RACISM IN CANADA
15. (1) EVERY INDIVIDUAL IS EQUAL BEFORE AND UNDER THE LAW AND HAS THE RIGHT TO THE EQUAL PROTECTION AND EQUAL BENEFIT OF THE LAW WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION AND, IN PARTICULAR, WITHOUT DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RACE, NATIONAL OR ETHNIC ORIGIN, COLOUR, RELIGION, SEX, AGE, OR MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY.
(2) SUBSECTION (1) DOES NOT PRECLUDE ANY LAW; PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY THAT HAS AS ITS OBJECT THE AMELIORATION OF CONDITIONS OF DISADVANTAGED INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS INCLUDING THOSE THAT ARE DISADVANTAGED BECAUSE OF RACE, NATIONAL OR ETHNIC ORIGIN, COLOUR, RELIGION, SEX, AGE, OR MENTAL OR PHYSICAL DISABILITY.
CONDEMN
URGE
RE-EMPHASIZE
REQUEST
MAY LOSE THE RIGHT TO:
- BE CALLED AN INDIAN
- LIVE ON AN INDIAN RESERVE
- BE BURIED ON AN INDIAN RESERVE WITH THE REST OF HER FAMILY
(http://www.canadiana.ca/citm/specifique/abwomen_e.pdf)
THE HOUSE OR LAND THAT A COUPLE LIVES IN WHILE THEY ARE MARRIED OR IN A COMMON LAW RELATIONSHIP.
IN 1986, THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA RULED THAT LAWS ON MATRIMONIAL PROPERTY DO NOT APPLY TO RESERVE LAND.
IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE PROTECTION ACT
RACIALIZED FEMINIZATION OF POVERTY
FORMAL EQUALITY: IGNORING DIFFERENCES ATTRIBUTED TO RACE, GENDER, DISABILITY, AND/OR SEXUAL ORIENTATION AND TREATING EVERYONE “THE SAME”.
IN 2001 21% OF WOMEN FROM VISIBLE MINORITIES HAD A UNIVERSITY DEGREE, COMPARED TO 14% OF OTHER WOMEN. DESPITE THIS, WOMEN FROM VISIBLE MINORITES ARE GHETTOIZED IN LOW-PAYING ADMINISTRATIVE, CLERICAL, SALES, AND SERVICE JOBS, AND HAVE LOWER EMPLOYMENT EARNINGS THAN OTHER WOMEN.
EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE, MATERNITY LEAVE, & PARENTAL BENEFITS
SUBSIDIZED CHILD CARE FOR POOR MOTHERS
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
ACCESS TO LEGAL AID
POINT SYSTEM FOR IMMIGRATION
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
WHAT CAN BE DONE?
FROM “FORMAL EQUALITY” TO “SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY”
POLICIES AND PRACTICES NEED TO RESPOND TO HISTORICALLY AND SOCIALLY BASED DIFFERENCES.
THEREFORE, IN ORDER TO BE TREATED EQUALLY, RACIALIZED AND IMMIGRANT WOMEN MUST BE UNDERSTOOD AND TREATED DIFFERENTLY.
WHAT IS EQUALITY?
ECONOMIC INEQUALITY AND RACIALIZED POVERTY IN CANADA, 2000:
35% OF ABORIGINAL WOMEN
23% OF IMMIGRANT WOMEN
29% OF VISIBLE MINORITY WOMEN
26% OF WOMEN WITH DISABILITIES
THE MINISTER RESPONSIBLE FOR THE STATUS OF WOMEN:
“WOMEN ARE STRONG, ALREADY EQUAL, AND DO NOT NEED POLICY SUPPORTS.”
1976: STATUS OF WOMEN CANADA (SWC)
IMPROVING WOMEN’S ECONOMIC WELL-BEING
ADDRESSING ISSUES AROUND VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN
FURTHERING RIGHTS OF WOMEN
OTHER BARRIERS
1990: MOVE TO ELIMINATE FUNDING TO WOMEN’S ORGANIZATIONS
1995: DISBANDED CANADIAN ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE STATUS OF WOMEN (CACSW), MOVING RESPONSIBILITIES TO SWC
1996: WOMEN SOUGHT TO INCREASE FEDERAL FUNDING FOR SWC
1997: END TO PROGRAM (CORE) FUNDING IN FAVOR OF PROJECT FUNDING
1998: ELIMINATED CORE FUNDING
2006: FEDERAL CUTS TO SOCIAL PROGRAMS
2007: GOVERNMENT REMOVES THE WORD "EQUALITY" FROM MANDATE
WHY?
FOREIGN QUALIFICATIONS NOT RECOGNIZED
LANGUAGE BARRIERS
ASSUMPTIONS AND PREJUDICE
SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY
OBJECTIVES
SECTION 15 OF THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS:
“TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR IMPORTANT COURT CASES AND COMMUNITY PROJECTS THAT ADVANCE THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE MINORITY RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY CANADA’S CONSTITUION, INCLUDING THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS” (34)
“TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR IMPORTANT COURT CASES AND PROJECTS THAT ADVANCE EQUALITY RIGHTS GUARANTEED IN SECTION 15 OF THE CANADIAN CHARTER OF RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS.” (34)
“RELFECT A VISION OF SUBSTANTIVE EQUALITY ARTICULATED BY THE SUPREME COURT OF CANADA” (35)
“TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR A SPECIFIC DEMOGRAPHIC IN CHALLENGING EXISTING LAWS, POLICIES, AND/OR PRACTICES THAT WERE FOUND TO BE DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST THIS DEMOGRAPHIC, COMPRISING HISTORICALLY DISADVANTAGED AND OFFICIAL MINORITY LANGUAGE GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS.” (40)
THE COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM
“THE COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM OF CANADA IS A NATIONAL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION WHICH WAS SET UP IN 1994 TO PROVIDE FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FOR IMPORTANT COURT CASES THAT ADVANCE LANGUAGE AND EQUALITY RIGHTS GUARANTEED UNDER CANADA’S CONSTITUTION.”
(COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM OF CANADA, http://www.ccppcj.ca/e/ccp.shtml)
RECOGNIZES THE PATTERNS OF DISADVANTAGE AND OPPRESSION EXISTING IN SOCIETY AND REQUIRING LAW MAKERS AND GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS TO TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT IN THEIR ACTIONS.
EXAMINING THE IMPACT OF LAW WITHIN ITS SURROUNDING SOCIAL CONTEXT TO ENSURE THAT LAWS AND POLICIES PROMOTE FULL PARTICIPATION IN SOCIETY BY EVERYONE, REGARFLESS OF PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS OR GROUP MEMBERSHIP.
REQUIRES CHALLENGING COMMON STEREOTYPES ABOUT GROUP CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAY UNDERLIE LAW OR GOVERNMENT ACTION.
(COURT CHALLENGES PROGRAM OF CANADA, http://www.ccppcj.ca/e/ccp.shtml)
THE CCP’S SUCCESS IN CANADA:
“HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN ALMOST ALL OF THE LITIGATION ACROSS THE COUNTRY SURROUNDING EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS FOR MINORITY OFFICIAL LANGUAGE COMMUNITIES.” (35)
“HAS PROVIDED FUNDING FOR SEVERAL CASES THAT WERE UNSUCCESSFUL IN THE COURTS BUT RAISED AWARENESS OF THE ISSUE AND ULTIMATELY RESULTED IN CHANGES IN THE LAW” (35)
ANNUAL BUDGET OF THE CCP = APPROX. 0.000536% OF CANADA’S TOTAL 2006 ESTIMATED TAX REVENUE.
THE INDIAN ACT, 1876
VISIBLE MINORITIES (APPROX. 13.4% OF CANADIAN POPULATION)
MATRIMONIAL REAL PROPERTY
ABORIGINAL PEOPLES (APPROX. 3.3% OF CANADIAN POPULATION)
OFFICIAL LINGUSTIC MINORITIES (APPROX. 5.1% OF CANADIAN POPULATION)
AWARDS POINTS FOR OFFICIAL LANGUAGE ABILITY, EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
GRANTS IMMIGRATION OFFICERS DISCRETIONARY POWERS (
CREATES CATEGORIES
(http://criaw-icref.ca/ImmigrantandRefugeeWomen)
1985:
BILL C-31 AND AMMENDMENTS TO THE INDIAN ACT, 1876
REINSTATED INDIAN STATUS FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN WHO HAD LOST IT BYMARRYING A NON-ABORIGINAL OR MOVING OFF A RESERVE.
(http://www.canadiana.ca/citm/specifique/abwomen_e.pdf)