Chapter 4 Review Questions

The Bilingualism and Biculturalism Commission challenged the traditional charter group model by listening to non-British and non-French groups and considered how policies guided by this model excluded significant aspects of the population. Their demands sought to gain official recognition of Canada as a multicultural society. The net result was the 1971 passage of the Multiculturalism Act and the creation of the new federal Ministry of State for Multiculturalism.

Canada was a pluralistic, mosaic-like society, but it was also highly stratified, with those of British ancestry dominating. Influence, wealth, and status were held disproportionately in the hands of those with English heritage. Members of other ethnic groups were largely blocked from access to opportunities to be part of the elites.

For most of Canada’s history the major sources of immigration were Europe and the US. In recent years, the leading sources have been Asia, the Middle East, and the Caribbean. Whereas just under 95 percent of immigrants before 1961 were born in the US or Europe, that figure was only 22.3 percent in the 1991–2001 period.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 recognized Aboriginal peoples as distinct rights-bearing peoples. The Quebec Act of 1774 recognized the rights and status of French-speaking Catholics.

Brooks’s main argument concerning the difference between American and Canadian models regarding multiculturalism points to the constitutionalization of the idea within the Canadian Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Brooks points to the effects of immigration reform laws as having an influence on the pattern of immigration to Canada. For example, the Immigration Act, 1967 eliminated racial discrimination and ethnic favouritism and established a points system that has been used since then.

English-speakers and French-speakers in Canada have different attitudes regarding accommodation versus assimilation. An example is the issue of wearing a Muslim veil on the soccer pitch—Quebecers and French-speakers were much more likely to support a ban on these forms of dress on the playing field.

The four factors are lack of language proficiency; unfamiliarity with cultural norms related to communication; lack of work experience in Canada; and lack of recognition of credentials.

These skeptics list ideas such as Quebec separatism and diversity as undermining the unity of the ‘Canadian image.’

The Europeans who initially settled in Canada were French and British, predominantly Christian – Catholic and Protestant, and English or French-speaking. While the French settlers came directly from France, a sizable number of British settlers were Loyalists who came via the United States following the American Revolution. These two groups were often referred to as “founding nations.”

Deep diversity is a concept that has been studied in the Canadian context by philosopher Charles Taylor, but was also, for many years, present in the Netherlands. It is the idea that different communities belong to a society in different ways. Furthermore, in a pluralistic society, there can be no single identity without excluding another minority group in some way.

The Royal Proclamation of 1763 is often seen as the first document to address the status and rights of a particular group. It predominantly addressed the status of French Catholics, but also Indigenous peoples as “distinct rights-bearing people,” although these rights are now enshrined in the Indian Act and section 35 of the Canadian Constitution.

Answers will vary based on the identity groups that you identify with. You may find that you have several different origins of ancestry, or that you belong to a number of identity groups all at the same time, although you may identify more strongly with certain groups than others.

Les québécois de souche are those who Brooks says are ‘old-stock Québécois,’ or those who can trace their ancestry back to French settlers. Their main criticism of the Bouchard-Taylor report was that it placed too much onus on them to accommodate, rather than placing onus on newcomers to adapt and accept their language and culture.

Brooks notes that Canada’s fertility rate has dropped over the last several decades, and has not been at the replacement rate of 2.1 since 1971. However, since 2001, immigration has contributed more to population growth than the natural increase, and it is estimated that by 2040, immigration will account for almost all population growth in Canada. Brooks also points out that demographically, there has been a shift away from predominantly European immigration to Canada, towards greater immigration from non-European countries, particularly those in Asia.

In your answer, discuss the Charter, the provincial human rights acts, multiculturalism policies, and employment equity programs. You may then discuss your own ideas on what should be done; support your response using evidence from the chapter and your own prior knowledge.

Consider first the actual data as per the representation in Canada’s federal and provincial governments of ethno-cultural minorities, women, Indigenous peoples, people with economic or health disadvantages. How does this lack of representation manifest itself in the types of policies and initiatives directed toward these groups? What are the possible solutions that could be attempted to improve the representation of under-represented groups within Canadian politics?

In responding to this question, you will want to see if the models have, more or less, the same essential features. The Canadian model and the Dutch model, for instance, are similar in that they encourage retention of minority cultures and offer public support to those cultures. The Canadian model differs perhaps in that the state encourages ethnic communities to reach out to other communities. The US model is not unlike the Canadian and Dutch models, although there is perhaps more stress in the US on the importance of citizens sharing a common civic identity. The French model is the one that differs the most, at least in the abstract. It discourages cultural retention and encourages identification with the values of France. It remains to be seen whether this approach can endure. It is possible, too, that, on the street, there are no differences among the models. You will also want to give some thought to the idea that multiculturalism is essentially about individual freedom, about living the kind of life that the individual wants to live.

The Bouchard-Taylor Commission was an examination of what was ‘reasonable accommodation’ for diversity, led by philosopher Charles Taylor and sociologist Gerald Bouchard, who conducted field research across Québec. The Commission recommended interculturalism, reconciliation, and mutual adaption for both majority and minority groups. It was criticized by some for requiring too much accommodation and change from ‘old-stock Québec’ and not enough from newcomers.

Answers will vary based on the examples and time periods that you select. Typically, your response should focus on groups other than those of French and English origins. Examples may include groups such as Ukrainians, who criticized the ‘bicultural’ model in Canada, or Chinese, who were barred from immigrating to Canada between 1923 and 1947. You may also choose to discuss Indigenous peoples in Canada, who have been excluded from social and political life through a number of government policies, outlined in this chapter, in the previous chapter, and in chapter 16. Ensure that you support your responses with evidence from the textbook.