Tag: Canada

Troubles in leadership

A world leader decries investigations into his possible criminal corruption as an “attempted coup” based on “fabrications and a tainted and biased investigative process.”

No, not that world leader. This time it is Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime-minister-by-a-thread. Finally indicted on graft charges after months of anticipation, he became the first Israeli prime minister ever to face charges while in office. He insists the indictment will not impact his leadership, just as the country seems on an irreversible path to a third election in a year.

In a region with a scarcity of free and fair elections, Israel can’t seem to stop having them. From that perspective, things could be worse. Whether Netanyahu’s Likud party stands with him in his time of trouble remains to be seen. The possibility of his departure from the political scene, which he has dominated for nearly a generation, would provide the most significant shakeup of the field and possibly prevent a third inconclusive outcome.

On this side of the ocean, the U.S. House of Representatives continues investigating President Donald Trump. Few people, including Republicans, are making much of an effort to refute the basic facts. Evidence piles upon itself that the U.S. president indeed asked the president of Ukraine for a dirty political favour – a bribe – in exchange for military financial aid that had already been approved by the U.S. Congress. GOP responses to this evidence range from “So?” to the only slightly more nuanced argument that the president of the United States didn’t get what he wanted and the president of Ukraine did, so no harm done.

With Trump seemingly in thrall or somehow beholden to Vladimir Putin, and his party steadfast behind him, we are treated to the spectacle of a party that 60 years ago was trampling over individual liberties based on a largely false suspicion that “the Russians” were infiltrating the country’s government and threatening its entire way of life now responding to a disturbingly similar situation, this one far more provably real, with a shrug.

While Canada, thankfully, has no such level of political intrigue or corruption at the moment, a shocking diplomatic move last week has set the official voices of the Jewish community on edge.

The day before swearing in a new cabinet, the government of just-reelected Prime Minister Justin Trudeau opted to vote at the United Nations General Assembly to condemn all Israeli settlements in the West Bank, jumping on a dogpile led by North Korea, Egypt, Nicaragua and Zimbabwe, none of whom should be arbiters of justice or human rights. To be clear, the vote means almost nothing in practical terms. But symbolism does count. And the vote was a slap in the face by Canada to Israel and those in this country who recognize it as our closest ally in the region for historical, moral and pragmatic reasons.

Some speculate that the shift in tone reflects the new minority government currying favour with the New Democratic Party, which has included some notorious Israel-bashers. That is probably a less likely reason than the campaign by Trudeau to win Canada one of the rotating seats on the United Nations Security Council. Where former prime minister Stephen Harper’s refusal to “go along to get along” in the anti-Israel hatefest that occurs annually at the UN was seen as a key reason we lost out on a seat, Trudeau seems determined to hedge his bets.

A prestigious seat on the Security Council would presumably elevate Trudeau in the eyes of the world after he frittered away the “Canada is back” optimism of four years ago by failing to meet climate targets while bhangra dancing across the world stage.

Regardless of the motive, it is a reprehensible act that could have serious implications for the political orientation of Jewish Canadians in the next few years. Coming as it does while the ink is barely dry on the results of an election in which Liberals mostly made the right noises to Jewish and pro-Israel Canadians, it seems a particularly brutish little dagger to unsheathe now.

Xenophobia intolerable

Don Cherry and Ron Maclean on screen, in 2018. (photo by Ross Dunn/flickr.com)

For many Canadians, Don Cherry and his bombastic pronouncements about hockey, but, more importantly, about society and whatever pops into his head, have been like a tolerated, occasionally amusing uncle at the family table. An opinionated crank who seems like a throwback to an earlier, less refined time, Cherry has been coming into our living rooms for decades, part and parcel with our national pastime.

But there’s a limit.

Cherry was finally told to leave the family table Monday after a rant about “you people” – new Canadians, immigrants or, as people of his inclination might characterize them, “foreigners.”

“You people … you love our way of life, you love our milk and honey, at least you can pay a couple bucks for a poppy or something like that,” Cherry said on Hockey Night in Canada last Saturday, two days before Remembrance Day. His implication was that new Canadians do not wear poppies or perhaps do so in lesser numbers than Canada-born Canadians. The Canadian Broadcast Standards Council was inundated and paralyzed on the weekend by complaints from viewers. On Remembrance Day, Sportsnet, which broadcasts the program, pulled the plug.

Cherry was unrepentant: “I know what I said and I meant it. Everybody in Canada should wear a poppy to honour our fallen soldiers.”

But that wasn’t the context of what he said. His implication was clear: immigrants take the benefits of life in Canada but do not respect the sacrifices that built the country or those who made them. That’s a far different – and more xenophobic – thing than saying everyone should wear a poppy.

Already, of course, social media grumps and trolls are declaring this the latest case of “political correctness” run amok, akin to taking “all thy sons command” out of the national anthem and all the other modernizations that threaten the hegemony of the geezer class.

Times change. People adapt or they don’t. But there are consequences in either case.

“To keep my job, I cannot be turned into a tamed robot,” said Cherry.

So be it.

טרודו ניצח שוב את השמרנים בבחירות

כיוון שהמפלגה של ג’סטין טרודו זכתה במרבית המושבים ברפלמנט, הוא זה שיקבל ראשון את המנדט להרכיב שוב את הממשלה החדשה. (רוני רחמני)

האם הוא עשוי בטפלון? שאלו הפרשנים באולפני החדשות לאור ניצחונו של ג’סטין טרודו – ראש הממשלה היוצא מטעם המפלגה הלברלית, בבחירות הכלליות בקנדה, שנערכו ביום שני בשבוע שעבר. זאת לאור מספר פרשות בהן נקשר שמו בשנה האחרונה. בהן: טרודו הואשם בכך שניסה להסדיר תביעה נגד חברת תשתיות הגדולה ממחוז קוויבק אס.אן.סי לוולין. להגנתו אמר ראש הממשלה כי ניסה בסך הכל למנוע פיטורי אלפי עובדים של החברה באם היא תעקור לחו”ל. כן פורסמה תמונה בה נראה טרודו מחופש לשחור עת היה מורה בבית ספר. טרודו התנצל על כך מספר פעמים. לכן העלו מספר פרשנים את הסברה שהוא יובס בבחירות הארבעים ושלושה במספר. אך לא כך אצל טרודו. אמנם המפלגה הליברלית הפסידה את הרוב בפרלמנט בבחירות, והיא ירדה ממאה שבעים ושבעה מושבים למאה חמישים ושבעה, מתוך שלוש מאות שלושים ושמונה מושבים. אך כיוון שהמפלגה של טרודו זכתה במרבית המושבים ברפלמנט, הוא זה שיקבל ראשון את המנדט להרכיב שוב את הממשלה החדשה. מדובר הפעם בממשלת מיעוט כי דרושים מאה ושבעים מושבים לממשלה הנשענת על רוב. אם יצליח טרודו לצרף לממשלתו את המפלגה הדמוקרטית החדשה מהשמאל, שנפגעה קשות בבחירות וירדה משלושים ותשעה מושבים לעשרים וארבעה, הוא יבטיח לעצמו ממשלה יציבה הנשענת על רוב ברור בן מאה ושמונים ואחד מושבים.

מפלגת השמרנים בראשות אנדרו שיר, ניהלה קמפיין מלוכלך ואישי נגד טרודו בארבעים ימי מערכת הבחירות. שיר לא התבייש להמציא סיפורים על טרודו ולטעון דברים כנגדו שלא היו ולא נבראו. ומה לא יעשו השמרנים כדי לנצח. שיר אף הגדיל לעשות וטען באחת מעצרות הבחירות האחרונות כי אם הוא ינצח בבחירות, יפעל לקיים חקירה נגד טרודו בפרשת אס.אן. סי לוולין. ציבור מאזיניו הנאמן צעק לעבר שיר:”נעל אותו”, “נעל אותו”, “נעל אותו”. זאת בדיוק כפי שצעקו תומכי המועמד לנשיאות בארה”ב דונלד טראמפ, כאשר הציע לבצע חקירה נגד הילרי קלינטון בפרשת האימיילים שנעלמו. הדימיון לא מפתיע אפוא כאשר מדובר בשמרנים. המפלגה של שיר הגדילה אמנם את כוחה משמעותית בפרלמנט לעומת הבחירות הקודמות, מתשעים וחמישה מושבים למאה עשרים ואחד מושבים, אך נכשלה נמרצות בכוונתה להרכיב את הממשלה הבאה.

המנצחת הגדולה בבחירות האחרונות היא המפלגת הבדלנים ממחוז קוויבק שהגדילה את כוחה משמעותית לעומת הבחירות הקודמות. מעשרה מושבים לשלושים ושניים מושבים. המפלגה הבדלנית הודיעה כי הורידה מסדר היום שלה את הרצון להגשים את החלום ההיסטורי ולהיפרד מקנדה. כל שהמפלגה מבקשת עתה זה הוא לדאוג לאינטרסים של המקומיים בקוויבק. ובין היתר למנוע את בניית צינור נפט במחוז להעברת נפט ממחוז אלבטרה.

לאור תוצאות הבחירות להערכת מספר פרשנים: קנדה כיום מפוצלת הרבה יותר מבעבר. לדעת חלק מהם זה מה שקורה בהרבה מדינות במערב כיום, אך בקנדה הפיצול נחשב עדיין למתון יותר. במחוז קוויבק שולטת המפלגה הבדלנית, במרכז המדינה שולטת המפלגה הליברלית ובמערב קנדה (במחוזות סיסקצ’ואן ואלבטרה) מפלגת השמרנים. הפרשנים חושבים שטרודו יהיה חייב לגלות מנהיגות אמיתית כדי לאחד את כל הכוחות תחתיו. יש המאמינים שהוא המנהיג הנכון במקום הנכון והוא יצליח לעשות זאת. מכל מקום בנאום הניצחון שלו אמר טרודו כי הוא ראש הממשלה של כל קנדה, והוא יפעל לטובת כל האזרחים בין אם בחרו בו או לא. וטוב שכך.

Vibrant democracies

On Monday, Canada and Israel each embarked on a new adventure in governance. Here at home, Justin Trudeau’s Liberal party had a surprisingly robust showing in the federal election, winning the irrefutable right to form a minority government, or to form a coalition of some description.

The Liberals’ relatively strong showing – 157 seats to Andrew Scheer’s 121; just 13 short of a majority – opens the door for a government with Jagmeet Singh’s New Democrats holding a balance of power. Just a few days before the election, polls suggested a race so tight, and with the Bloc Quebecois and NDP taking so many seats, that any configuration to reach the magic 170 number would have required not two parties, but three. That complicated scenario was averted, leaving the Liberals free to face the House with either a formal agreement with the NDP or a tacit knowledge that the now-fourth party is in no financial position to return hastily to the election battlefield.

In Israel Monday, President Reuven Rivlin called on Blue and White leader Benny Gantz to attempt to form a government after incumbent Binyamin Netanyahu failed to do so after the second inconclusive election this year. Gantz has said he hopes to form a “liberal unity government,” but that is as challenging as Netanyahu’s failed effort to coalesce a majority. He may be hoping that, if Netanyahu is indicted in the coming days, Likud under a new leader might be a viable partner – or perhaps some MKs unfettered from Netanyahu’s long years of leadership will break away and form a faction to join Gantz. Another plan has Gantz propping up Netanyahu unless and until Netanyahu is charged, at which point Gantz would stand up as prime minister, which seems a strange compromise with a tarnished leader. As usual in Israeli politics, there are a vast number of moving parts.

Multiple moving parts is less typical of Canadian politics, where our tendency toward majority governments typically sequesters any moving parts in the all-powerful Prime Minister’s Office. Not so during a minority Parliament, when individual MPs on all sides are able to wield power in ways they can only dream of in a majority scenario.

In what must be a jagged pill for the once and future prime minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould, whose testimony about Trudeau’s treatment of her was the single most detrimental arrow in Trudeau’s reelection armour, was herself reelected as an independent in Vancouver Granville. A large number of Jewish British Columbians, now, are represented in Parliament by an individual who belongs to no party. This will be fascinating to watch in many respects, not least how she pursues politics from the opposition benches as the SNC-Lavalin affair continues to percolate.

Other sidebars in the result include the scuttled effort by a leading anti-Israel figure to re-enter Parliament. Svend Robinson, who, during 25 years in Parliament, was one of Canada’s most vociferous voices against Israel, threw his hat back in the ring but came up short in Burnaby North-Seymour – being narrowly defeated by the incumbent Liberal despite this being ground zero in the battle over the Liberals’ Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

More notably, Maxime Bernier, leader of the nascent People’s Party, lost his own seat in Quebec. His party made effectively no impact anywhere, sending the hopeful sign that messages of populist xenophobia that seem to be resonating elsewhere in the world still fall largely on deaf ears, at least electorally, here.

Canada will almost certainly have an easier time forming a government than Israel will but, in both cases, the drama plays out against the backdrop of healthy, vibrant, disputatious democratic systems. No matter what the outcomes, we should be thankful for that.

 

ניסויים מוצלחים באמצעות מזל”טים

נסיעה טובה: ניסויים מוצלחים להעברת משלוחים באמצעות מזל”טים בארה”ב וקנדה (Webagentur Meerbusch via Pixabay)

בחודשים האחרונים בוצעו ניסויים מוצלחים להעברת משלוחים באמצעות מזל”טים ברחבי ארצות הברית וקנדה. זאת על ידי גורמים מסחריים וממשלתיים שונים. הניסויים מתבצעים כחלק מפעילות להפוך בקרוב את השירות של השימוש במזל”טים למסחרי ורווחי. כפי שפירסמנו בעבר הרגולציה בקנדה לביצוע ניסוים באמצעות מזל”טים הרבה יותר קלה, מאשר זו שבארה”ב. זו הסיבה למשל שאמזון החליטה לבצע את הניסויים במזל”טים בצד הקנדי של הגבול, לא רחוק ממטה החברה שבעיר סיאטל שנמצאת בצד האמריקני.

בקנדה בוצע בתקופה האחרונה ניסוי מסחרי ראשון ומוצלח על ידי רשות הדואר הקנדית (קנדה פוסט), בשילוב רשת בתי המרקחת לונדון דראגס ויצרנית מקומית של רובוטים אינדרו רובוטריקס (ממחוז בריטיש קולומביה). אינדרו רובוטריקס משתפת כבר פעולה עם רשות החלל האמריקנית (נס”א), רשות החלל הקנדית ורשות התחבורה הקנדית. באמצעות מזל”ט קטן הועברו תרופות חיוניות מוונקובר איילנד לביתו של חולה בשגר באחד האייים הסמוכים – סולט ספרינג איילנד שבבריטיש קולומביה. כלי הטיס הבלתי מאוייש עבר את ששת הק”מ מעל הים באחת עשרה דקות בלבד. השותפים לפרוייקט מאמינים כי כאשר השימוש במזל”טים להעברת משלוחים יהפוך למסחרי, אחת הדרישות המיידיות מהשוק תהיה העברת תרופות וציוד רפואי חיוני, למקומות שנמצאים במרחק ממרכזי הערים.

ניסוי דומה בוצע בחודש לאחרונה בארה”ב על ידי הצבא האמריקני, בשיתוף פעולה עם המכון לטכנולוגיה של מדינת ניו ז’רזי. שני הגופים ביצעו שני ניסויים עם מזל”טים שטסו למרחק של עד קרוב לק”מ, מעל הים ליד ניו ז’רזי. כלי הטיס העבירו מנות חירום ומארזי מים לצבא האמריקני. זאת כדי לבדוק את האופציה של העברת אספקת חירום לאזורי לחימה בלתי נגישים, וכן לאזורי מוכי אסון בארה”ב.

מספר ניסויים נוספים בוצעו בארה”ב בתקופה האחרונה להטסת מזל”טים ללא ציוד בשלב זה. בקייפ רובטרס שבמדינת קליפורניה בוצעה טיסת ניסוי למשך כדקה של מטוס ללא טייס, הנחשב הגדול ביותר מסוגו כיום, בארה”ב ואולי אף בעולם כולו. משקל כלי הטייס נאמד בכחצי טון. הפרוייקט שייך לחברת הסטרט-אפ אלראוי אייר מסאן פרנסיסקו. החברה בודקת אפשרות להעביר מטענים כבדי משקל של למעלה ממאתיים ק”ג. אלראוי אייר נערכת לשתף פעולה עם חברות המישלוחים האמריקניות הגדולות בעולם: פדקס, די.אייץ’.אל ויו.פי.אס.

בניסוי בפורט וורט שבמדינת טקסס מזל”ט קטן עלה לאוויר למשך מספר דקות ונחת. פרוייקט זה של חברת בל הליקופטר טקסטרטון האמריקנית בשיתוף פעולה עם חברת המשלוחים הגדולה של יפאן – ימאטו.

ואילו אוניברסיטת פיירבנקס שבמדינת אלסקה בשיתוף פעולה עם חברת שירותי צינורות, ביצעו ניסוי ראשון באזור פוקס. הניסוי הכלל הטסת מזל”ט למרחק של למעלה משישה ק”מ. שני הגופים מעוניינים לאפשר לספק ציוד רפואי לאזור צינור הנפט טרנס אלסקה. ובמקביל לבצע מעקבים אווירים על מה שמתרחש באזור.

מזל”ט הוא כלי טיס בלתי מאויש שלא נושא עליו טייסים. הכוונה והבקרה על כלי הטיס נעשית על ידי הפעלה מרחוק. רוב המזל”טים מיועדים לשימושים צבאיים, אך יותר ויותר נעשה בהם שימוש גם ליישומים אזרחיים. כמו למשל: משטרה, אבטחה, בקרת תנועה, מחקר מדעי וצילום.

בשימושים הצבאיים מזל”טים משמשים לאיסוף מודיעין, יצירת הטעיה וכן לירות חימוש מדוייק במטרות קרקעיות. בין המדינות המחזיקות במזל”טים לתקיפות צבאיות: ארה”ב, ישראל, סין, הודו, מדינות אירופה וקנדה. האיראנים אגב הואשמו לאחרונה בכך שהם השתמשו במזל”טים להתקיף את מתקני הנפט של ערב הסעודית. המזל”טים הגיעו מאזור תימן והפציצו שני מתקני נפט סעודיים.

Canada is not immune

Maxime Bernier’s performance at the federal leaders debate Monday night may have been unimpressive, and at times badgering, but no doubt some ears pricked up at his assertion that he is the only party leader whose position on immigration stands apart. True enough. He calls for about 150,000 immigrants annually, half the number now admitted.

The People’s Party leader was challenged at the get-go by a debate moderator who raised Bernier’s past comments about “extreme multiculturalism” and his use of the words “ghettos” and “tribes” to describe new Canadians.

Bernier will be lucky to win his own seat in Quebec and his actions in the debate probably didn’t win him a groundswell of supporters anywhere else. But the emphasis on immigration was notable. Slashing immigration in half, which could have detrimental impacts on the economy and growth of the country, would represent a huge number of people refused entry to Canada. But it’s not really about the numbers. It was the underlying message. Bernier was signaling to potential supporters that immigration is generally undesirable, with all the attendant impulses that message is intended to convey.

Hours before the debate, an Angus Reid Institute poll indicated that Canadians are split on the issue – and leaning in the direction of less immigration and tougher treatment for asylum-seekers. Forty percent of respondents said Canada takes in too many refugees, while 13% said we accept too few.

Bernier may not be the best messenger for the anti-immigration idea, but it is clear that there is a constituency in Canada for a politics that is exclusionary and plays on discriminatory tropes. All the main political parties are admirably standing firm against this impulse, for now. But it is worth keeping a close eye on this trend and reminding ourselves regularly that Canada is not immune from xenophobia.

Election views diverge

The Independent spoke with people in the Jewish community to gauge attitudes as the federal election approaches. What we found was a diversity of views and a lack of consensus.

An informal focus group of residents at the Weinberg Residence raised issues of out-of-pocket expenses for medical treatments and a lack of available doctors.

“You lose your doctor, you can’t get another one,” said one senior voter.

There was not great enthusiasm for any of the party leaders. One participant said she had lost respect for Liberal leader Justin Trudeau long before the recent brownface and blackface issue emerged.

“I was disappointed in him way back when he went to India and there was this whole thing of dressing up in Indian costumes. I felt it wasn’t very statesmanlike.”

“I feel that he’s had his chance and I don’t want to vote for him because he showed us what he can do. I don’t think he’s got what it takes,” said another voter.

“I expected nothing from Trudeau and I got it,” said another.

But there was no groundswell of support for Conservative leader Andrew Scheer.

“I’m disappointed,” said one. “I haven’t heard anything that’s promising.”

Some voters said NDP leader Jagmeet Singh comes across as sincere, but one said he has a lot of repair work to do with the Jewish community after his party’s positions against Israel in the past.

Elizabeth May, the Green leader, was viewed positively, but not seen as prime minister material.

“She’s very good at her subject, but I can’t envisage her really understanding what’s going on in the economy, in foreign affairs,” one resident said.

Among more than a dozen participants, the vast majority had a positive view of their incumbent MP, Jody Wilson-Raybould.

“I think she deserves better than she’s had,” said one person, while a Conservative supporter said she wishes Wilson-Raybould was running for her party, because she’d like to vote for her.

A show of hands indicated well more than half are undecided about who to vote for.

“Everybody’s confused,” said one, to laughter all around.

* * *

Alice Sundberg, director of operations and housing development for Tikva Housing Society, would like to see the federal government get back into funding nonprofit housing.

“We think that there is a really significant role for the federal government in making rental housing more affordable,” she said. Rather than subsidies to renters, which go into the pockets of landlords and don’t create new housing, she would like to see either capital grants to reduce mortgages for nonprofit or co-op housing, thus reducing the rental costs, or ongoing operating subsidies to organizations like hers that develop new housing.

“We don’t have enough supply,” said Sundberg. “Back in the ’90s, when the federal government withdrew from funding new affordable housing, it was really the beginning of our homelessness crisis.”

Housing is also a topic for Eldad Goldfarb, executive director of the Jewish Community Centre of Greater Vancouver. The centre’s redevelopment will include at least 300 units of affordable rental housing. His team has spoken to many federal officials, including MPs, but, so far, he said, “No commitments, no confirmations, lots of good feedback and great understanding of the project, support for it, but nothing has translated into actual commitments, funding, promises, nothing of that sort.”

Support for the housing component might include financing from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, rather than grants, though he hopes for federal cash for the new JCC building. He credited the federal government for stepping up with funding for security infrastructure for communities at risk, but added there is always need for more.

* * *

The rise of hate-motivated rhetoric and violence leads some community leaders to call for more federal action and leadership.

“With the rise of antisemitism, racism and far-right extremism, particularly in the online space, the Vancouver Holocaust Education Centre would welcome a comprehensive strategy to tackle hate in all its forms,” said Nina Krieger, executive director of the VHEC.

Russ Klein, principal of King David High School, would like to hear party leaders and candidates address how they are demonstrating moral and ethical leadership that creates trust and inspires Canadians, especially young people.

“How will they work to ease a society which seems quick to feel fear and seems overly stressed and anxious?” asked Klein. “I want to know how they will support a kinder, more inclusive society that offers hope and opportunity for all but especially to young people and to the most vulnerable in our society. How will they work to maintain affordable housing, livable wages and allow people to manage a balanced lifestyle in cities like Vancouver, where young families cannot afford to live in their current community? We live in extremely concerning times globally and I want Canada to lead in decreasing world tensions – how will they do that?”

* * *

Similar broad topics arose among a handful of University of British Columbia students who met at Hillel House to discuss issues that are important to them. All agreed that there has not been enough discussion of foreign affairs and there is a lack of substantive difference between the parties on issues like immigration.

“I don’t see any candidate that has a clear foreign policy vision, even though I think Chrystia Freeland is, personally, a great minister of foreign affairs,” said Adam Yosef Dobrer, a third-year political science student who is volunteering on Zach Segal’s Conservative campaign in Vancouver Granville.

Dobrer also wants Canada to return to the Conservative policy of defunding the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which he called the greatest obstacle to peace between Israelis and Palestinians.

“In the last four years, I found it very difficult to understand where Canada as a nation lies in foreign affairs,” said Nika Perel, a fourth-year psychology student from Ontario who plans to vote Conservative. She credited the previous Conservative government with more clarity on Israel and Palestine and on Russia and Ukraine. “Stephen Harper made it very clear that he took a position supporting Ukraine.”

Jake Reznik, a nursing student with an undergraduate degree in kinesiology who remains an undecided voter, said Canada is not adequately standing up to China over its treatment of the Muslim-minority Uygher population or its other human rights violations. He added: “There is a lot of influence that the Chinese government does have in Canada that goes under-recognized.”

Matt Perzow, an NDP supporter who plans to vote strategically for Joyce Murray, the Liberal candidate in Vancouver Quadra, to prevent a Conservative government, emphasized health care, including mental health services. Defending Canadian values like multiculturalism and care for the most vulnerable are also things he wants to see party leaders prioritize.

All the students agreed that supporting Israel is an important consideration in their vote, but also said it will not be the deciding factor.

“I wouldn’t vote for any party that I thought would jeopardize the future of the Jewish people, whether it’s in Canada, in Israel or in another place,” said Perzow. “I’m not voting for somebody because of that issue, but, if I thought that something compromised the well-being of the Jewish people, I wouldn’t support them.”

Dobrer, whose family migrated to Canada from Israel when he was an infant because of the Second Intifada, said he has a “very resonant emotional connection” to Israel “but I am a Canadian first.” He is concerned about some election candidates, including Green party MP Paul Manly, who Dobrer says has a “long and sordid history of antisemitism and 9/11 ‘trutherism’ and delving into conspiracy theories.” (After being elected in a by-election this year, Manly denied he supports 9/11 conspiracies after the CBC reported on statements he had made in 2007 and 2011.)

The students all agreed that the environment and climate change are top issues for them and their peers, but expressed nearly universal hopelessness that anything substantive would change.

“I have no doubt that it will not be addressed,” said Reznik. “I know personally I’m not going to be willing to sacrifice my own standard of living and, at the same time, I think it is tremendously insulting on my part to tell someone else that they can’t attain my standard of living that we have here.”

“A lot of people are standing up and screaming about things, but they’re not going to do anything about it,” said Perel.

A hint of hope came from Dobrer: “From the government, I’m very skeptical. But from young intellectual minds, from the not-for-profit sector, from the private sector, every day there is more and more innovation, technological advances and more intellectual capital devoted to dealing with climate change.”

Canada is not “broken”

An opinion poll released last week indicates that 52% of Canadians agree with the statement that our society is “broken” – a spike of 15 points over three years ago – while just 19% of respondents disagreed with the statement.

The poll, conducted by Ipsos and provided exclusively to Global News, also suggests that two-thirds of respondents believe the economy is rigged to benefit the rich, while 61% agreed with the statement that “traditional parties and politicians don’t care about people like me.” Commentary provoked by the poll has focused on the portent these results have for a surge of populist parties or ideas in the coming federal election.

It should not be a surprise, perhaps, that people think the economy benefits the rich or that politicians have at heart the best interests of people other than little-old-us. We have been complaining about our politicians since the profession was invented and probably every one of us, no matter where we fall on the income scale, thinks we’d be doing better economically if it weren’t for some systemic force or policy that prevents us from getting ahead.

The really provocative result in this poll is the perception apparently held by more than half of Canadians that our society is broken. Admittedly, the question is ill-formed. What does “broken” even mean in this context? Regardless, the idea that we live in a broken society probably says more about the individual respondents than it does about our society as a whole. Canadians are among the most privileged, advantaged, wealthiest, healthiest and least oppressed people in the world. With some grievous historical and contemporary exceptions, Canada is one of the most egalitarian societies on earth.

We may dislike our politicians or have misgivings about this or that development, but for a poll to suggest that half of Canadians think this is a broken society makes us wonder if we are a country of naïve and entitled people. It would be instructive for Canadians who feel this way to take an eye-opening trip almost anywhere else in the world.

This is not to dismiss the very real cases of injustice, inequality or other systemic problems our country faces, but this poll indicates that half of Canadians don’t have the faintest idea how fortunate most of us have it here.

It also creates the potential for some very concerning political consequences. If Canadians march into the polling booth next month certain that this is a broken society, it is anyone’s guess what kind of ideas they might be willing to support to “fix” it.

Roll out welcome mat

Bill 21, Quebec’s law that forbids most public employees from displaying any religious symbols like a turban, a Magen David or a hijab, may become an issue in the federal election. On CBC Radio’s political program The House last weekend, MPs representing the Liberal, Conservative and New Democratic parties all took effectively the same position: the law is discriminatory but provinces have the right to proclaim their own laws and, what’s more, the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause means Quebec can pretty much do whatever it wants.

There is a political calculation in all this, of course. Many Quebeckers support this law and any federal party needs to appeal to a chunk of these voters in order to succeed in the province during next month’s vote. As a result, party leaders are mostly making the right noises about this discriminatory law, while hoping to move on to the next topic ASAP.

With federal leaders basically throwing up their hands on the issue, which calls into question the most fundamental rights of Canadians of all religions, what can be done?

One individual interviewed on the program is a teacher who is Sikh. Her choice was to move from Quebec to British Columbia, where she could continue her chosen profession without diminishing her religious beliefs, which include wearing a turban.

If federal leaders will not act forcefully, perhaps leaders in the provinces outside Quebec can do something. Throughout history, Canada has been enriched by refugees and immigrants who sought freedom and opportunity – our gains roughly equating the loss to their places of origin. Why not apply the same principle to inter-provincial relations?

Perhaps provinces like British Columbia should roll out the welcome mat for teachers, school administrators, wildlife officers, Crown prosecutors and other civil servants from Quebec who no longer feel welcome there. Actively recruiting these experienced professional people of different cultures and religions would strengthen our communities and send a message to Quebec that cultural difference is an asset, not a liability.

In the absence of forceful federal leadership on this front, it would be encouraging to see provincial governments stepping up where they can.

Concern over what to share

For many of us, it’s the beginning of the year. Not the year that starts with Rosh Hashanah. I mean, the academic year. If you’re a student, a student’s parent or a teacher, professor or other education professional, the beginning of September can mean only one thing. It’s time to get back to the grind.

This is both exciting and a nerve-racking time. You want people to like you and appreciate your skills, talents and special gifts. You want to feel welcome and make others feel welcome, too. Seeking approval is an important part of life. We all do it, right?

As overachievers, my husband and I try to start early. He mentioned that some new colleagues were moving in down the street at the beginning of August. They were moving from another country, so we should try to help, we figured. The wait for one’s belongings to arrive and pass through customs can be awhile. (For us, it took 10 days.)

My husband was out of town when they arrived, so I sprang into action. We loaned them a picnic basket filled with dishes, silverware and cups, some patio chairs and, when they asked, even a broom and dustpan.

A few days later, my husband home, we enjoyed a Saturday together out in the sunshine. When we checked our email again, we found that our new neighbour had asked us to loan more items. We apologized, but explained we weren’t usually online on Saturdays. “Oh!” she replied, “Do you do a tech Sabbath?” I had to look this up, but this term was coined in 2010 by Tiffany Shlain, an internet pioneer, and her husband, Ken Goldberg, a robotics professor. It is based loosely on the notion of unplugging from technology on a traditional Sabbath.

I was flummoxed. There seemed to be no nice way to say, “Uh, no, I do real Shabbat.” So, I thought, OK, I will try to explain. I said something like: “In the safety of Canadian diversity, we observe real Shabbat, not just ‘tech Shabbat.’

“We are Jewish and try to take the day off from Friday night to Saturday night. So, we have a big family dinner on Friday nights, we go to synagogue on Saturdays many weeks and we spend the day together, sometimes with friends. However, if you need to reach us, you can always call the landline or walk over and knock on the door. We use the phone when necessary, drive, turn on lights, etc. We are not very strict in our observance; sometimes, we spend the day as a family outside, at a farm or doing an outing together. We just try to rest and not to work.

“We hope your belongings will arrive soon!”

Her response? I kid you not – she said, “Thanks for sharing.”

I felt completely uncomfortable and embarrassed. This was from a new neighbour, someone to whom we offered the loan of various items and tried to welcome. I left it there, I had nothing else to say. My partner was somewhat more hopeful, that perhaps they were just clueless. He tried to explain how hard it is sometimes to be a minority in this way.

In the end, I realized that this fit right into the “new school year, new school experience.” Many of us are seeking approval from peers, colleagues, family members and friends. We jostle and jockey for position. We want others to admire us or, at the least, accept who we are. Then, in an effort to bond or make connections we maybe overshare with people who couldn’t care less.

At the start of the new school year, I’m often keen to make new connections, but it would have been altogether possible for me to say nothing about who we were or why we weren’t online on Saturdays. We might even have saved ourselves the trouble by not offering to loan things in the first place. However, in the interest of being welcoming to strangers and reaching out to make friends, I ended up feeling embarrassed and self-conscious rather than proud. I didn’t like it.

Before I moved to Canada, I lived in the southern United States in a place where I had good reason to feel wary about revealing too much about my religious life. We knew it could be an issue; it wasn’t an especially tolerant place.

Based on recent news events – a swastika painted on a car in a Winnipeg neighbourhood, an election scheduled for Shemini Atzeret – I have to conclude that maybe it’s time to be more careful here.

Sadly, for the first time in 10 years in Canada, I’m wondering if I would have been better off to keep my Jewish practice to myself, and reveal less. Maybe if I were hip, I’d be considering a tech Sabbath, but no. I’m connected to something that’s perhaps less popular, but a lot deeper. Sometimes, sharing this is important, even if it isn’t always the cool answer.

Joanne Seiff has written regularly for CBC Manitoba and various Jewish publications. She is the author of three books, including From the Outside In: Jewish Post Columns 2015-2016, a collection of essays available for digital download or as a paperback from Amazon. See more about her at joanneseiff.blogspot.com.