It was created by the devil to punish us humans. No phonecall with a tinny pre-recorded female voice should last longer than 30 minutes.
And then there’s the freedom of information. This government has failed so miserably on releasing information.
I sent one request in early September to the Department of Foreign Affairs. The departments are legally required to send a formal response to your petition in 30 days. In my experience, that always meant getting the information within a month’s time.
This request? I got an initial response after a month informing me that it would be a 120-day extension. Considering the request was time-sensitive, I was off-the-wall mad. It also informed me that the request turned up a paltry 70-something pages.
So I called the department and spoke to the officer on my case. He proceeded to tell me that all the departments response for the file had reported back - except one. One department had been reviewing the file and thus holding up the request. Technically, they are still reviewing the file.
The Privy Council Office.
The line I got was this: the PCO is doing a review, and it was taking longer than expected because of staff cuts.
Scoff, I did, as the PCO’s budget went up by a fifth.
A FIFTH.
The PCO is a partisan body, no doubt. It plays politics with the civil service - that’s what it’s there for. But when you’re obstructing my work as a journalist? You’re damn straight I’m mad.
This government is not the anti-Christ. No doubt the former-Reformers have a bit of a persecution complex. This is their first turn in government and they’re righting some wrongs they’ve seen in the past.
I just hope they finally get over it. They should stick to what they do best - pushing their agenda through the House. That’s their job. Don’t like it? Fight it.
But for the love of god, I’m not going to get 20,000 people in the streets over one (very) late FOI request. Please, please, Mistuh Harper - if you’re going to get me one thing for Christmas, make a competent bureaucracy.
