Understandings of Multiculturalism Among Newcomers to Canada

Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

A “Great” Large Family: Understandings of Multiculturalism among Newcomers to Canada

Christopher J. Fries and Paul Gingrich

Abstract Résumé Analysts have taken positions either supporting or attacking Les analystes ont pris position soit pour ou contre la poli- multicultural policy, yet there is insuffi cient research con- tique du multiculturalisme, mais il y a insuffi sance de cerning the public policy of multiculturalism as it is under- la recherche sur la politique publique du multicultura- stood and practiced in the lives of Canadians. Th is analysis lisme tel qu’on le comprend et pratique dans la vie des approaches multiculturalism as a text which is constitu- Canadiens. Cette analyse aborde le multiculturalisme en ent of social relations within Canadian society. Data from tant que texte constitutif des relations sociales au sein de the Regina Refugee Research Project are analyzed within la société canadienne. Des données statistiques du Regina Nancy Fraser’s social justice framework to explore the Refugee Research Project sont analysées dans le cadre de manner in which multiculturalism and associated poli- justice sociale élaboré par Nancy Fraser afi n d’explorer la cies are understood and enacted in the lived experience of manière dont le multiculturalisme et les politiques conne- newcomers. Newcomers’ accounts of multiculturalism are xes sont comprises et adoptées dans le vécu des nouveaux compared with fi ve themes identifi ed via textual analysis of arrivants. Les témoignages de nouveaux arrivants sur le the Canadian Multiculturalism Act—diversity, harmony, multiculturalisme sont comparés à cinq thèmes identifi és equality, overcoming barriers, and resource. Embedded par l’analyse textuelle de la Loi sur le multiculturalisme within the accounts newcomers off ered of Canadian multi- canadien – la diversité, l’harmonie, l’égalité, la suppres- culturalism are relations of ruling that can be understood sion des obstacles, et l’ingéniosité. Les nouveaux arrivants within the context of struggles for recognition and social intègrent à leurs témoignages concernant le multicultura- justice. Further research is needed to investigate the rela- lisme canadien des relations de pouvoir qui peuvent être tional processes in which diff ering perceptions of and comprises dans le contexte de luttes pour la reconnais- experiences with multiculturalism are embedded and to sance et la justice sociale. D’autres recherches sont néces- compare the present accounts with those of other groups of saires pour étudier les processus relationnels auxquels sont immigrants and Canadian-born. intégrées diff érentes perceptions et expériences du multiculturalisme et comparer les témoignages actuels avec ceux d’autres groupes d’immigrants et natifs du Canada.

36 A “Great” Large Family

[To me, multiculturalism means] opportunities for all with newcomers to Regina, Saskatchewan, who arrived groups, cultures, or persons to develop or act within their in the city as government-sponsored refugees. Before pre- community. Th e governments try to treat everybody as part senting our fi ndings, we provide a historical and theoretical of a ‘great’ large family. background for understanding multiculturalism. Regina Refugee Study participant Historical and Th eoretical Background [Canada is not] a melting pot in which the individuality Multicultural Policy in Canada of each element is destroyed in order to produce a new Multicultural policy is closely linked to the social, economic, and totally diff erent element. It is rather a garden into and political history of Canadian society, and more specif- which have been transplanted the hardiest and bright- ically to immigration8 and the labour market, along with est fl owers from many lands, each retaining in its new environment the best of the qualities for which it was issues of citizenship and social justice. In English-speaking loved and prized in its native land. Canada prior to the 1960s, “integration” meant assimilation into a British model of society, although there were excep- Th e Right Honourable John Diefenbaker, former Canadian Prime Minister1 tions and assimilation was oft en incomplete. More recently, there have been changes in the composition of the population, in the structure of Canadian society, and in offi cial Introduction policy and practice, so that integration in a multicultural Perhaps no Canadian policy initiative has greater potential context has become widely accepted.9 While this has cre- relevance for the lives of newcomers to Canada than does ated a greater degree of social justice in areas of cultural dif- multiculturalism. Multiculturalism has been both widely ferences, inequalities of incomes and opportunities remain applauded and subjected to much criticism. One reason for structured into the operation of the Canadian economy and this ambivalence may be the variety of meanings associated society.10 Th ese have not been eliminated, leading to dra- with multiculturalism—it can refer to any of policy, pro- matic diff erences in life experiences for individuals from gram, practice, educational approach, sociological concept, diff erent ethnocultural backgrounds. symbol, ideal, ideology, theory, or description of Canadian Some writers have found historical precedents or con- society. No defi nitive meaning has been attached to the term tinuities for federal multicultural policy,11 but most date and “as a federal policy multiculturalism is diffi cult to expli- the beginning to the early 1970s.12 Following the Royal cate since its substance remains obscure and the program Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, appointed 2 content of multiculturalism is periodically modifi ed.” in 1963, the federal government “proclaimed a policy of While many analysts have taken positions either supporting multiculturalism within a bilingual framework.”13 On 3 or attacking multicultural policy, there are few empirical October 8, 1971, Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau 4 studies of multicultural policy and its eff ects. In addition, announced that federal government policy would offi cially 5 there has been little in the way of empirical investigation be directed toward “preserving human rights, developing into the ways Canadians perceive the policy and how the Canadian identity, strengthening citizenship participa- accounts of newcomers are implicated in the construction tion, reinforcing Canadian unity and encouraging cultural of multiculturalism as a feature of the Canadian ethno- diversifi cation within a bilingual framework.”14 In 1977, cultural landscape. Drawing upon Ng’s conceptualization legal safeguards against discrimination based on race, eth- of Canadian multiculturalism as an “ideological frame,” it nic origin, or religion were made law as part of the Canadian becomes clear that implementation of the policy is a rela- Human Rights Act. When the Canadian Constitution tional process that is “produced and constructed through was patriated in 1982 the Charter of Rights and Freedoms 6 human activities.” Consequently, the starting point for this enshrined guarantees of equality and multiculturalism in analysis is approaching Canadian multiculturalism as a sections 15 and 27. And perhaps most signifi cantly, on July text which is constituent of social relations within the wider 21, 1988, Bill C-93, an Act for the preservation and enhance- Canadian society: “In taking up a text as a constituent of a ment of multiculturalism in Canada, or the Canadian social relation, we are constrained not only to understand Multiculturalism Act (CMA) became law. it as a moment in a sequence, but also to recognize that the Responsibility for administering the policy was interpretive practices which activate it are embedded in a initially vested in the Multiculturalism Directorate of 7 relational process.” In this article we explore how multicul- the Department of the Secretary of State and, aft er 1993, turalism and its associated policies and legislation are under- in the Department of Canadian Heritage.15 Following a stood and enacted in the lived experience of newcomers to 1996 review16 Canadian Heritage established a renewed Canada. Data for this exploration come from interviews multiculturalism program with “social justice, identity

37 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

and civic participation” as goals.17 Since 2008, multicul- interaction.”31 Th is is social status not in terms of prestige turalism policy and programs have been located in the or an index of socio-economic status, but in the Weberian Department of Citizenship and Immigration.18 Among the sense of social honour and status group.32 Th is form of current emphases are inclusive citizenship, “reaching out to status aff ects how members of a society interact (or how Canadians and newcomers and … developing lasting rela- some are not permitted to interact) with each other and the tionships with ethnic and religious communities in Canada,” extent to which all members are considered full participants identity, integration, equality, acceptance, and harmony.19 in social relationships. Multicultural policy in Canada has had both vocifer- Initially, Fraser’s social justice framework33 identifi ed ous defenders and critics. Ministerial statements defending two distinct social spheres that have associated with them and promoting the federal policy and program20 have been diff erent sources of injustice and diff erent solutions to eco- accompanied by reports and polls that generally show pub- nomic and cultural injustice.34 Her original model presents lic support.21 Academic analysis has provided historical, two overlapping but analytically distinct sources of inequal- sociological, and theoretical support for multiculturalism.22 ity (maldistribution / misrecognition) with two solutions At the same time, opposition to and questioning of multi- (redistribution / recognition). Later, Fraser35 would intro- culturalism has come from some academics,23 writers and duce a third dimension focusing on the issue of political media analysts,24 and non-governmental organizations and representation within the context of global neo-liberalism. political parties and groups.25 Changes in federal program Here her concern is with the ways in which the political structures and a shift in emphasis have been seen by some framing of social justice includes and excludes parties. In to weaken the federal commitment to multiculturalism.26 view of Fraser’s later work, redistribution, recognition, and Despite this, multicultural policy continues to attempt representation are understood as conjoined in struggles to deal programmatically with cultural diff erence in an for social justice. Th e present analysis is grounded in the accepting manner, within the context of unequal relation- redistribution / recognition debate that is central to Fraser’s ships among individuals and groups. Th e policy is a means earlier work. of countering homogenizing cultural tendencies in contem- Fraser argues that social injustice can be a result of mal- porary societies such as Canada.27 As such, multicultural- distribution in the material sphere of society or misrecogni- ism is not an ethereal or merely platitudinous concept, but tion in the cultural and symbolic sphere. Maldistribution in dealing with disparate and unequal power relationships, of resources is associated with exploitation, economic the policy has direct consequence for how both Canadians marginalization, and deprivation while misrecognition is and newcomers live and realize social aspirations. As an associated with cultural domination, nonrecognition, and ideological process that is contested and subject to ongoing disrespect.36 However, Fraser argues that redistribution of negotiation, multiple viewpoints on multicultural policy are economic resources will not necessarily solve problems of inevitable. Ng employs textual analysis to demonstrate that misrecognition; the latter are in the cultural or symbolic Canadian multiculturalism “is through and through an sphere and “the remedy for cultural injustice … is some artifact produced by the administrative processes of a lib- sort of cultural or symbolic change.”37 As such, Fraser sets eral democratic state in a particular historical conjuncture misrecognition in the sphere of culture and the symbolic, to re-conceptualize and reorganize changing social, polit- emerging as a result of status subordination. ical, and economic realities.”28 As such, multicultural poli- Fraser elaborates that each specifi c social inequality, such cies are inextricably bound up with issues of social justice. as discriminatory or inequitable treatment of immigrant groups, has elements of both maldistribution and misrecog- Multiculturalism and Social Justice nition. Because of the close connection between maldistri- Th e theoretical framework informing this analysis is pro- bution and misrecognition, social justice can be achieved vided by critical theorist Nancy Fraser’s analysis of recogni- only by tackling and eliminating the causes of both injus- tion within a social justice framework, examining sources tices. As such, she considers the material and symbolic of injustice in culturally diverse societies.29 In Fraser’s spheres to be two distinct, but interlocking, dimensions of framework, “social identities are discursively constructed social life. Achieving social justice involves both redistribu- in historically specifi c social contexts.”30 As such, multi- tion of resources in the material sphere and achieving a form cultural policy can be understood as constitutive of status of recognition that allows all members of society to have the orders such as “refugee.” In Fraser’s words, “status repre- status of full partners in social interaction.38 Following on sents an order of intersubjective subordination derived the redistribution / recognition model, Fraser’s criterion for from institutionalized patterns of cultural value that con- achieving social justice is “parity of participation” or “par- stitute some members of society as less than full partners in ticipatory parity.”39

38 A “Great” Large Family

Fraser develops parity of participation as a standard for that “justice requires social arrangements that permit all inclusion, in that a socially just society will eliminate bar- (adult) members to interact with one another as peers.”46 riers that prevent participation of all in social institutions. Fraser does not consider multiculturalism to be suffi cient Th is means the elimination of socially constructed barriers to achieve participatory parity or transformation in the cul- in both the material and symbolic spheres so that all can tural and symbolic spheres. Rather, she argues that main- participate as peers in social relationships and social insti- stream multiculturalism requires ongoing reallocations tutions; in the economic and cultural spheres, respectively. of respect to existing identities. Th is parallels a reformist By applying this norm, there is a possibility for some form approach in the economic sphere, where continual redistri- of equality of opportunity and for all members of a soci- bution of material resources may be necessary to counter ety to have “the status of full partners in interaction.”40 As new forms of inequality. Some aspects of multiculturalism such, parity of participation rests on two conditions: Th e can be considered to be primarily affi rmative and other objective condition, that of greater equality of distribution aspects transformative, with the latter having the possi- of resources, is necessary “to ensure participants’ independ- bility of deconstructing diff erences, creating new social ence and ‘voice’” and provide “the means and opportunities relationships and institutions, and leading to greater par- to interact with others as peers.”41 Th e intersubjective con- ticipatory parity. Fraser argues that mainstream multicul- dition means eliminating misrecognition and “requires that turalism is primarily concerned with surface reallocations institutionalized patterns of cultural value express equal of respect to identities that currently exist, without challen- respect for all participants and ensure equal opportunity ging or changing these identities. For Fraser, political and for achieving social esteem.”42 Fraser argues that there are social solutions to injustice must move beyond affi rming two distinct processes, which she terms “affi rmation” and or recognizing diff erence and involve transforming society “transformation,” that can help achieve participatory par- by deconstructing the meaning of diff erence and recon- ity, with comprehensive social justice emerging only from structing the social relationships of distribution and rec- the later, transformative processes. However, these pro- ognition. Th e framework developed by Fraser provides a cesses are interlinked, so that achievement of social justice powerful vision of how societies can be transformed in a requires attention to both affi rmation and transformation. way that promotes social justice. Her analyses provide a way One means of reducing cultural or symbolic injustice is of analyzing and conceptualizing how Canadian multicul- accordance of recognition to individuals and groups whose tural policy is constitutive of particular social relations. culture has been devalued, ignored, or considered inferior by those who have been able to exercise subordination over Methodology individuals and groups who practice that culture. Fraser Data and Sampling terms this an affi rmative approach, one of recognizing and Th e data for this article come from interviews with fi fty- respecting the individuals, groups, and cultures that had fi ve newcomers to Canada who participated in the Regina been misrecognized and not respected. A more radical, or Refugee Research Project.47 Most of the newcomers arrived what Fraser terms a transformative, approach is to decon- in Regina as government-sponsored refugees between 1985 struct group identities and diff erences. Th is means changes and 1994. Th ey were welcomed to the city by the Regina that “redress disrespect by transforming the underlying Open Door Society (RODS), a community settlement cultural-valuational structure.”43 agency. To improve sample representativeness, some indi- Deconstruction could transform social relationships and viduals who arrived prior to 1985 also became project par- social institutions, leading to new and restructured identi- ticipants. While the aim was to interview equal numbers of ties and institutions. In her analyses, Fraser points to the males and females, only sixteen of the fi ft y-fi ve participants need for deconstruction of diff erence and reconstruction of were female. the relations of recognition. Since she considers transforma- Table 1 compares the number of sample participants by tive approaches to be necessary in order to achieve social region of origin with the number of government-sponsored justice, she cannot provide a roadmap—the form such a refugees who arrived in Regina between 1985 and 1994. solution takes depends on how members of society trans- While not a random sample, the project participants consti- form social institutions. Fraser does, however, provide a tute a cross-section of adult Regina residents who arrived as guideline for reconstruction when she argues that the norm refugees between 1985 and 1994. Th e sample is reasonably of parity of participation is the standard for overcoming representative of these newcomers from Southeast Asia and misrecognition.44 Subordination “denies some individuals Africa, while it under-represents Europe and West Asia and and groups the possibility of participating on a par with over-represents Central and South America. others in social interaction.”45 As a corrective, she argues

39 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

Table 1. Number and percentage of individuals in documents or policies. Th ree researchers independently sample and in population of arriving Regina govern- read the responses and identifi ed themes newcomers recog- ment-sponsored refugees (1985–1994), nized. Where ratings were inconsistent, we discussed them by region of origin and arrived at a mutually agreed-upon coding.

Region of Number of individuals Per cent of individuals origin of Regina and Immigration individuals Sample Population. Sample Population. Regina has a population of approximately two hundred Southeast Asia 17 572 31 31 thousand people, making it a medium-sized Canadian 50 Central/South 24 360 44 19 city. While Regina receives relatively few of immigrants America to Canada, over the last thirty years there has been a small Europe 43657 20but steady fl ow of immigrants and refugees to Regina, with 51 Africa 62701115immigration to the city tripling in the last fi ve years.

West Asia 42817 15Examining the views and experiences of newcomers to Regina is important for at least three reasons. Total 55 1,848 100 100 First, Regina is a city with a strong European multicul- Source: Regina Open Door Society Inc., Annual Report, 1989– tural heritage. In the early part of the twentieth century 1990 through 1993–1994. Note: Regions of origin are as fol- the population was primarily British in origin, but by the lows. Southeast Asia: Cambodia, Laos, Vietnam; Central/South second half of the century, through migration and immigra- America: Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua; tion to the city, the population became what can be termed Europe: Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, multi-European.52 On the ethnicity question of the 2006 Poland, Romania; Africa: Eritrea, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Somalia, Census of Canada, close to one-half of the population of Sudan, Uganda; West Asia: Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq. the city gave single or multiple European origin responses. And the population of Aboriginal and visible minority ori- Th e Interview gins reached 8.9 and 6.6 per cent, respectively, in 2006. Th is Researchers contacted newcomers and conducted semi- represents a population mix diff ering from that of Canada’s 53 structured interviews with newcomers in English exploring largest metropolises. a wide range of topics such as English language acquisi- Related to this is that in medium-sized cities “the process tion, employment experiences, health and health care, and of immigrant settlement and integration may be decidedly family, friends, and community. During the interview, new- diff erent from and perhaps more successful than that in the 54 comers were provided prompts meant to elicit discussions largest metropolitan areas of Canada.” One diff erence is 55 of their awareness and experiences of Canada’s policy of that Regina has no immigrant or ethnic enclaves although multiculturalism. Th ese interviews contribute to a discus- there are areas of the city that can be considered Aboriginal 56 sion of multiculturalism in two ways. First, by providing neighbourhoods. Newcomers to Canada who reside in newcomers’ views, we address the concern of Bloemraad, Regina cannot settle into a neighbourhood composed of 57 Korteweg, and Yurdakul, who note, “Future research also others of their background. needs to break down the meaning and practice of multicul- A third reason is that immigration to Regina and several turalism in diff erent times and places.”48 Second, by giving other medium-sized cities is growing. From 2000 to 2010, “voice” to participants and listening carefully to their narra- immigration to Toronto, Montreal, or Vancouver declined tive histories, it is possible to learn about the lived experi- from 76 per cent to 63 per cent of all Canadian immigrants ence of the individual and the social context within which while immigration to the largest Prairie cities rose from 8 58 multicultural discourses are given meaning and enacted. per cent to 17 per cent. Immigration to Regina accounts Newcomers’ accounts of multiculturalism were coded for only 1 per cent of Canada’s immigration but the situation according to fi ve themes identifi ed via textual analysis in other Prairie cities may have parallels to that of Regina. within the Canadian Multiculturalism Act (see Table 3). Th e Regina Refugee Research Project did not explore the While other researchers might identify themes diff erently, background of participants in great detail. But all partici- we consider the fi ve themes of diversity, equality, over- pants had been accepted by Canada as refugees, meaning coming barriers, harmony, and resource to summarize the that they had been displaced from their country of origin 59 major statements of the Act. Further, the themes identifi ed and feared persecution if they were to return. Th e two via textual analysis of the Act are similar to those identifi ed regions from which most participants came were Southeast in other discussions of multiculturalism.49 Th e themes refer Asia, as part of the aft ermath of the war in Vietnam, and El 60 only to statements in the Act, and not other government Salvador, as a result of the civil war.

40 A “Great” Large Family

Findings with less than two classes were aware of the policy. While Awareness of Multiculturalism there appeared to be no relationship between awareness Approximately one-half (twenty-fi ve of forty-nine) of the of multiculturalism and the number of Canadian friends, newcomers who responded to the prompt regarding multi- those newcomers who reported having friends from an cultural policy were either unaware of the policy (fi ft een) Aboriginal background were more likely to be aware of or demonstrated little awareness (ten). Of the latter, while multiculturalism. Eleven of the sixteen newcomers who some may have had a fuller understanding than evidenced reported having an Aboriginal friend said they were aware in their responses, they said little more than that the policy of multicultural policy (69 per cent), as opposed to aware- means “a lot,” is “essential,” or “freedom.” In contrast, many ness by only eight of nineteen newcomers who reported no of the twenty-four newcomers who demonstrated an aware- Aboriginal friend (42 per cent). Th is fi nding is interesting ness of multiculturalism provided detailed accounts con- given that no relation was found between awareness and cerning its meaning. A few examples are the recognition of having friends in other ethnic groups. diversity and harmony (“lots of cultures living together in Year of arrival in Regina appears strongly related to harmony”), learning from each other (“learning about other awareness of multiculturalism. Over 60 per cent of the countries [and] their cultures”), and government policy thirty newcomers who arrived between 1988 and 1993 indi- (“government receives diff erent people, diff erent cultures cated awareness of multicultural policy; only one-quarter and they promote it”). Some accounts indicate ambivalence, of the nineteen arriving earlier reported awareness. Th is outright opposition, or a misunderstanding of the policy: “A diff erence may be related to the improved and more sys- smoke screen for Canadians [which does] nothing for me.” tematic settlement services that became available in the In terms of awareness of multiculturalism, Table 2 shows city. Several of those who arrived in the 1970s received little that responses of Regina newcomers are almost identical to initial assistance. In contrast, newcomers arriving as gov- those reported for all Canadian adults and for respondents ernment-sponsored refugees aft er the mid-1980s obtained born outside Canada in Multiculturalism and Canadians: basic settlement services from RODS, including classes in Attitude Study 1991.61 the English language and an introduction to Canadian soci- Table 2. Level of awareness of multiculturalism, ety. Newcomers initially assisted by RODS reported greater Regina participants and Multiculturalism awareness of multicultural policy than those not met or and Canadians 1991 Survey. assisted by RODS. Newcomers appear to perceive RODS Percentage with each response settlement services as indicative of state-sponsored support of multiculturalism. In addition, in the programmatic Regina 1991 Survey (n=3,325) delivery of settlement services, RODS operates within an Refugee Level of Project Born ethos of multiculturalism that can be seen as promoting the awareness of participants All outside goals of the policy. Newcomers from Central America and multiculturalism (n=55) respondents Canada Eastern Europe were most likely to report an awareness of Unaware 27% 25% 28% Canada’s policy of multiculturalism, and it was these who Little awareness 18% 63% 62% arrived more recently, were more likely to have been met by RODS, and had higher education levels—the latter being Aware 44% factors generally associated with greater awareness. No response 11% 12% 10% An indication that the policy of multiculturalism has met Total 100% 100% 100% with some affi rmative success in promoting recognition of the cultural and ethnic diversity of Canada and the equal- Note: Th e question asked in the Multiculturalism and Canadians ity of Canadians of all origins comes from the fi nding that Survey was, “To the best of your knowledge, does the federal gov- newcomers identifying with both Canada and their coun- ernment have a policy of multiculturalism?” with the response try of origin reported a high level of awareness (fourteen of being a “yes” or “no.” twenty-three or 61 per cent). In contrast, those identifying Several factors appear to be implicated in awareness of primarily with either Canada or their home country were multicultural policy. Newcomers who indicated aware- less likely to report awareness (eight of twenty-two or 36 per ness reported their mean years of schooling was 15.0 years cent). Yet, those who are aware of the policy were least likely as compared with a mean of 11.0 years for the less aware to identify themselves as primarily Canadian. Only three and unaware group.62 Sixteen of the twenty-eight (57 per of twenty-three newcomers who were aware of the policy cent) who attended at least two English language classes identifi ed themselves primarily as Canadian, compared to reported awareness, while only fi ve of sixteen (31 per cent) four of fourteen who were unaware of the policy. Awareness

41 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

of the policy then, seems to encourage dual identifi cation of respect that emerge from such initiatives do not decon- as “Canadian-plus,” in which newcomers view themselves struct the manner in which the identities are formed and both as Canadian and as members of their country of ori- maintained, leaving “intact both the contents of those iden- gin. When asked “Would you encourage friends from your tities and the group diff erentiations that underlie them.”66 native land to come to Canada?” just under 60 per cent of In Fraser’s view, such an approach oft en emerges from newcomers who responded “yes” were aware of multicul- struggles for recognition and group identity. turalism (twenty-two of thirty-nine). In contrast, the seven Th ematically, the CMA contains little reference to decon- newcomers who said that they would not encourage friends structive aspects associated with diff erence and categor- to come to Canada were less aware. If encouraging newcom- ization into ethnicity, culture, and race. In fact, concepts ers to feel more Canadian by affi rming recognition of their such as “preserve” and “enhance” of the CMA may lead background is an objective of multicultural policy, then the to emphasis on affi rmation of such diff erence. In Fraser’s policy appears to assist in this. Next, we consider the extent approach, more attention would need to be paid to redis- to which the affi rmative and transformative dimensions of tributive issues in the economic and material sphere in Fraser’s analysis of multiculturalism fi nd expression in new- order to achieve this aspect of social justice. Th e statement comer accounts of the policy. that comes closest to matching the concept of participatory parity is from the CMA, section 3(1) (c), where multicultur- Understandings of Multiculturalism—Affi rmative or alism policy is to “promote the full and equitable partici- Transformative? pation of individuals and communities of all origins in the In order to study newcomers’ understandings of multi- continuing evolution and shaping of all aspects of Canadian culturalism, we compared the accounts they off ered to society and assist them in the elimination of any barriers the themes identifi ed via textual analysis of the Canadian to that participation.” However, the CMA does not develop Multiculturalism Act. We considered fi ve themes to be cen- this idea more fully. In light of the framework developed tral in the Act—these are summarized in Table 3, with refer- by Fraser, the CMA represents an ideological frame for ences to the relevant sections of the Act. Most references are affi rmative approaches to multiculturalism and contains to section 3 (1) of the Act, the part that states the meaning of some statements about transformation, but is defi cient in federal multicultural policy. In this section of the paper, we dealing with issues such as overcoming barriers, participa- present a critical textual analysis of the CMA in the light of tion, and dealing with racism and discrimination. the analyses of Fraser, commenting on the degree to which Diversity. Affi rmation of diversity is central to multicul- four central issues emerging from her theoretical frame- tural policy—without the fact of diversity in culture, cul- work—affi rmation; participation; deconstruction; and tural heritage, race, and language in Canadian society, there transform ation—are evidenced in the narratives off ered by would be little need for the Act. Sub-themes are respect for newcomers. diversity (also in the harmony theme), and protection and Much of the discussion of multiculturalism revolves promotion of diversity (also in the resource theme). Most around preservation of cultures and languages, recogniz- newcomers associated multicultural policy with diversity— ing and respecting diff erences among groups, and solid- examples are “a mix of cultures,” “diff erent cultures, diff er- ifying group identities. In such discussions, there may be ent people,” and “diff erent heritage, diff erent culture, diff er- little reference to how cultures continually change, espe- ent language.” cially as people of diff erent cultures interact with each other. Equality. Diversity alone could be associated with Th e CMA contains many examples of this when it refers to inequality, antagonism, or confl ict among individuals and respect or tolerance for cultures other than one’s own, and groups. Regardless of the reality, the Act states that equal- in phrases such as “preserve, enhance and share culture” ity is a policy aim, through “equal treatment and equal pro- and “recognize and enhance development of communities tection,” “equitable participation,” and “equal opportunity.” of common origin.”63 Fraser identifi es such approaches as None of these implies that individuals will be equal in terms “mainstream multiculturalism” with “surface reallocations of income, wealth, or condition, but one goal of the Act is to of respect to existing identities of existing groups” that set out several aspects of equality among individuals and “support group identifi cation.”64 While she does not mini- groups. Seven of the accounts refl ected the goal of equal- mize the importance of these struggles, Fraser argues that ity as embodied in the Act. Newcomers noted, “we are all such approaches can “drastically simplify and reify group equal, all Canadians were immigrants at one time,” “equal- identities.”65 She refers to such approaches as affi rmative, in ity, friendship, and respect between each other,” and “soci- the sense that they aim to correct injustices by providing ety which is just, where equal participation can take place.” affi rmation for devalued group identities. Th e reallocations One newcomer provided a very concrete account of equality

42 A “Great” Large Family

Table 3. Textual analysis: Themes in the Canadian Multiculturalism Act

Theme Afﬁ rmative Transformative Diversity • cultural and racial diversity of Canadian • promote reﬂ ection and evolving expression society 3:1(a) of cultures 3:1(h) • preservation, enhancement and sharing of cultural heritage 3:1(a) • recognize the existence of diverse communities 3:1(d) • respecting and valuing diversity 3:1(e) Equality • equal treatment and protection under law • full and equitable participation of individuals 3:1(e) and communities in the continuing evolution • equal opportunity in federal institutions 3:2(a) and shaping of Canadian society 3:1(c) Harmony • harmony, respect, appreciation, and under- • exchanges and cooperation among the standing 3:1(f) and (j) diverse communities 5:1(c) Overcoming barriers • eliminate barriers to participation 3:1(c) • encourage institutions to be inclusive 3:1(f) Resource • fundamental to Canadian heritage and iden- • creativity 3:1(g) tity 3: 1(b) • invaluable resource in shaping Canada’s • historic contribution to Canadian society future 3:1(b) 3:1(d) • make use of language skill and cultural understanding 3:2(e) • value diversity 3:1(e)

Note: Th e numbers and letters in the box refer to the sections or subsections of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. rights by stating: “Being able to participate in Canadian newcomers appeared to express this theme, their accounts society. For example, having the right to vote.” concerning barriers to jobs and education and “opportun- Harmony. We attached this label to concepts such as ities … to develop or act” do so only implicitly. Given the respect, recognition, appreciation, and understanding. limited and peripheral reference to overcoming barriers While, in practice, relationships among diverse groups and in the Act, it is perhaps not surprising that none of the eff orts to reduce barriers to full and equal participation newcomers’ accounts included explicit recognition of this may not be carried out harmoniously, the Act mandates this theme. In fact, some of those who reacted negatively or with direction. By indicating that Canadians should respect and ambivalence to the policy noted that a missing element of appreciate various diverse cultures and traditions, a certain multiculturalism was its inability to assist in overcoming harmony is implied by the Act. Newcomer accounts that barriers to fuller social participation. drew upon rhetorical framing of Canadian multicultural Resource. Statements in the Act express the idea that policy such as “many people work together looking for bet- multiculturalism and diversity are or can be resources inte- ter life” and “one culture and another come together, bring gral to Canadian heritage and identity and are important cultures together” express this theme most clearly. Many for shaping and building Canada. In this theme, diversity accounts employ similar rhetorical devices and this was the is considered creative, skills are provided, understanding second most widely expressed theme by the newcomers. is increased, and Canadian society is transformed. Th is Overcoming Barriers. Given the many forms of inequal- was the second least expressed theme in the newcomers’ ity in Canadian society, it is interesting that the framers accounts and again, most statements were no more than of the Act noted a need to eliminate barriers. Th e specifi c implicit. Perhaps the clearest narratives were those of the types of barriers and how these might be overcome are not newcomers who noted that “cultures contribute to [the] cul- discussed in the Act, but there is some recognition of mal- ture of Canada” and “means we are people from diff erent distribution. Section 3:1 (f) refers to assisting a variety of countries, but have the same responsibilities for our society.” institutions to be inclusive, the implication being that some Most newcomers identifi ed the diversity theme, with just institutions are not inclusive in their practices. While three over 40 per cent also making some reference to harmonious

43 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

relationships. Approximately one-quarter of the aware society,” “where equal participation can take place,” and newcomers expressed some notion of multiculturalism “opportunities for all groups, cultures, or persons to develop as equality or resource. Th e bulk of statements about the or act within their community.” Others noted that it is pos- meaning of multiculturalism made reference to what Fraser sible to “sample of [the] best elements in every culture” or terms the affi rmative aspects of multiculturalism. Words expressed the idea of peaceful coexistence: “lots of cultures used in connection with diversity that the researchers con- living together in harmony.” One newcomer said multicul- sidered to express this approach include “equality,” “respect,” turalism “means we are people from diff erent countries, but “friendship,” “family,” “harmony” “share,” “preserve,” and have the same responsibilities for our society.” What is inter- “appreciate.” We also considered responses such as “diff er- esting about the latter account is that it extends individual or ent heritage, diff erent culture, and diff erent language are group action beyond participation, to responsibility. As the considered a good thing” and “government receives diff er- next section will discuss, this is reminiscent of some contem- ent people, diff erent cultures and they promote it. Th ere is porary discussions on citizenship,67 but appears to be beyond not laws against it like in some countries. Th ere is freedom multicultural policy, at least as expressed in the Act. of religion and culture” as expressing affi rmation. For the Rights and Privileges. Six newcomer accounts identifi ed most part, the latter accounts are associated with a vision rights or privileges they felt were guaranteed by the policy. of multiculturalism as one of diff erent cultures and peoples One explained, “Th ere is freedom of religion and culture” who coexist or get along with each other. But these phrases and another indicated the right to “exercise language and do not present a view of cultures as changing or society as customs so long as it doesn’t aff ect someone else.” Th e lat- being transformed. Each of the above accounts represents ter is an example of a commonly expressed theme—affi rma- a view of multiculturalism that is consistent with much tive aspects of multicultural policy are moderated to allow of the offi cial discourse of Canadian multiculturalism. development of a greater sense of Canadian cultural unity. Such statements are examples of an affi rmative view that Critical View. While most newcomers who provided accords respect to cultures other than one’s own, with- accounts of multicultural policy evaluated it positively, out envisioning possibilities for multiculturalism as being three newcomers expressed serious reservations toward transformative. In addition, newcomers identifi ed other the policy, providing their own variant of Fraser’s criti- factors they felt were associated with multiculturalism—we cism that multiculturalism is merely affi rmative. One new- now turn to these. comer, apparently frustrated by the policy, referred to it Freedom. Four newcomers mentioned freedom with the as “A smoke screen for Canadians which does nothing for clearest expressions being “Th ere is freedom of religion and me.” Two accounts provide illustrations of the failure of culture,” “free for everyone,” and “freedom.” While section multicultural policy to fulfi ll transformative purposes as 3:1 (a) states “freedom of all members of Canadian society to articulated by newcomers: “Activities may help but doesn’t preserve, enhance and share their cultural heritage,” the Act help integration, but can help preserve culture” and “[I] like emphasizes affi rmative approaches to cultural diversity and it and hate it at the same time. We can live in our culture maintenance of culture, rather than promoting the trans- but we are called minority groups. Appears on job applica- formative potential of freedom. In this respect, the account tions. You are diff erent. Never part of the total.” As used by “Th at people have freedom to speech, religion, culture, jobs, Fraser, “deconstruction” involves eliminating such socially and education” is interesting. While the fi rst three men- constructed diff erences that impede parity of participation. tioned freedoms clearly fi t into the policy, the latter two In connection with multiculturalism, this involves decon- do not appear in the Act. Newcomers’ accounts articulated structing race, ethnicity, national origin, and religion in a serious concerns about maldistribution of employment and way such that diff erences associated with these categories educational opportunities that were not addressed by multi- no longer impede the ability of anyone to participate as a cultural policy. When asked what aspects of their new lives peer in social institutions and relationships. Th ere were few present the greatest problem and what changes would make accounts that mentioned culture and social life in a way that life a lot better, fourteen newcomers specifi cally directed implies change that could produce a new culture and way of their narratives to employment diffi culties. life. As compared with Canadian multicultural policy, a few Participation. Following Fraser’s criticisms of multicul- of the accounts appear to place an even greater emphasis turalism, we did not identify participation as a major theme on the transformative potential of promoting Canadian cul- in the Act although section 3:1 (c) states that the policy is to tural unity through mutual respect for diversity. Consider “promote the full and equal participation of individuals and the following account: “Putting together people from dif- communities of all origin …” Several newcomers identifi ed ferent cultures to be unifi ed in one idea and to learn each participation as key, for example, “participate in Canadian from the other and to live together.” Th is account pulls

44 A “Great” Large Family

together themes of diversity, harmony, and resource. Th e not addressed and economic and social inequalities among view expressed is one of creating a new culture. Th is implies ethnic groups persist, multicultural policy can be viewed as some deconstruction of diff erences created by earlier cul- having failed to achieve its transformative potential. Th is tures, so that new social relationships and culture emerge. failure has direct and concrete eff ects on the lives and social Th e above statements certainly contrast with affi rmative realities of newcomers. One concrete manifestation of this accounts such as “practice your own culture,” where no is the inability of some members of such groups to gain edu- change in culture is suggested. cational and employment opportunities equal to those of other Canadians or exercise rights that other groups take Discussion for granted. Multicultural Relations of Ruling Related to this is multiculturalism as a resource for Analysis of newcomers’ accounts in this article this has been developing and shaping Canada’s future. Only one-quarter an exercise in research concerning understandings of the of aware newcomers identifi ed this theme, yet unique cul- public policy of multiculturalism. Issues of social justice tural characteristics can provide valuable resources, rel- are central to a critical understanding of multiculturalism evant for the life chances of all Canadians. From a social and several interrelated conclusions emerge from this study, policy standpoint, Canadians could be encouraged to view which demonstrates how Canadian multicultural policy the wide variety of cultural attributes and skills of newcom- is constituent of ruling relations. Newcomer accounts do ers as a valuable resource to transform Canadian society, not always match the concepts and approaches of Fraser, where the potential benefi ts of the attributes and skills of although some participants made statements that point both newcomers and all Canadians are realized. toward multiculturalism as a transformative social process An understanding of multiculturalism that is limited to that can lead to social change. While many of the accounts affi rming diversity is limited. Th e theme of affi rming divers- presented no more than an affi rmative approach to multi- ity found expression in nearly three-quarters of the accounts culturalism, few stated that multiculturalism was a way of off ered by newcomers, yet only about one-half of these transforming social relationships. Many of the statements accompanied this with an understanding equality and har- implied little more than an affi rmative form of relation- mony as part of multiculturalism. History provides many ship—that of respect, harmony, and understanding—and examples of the danger associated with a narrow conception few had more dynamic implications. Th e latter tended to of diversity, one that is not tempered with mutual under- consider individuals and groups of diff erent cultural back- standing, respect, tolerance, equality, and harmony. grounds to be actively involved in interaction, sharing, Each of the fi ve major themes from the Canadian working together, and creating a new or diff erent culture Multiculturalism Act found at least some level of expression and set of social relationships. in newcomer accounts. Th e public framing of Canadian Of the fi ve themes embedded in the Canadian multicultural policy appears to act as an interpretive Multiculturalism Act, overcoming barriers was the theme resource upon which newcomers draw in their own account- newcomers’ accounts were least likely to employ as inter- ing of their experiences of multiculturalism. At the same pretive resources. “Overcoming barriers” refers to ways time, in no case did any single newcomer identify all fi ve of creating equal participation and life chances for all themes, and most identifi ed only one or two themes. Most Canadians, regardless of their cultural heritage. Given that accounts articulated the affi rmative emphasis of the policy employment and educational opportunities are central rather than more transformative aspects. Since multicul- issues for newcomers, multicultural policy could have great tural policy is so potentially relevant to the lives of newcom- relevance by promoting these. If newcomers to Canada ers, policy makers could undertake greater eff orts to develop are unaware of guarantees to full and equal participation, clearer understandings of multicultural policy. For example, they are unlikely to seek redress when they encounter such language programs and settlement agencies both help pro- barriers. Newcomers may suff er in silence, unaware of the mote Canada’s multicultural policy and assist newcomers in legislative commitment to removing such barriers. Th is is a participating in Canadian society and improving their life key area, one that educational programs could benefi cially chances. Such programs and agencies could be strengthened address. as resources to help achieve these dual goals. Many critics have considered the promise entailed in For Fraser, the criterion for a socially just transformation multicultural policy and the Act as unfulfi lled. A key ele- is parity of participation. Such participatory parity must be ment of a sociological understanding of multiculturalism rooted in social institutions and not merely in interpersonal relates to the power relationships between cultural minor- psychology68 meaning “participatory parity as a norma- ities and the majority. To the extent that maldistribution is tive standard.”69 One example of reconstruction that Fraser

45 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

provides is that of practices that marginalize or exclude eth- groups of immigrants and Canadian-born. Surveys related nic and religious minorities in France. Fraser argues that to multiculturalism oft en ask people to evaluate the policy affi rmative steps to include minorities could have trans- and concept, but there appears to be less investigation of the formative consequences such as “reconstructing French diff erent perceptions of and experiences with multicultural- national identity to suit a multicultural society” and “refash- ism. Further research is needed to investigate the relational ioning Islam for a liberal-pluralist and gender-egalitarian processes in which diff ering perceptions of and experiences regime.”70 Th is example illustrates a transformative solu- with multiculturalism are embedded and to compare the tion that focuses primarily on eliminating institutionalized present accounts with those of other groups of immigrants disparities in participation. In other cases, transformation and Canadian-born. may require more attention to deconstructing diff erences In the future, Canadians will continue to welcome indi- that impair such participation. viduals and groups from diff erent geographic regions with Fraser considers deconstruction of socially constructed a variety of cultural histories and experiences. Will the identities and diff erences to be central to achieving a trans- social intolerance and injustice that oft en characterized the formation in a socially just direction. For her, this involves past be repeated, or will Canadian society fi nd new ways of deconstructing identities associated with race, ethnicity, recognizing a “great” large family? One way that societies sexuality, and gender. By changing the structure and oper- can transform themselves is by learning from other soci- ation of its institutions and social relationships, the prac- eties, cultures, and peoples and by incorporating this learn- tice of multiculturalism can be a way for a diverse society to ing into societal practices. Integration can be considered transform itself. A society where principles of multicultur- a two-directional process. One part of the process is that alism—equality, respect, harmony, recognition, participa- newcomers to a society change their practices and views as tion—are practiced will attempt to fi nd ways of integrating they incorporate themselves in the society. At the same time, members from all backgrounds and cultures, allowing all to a truly transformative process will change the society into participate in social life. While it is diffi cult to predict the which newcomers enter, and the social relations and institu- direction this may lead, it is unlikely to leave social relation- tions will change in the society. ships and social institutions unchanged. Social interaction Following Fraser, socially just multicultural policies on the basis of the principles and practices of multicultur- require those who were members of the society prior to alism can help produce a more socially just outcome, with newcomers arriving to also change their social practices so improved opportunities for all to participate in the life of that all members of the society can participate in social life society. Th e majority of newcomers expressed a desire that as peers. Th e accounts studied here demonstrate an appre- both they and their family maintain aspects of their cultural ciation of diversity and a view that diversity provides a way heritage, and it is this affi rmation that multicultural policies of learning and tackling problems. New cultural traditions have been most successful at supporting. In addition, new- and experiences will be created within Canada, leading to comers’ accounts articulated a desire to establish the types new groups and identities. Based on the accounts articu- of services for their ethnic communities that multicultural lated by the newcomers studied here, the authors agree policies can in some cases help facilitate greater participa- that newcomers “typically wish to integrate into the larger tion—services such as meeting places, place of worship, and society, and to be accepted as full members of it”71 and that language schools. many of the rights such newcomers expect “promote integration into the larger society.”72 Th e newcomers in this Conclusion project appear to have generally accepted and adopted this Recognition of a “Great” Large Family affi rmative approach—and as they were refugees originally, In terms of future research, we encourage other research- Canada may not have been their fi rst choice of new home. ers to further investigate what Canadians understand by Given this evidence, we are optimistic about the future. multiculturalism. Th is project has found that several factors Multicultural principles have already become part of the associated with the social lives and life chances of newcom- Canadian identity and may assist in the future transforma- ers are positively related to the potentialities of multicul- tion of Canadian culture and identity. tural policy for the affi rmation of cultural diff erence. While some of these fi ndings should encourage multicultural policy makers, these results must be regarded as tentative Notes because of the small sample size and the exploratory nature 1. Department of the Secretary of State of Canada, Multicul- of this analysis. For example, it would be useful to compare turalism … Being Canadian, (Ottawa: Ministry of Supply the accounts given by this study’s newcomers with other and Services, 1987), 9.

46 A “Great” Large Family

2. Peter S. Li, “Th e Multiculturalism Debate,” in Race and Eth- Programs: Final Report, study conducted by Brighton nic Relations in Canada, 2nd ed. (Don Mills: Oxford Uni- Research (Ottawa: Corporate Review Branch, 1996), 12; versity Press, 1999). Richard J. F. Day, Multiculturalism and the History of 3. For a recent review of these debates, see Keith Banting and Canadian Diversity (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Will Kymlicka, “Canadian Multiculturalism: Global Anx- 2000). ieties and Local Debates,” British Journal of Canadian Stud- 12. Garth Stevenson reviews the history of multiculturalism ies 23, no. 1 (2010): 43–72. in Canada in “Contrasting Images: ‘Multiculturalism’ as 4. Several writers have urged researchers to develop and ana- conceptualized in Canada and the United States,” paper lyze empirical evidence as a means of contributing to the prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the debates. Joseph Garcea, “Postulations on the Fragmentary Canadian Political Science Association, Montreal, June 3, Eff ects of Multiculturalism in Canada,” Canadian Ethnic 2010, accessed April 4, 2011, http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/ Studies, 40, no. 1(2008): 141–60, argues for investigating papers-2010/Stevenson.pdf. “real and perceived problems at the substantive and sym- 13. Jean R. Burnet and Howard Palmer, Coming Canadians: bolic levels,” 156. Irene Bloemraad, Anna Korteweg, and An Introduction to a History of Canada’s Peoples (Toronto: Gökçe Yurdakul note, “Th e explosion of scholarly inter- McClelland and Stewart, 1988), 224; Charles S. Ungerleider, est in multiculturalism during the 1990s largely revolved “Immigration, Multiculturalism, and Citizenship: Th e around normative theory, with few empirical studies ana- Development of the Canadian Social Justice Infrastructure,” lyzing specifi c policies and their consequences,” page 160 in Canadian Ethnic Studies 24, no. 3 (1992): 14. “Citizenship and Immigration: Multiculturalism, Assimila- 14. Accessed April 6, 2011, http://canadachannel.ca/HCO/ tion, and Challenges to the Nation-State,” Annual Review index.php/Pierre_Trudeau,_on_Multiculturalism. of Sociology 34, (2008): 153–79. Kymlicka argues that 15. Yasmeen Abu-Laban and Tim Nieguth, “Reconsidering research fi ndings have been ignored in public commen- the Constitution, Minorities, and Politics in Canada,” Can- tary on multiculturalism. See Will Kymlicka, Th e Current adian Journal of Political Science 33, no. 3 (2000): 491. State of Multiculturalism in Canada and Research Th emes 16. Canada, Department of Canadian Heritage, Strategic on Canadian Multiculturalism 2008–2010, Citizenship and Evaluation of Multiculturalism Programs. Immigration Canada, Catalogue No. Ci96-112/2010E-PDF, 17. Canada, Department of Canadian Heritage, 10th Annual Ottawa, 2010, 11. Report on the Operation of the Canadian Multiculturalism 5. A notable exception is Labelle and Salee’s study of the per- Act, p. v (Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Govern- ceptions of immigrants to Quebec; see Micheline Labelle ment Services, 1999), accessed April 6, 2011, http://dsp-psd and Daniel Salée, “Immigrant and Minority Representa- .pwgsc.gc.ca/Collection/Ci95-1-1998E.pdf. tions of Citizenship in Quebec,” in Citizens Today: Global 18. Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Annual Report on Perspectives and Practices, ed. T. Alexander Aleinikoff and the Operation of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 2007– Douglas Klusmeyer (Washington: Carnegie Endowment 2008, Catalogue Number CH31-1é2008, Ottawa, 2009. for International Peace, 2001). 19. Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Multiculturalism 6. Roxana Ng, “Multiculturalism as Ideology: A Textual and Canadian Multiculturalism: An Inclusive Citizenship, Analysis,” in Knowledge, Experience, and Ruling Relations, accessed April 5, 2011, http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/multi- ed. Marie Campbell and Ann Manicom (Toronto: Univer- culturalism/index.asp. sity of Toronto Press, 1995), 36. 20. See the annual reports from Canadian Heritage and Cit- 7. Dorothy Smith, Texts, Facts, and Femininity: Exploring izenship and Immigration Canada, Annual Report on the Relations of Ruling (New York: Routledge, 1990), 125. Operation of the Canadian Multiculturalism Act. 8. While multiculturalism addresses social relationships 21. Angus Reid Group, Inc., “Multiculturalism and Canadians: among all individuals and groups, the focus for this article Attitude Study 1991,” National Survey Report (1991); Reg- is on immigration and multiculturalism. inald W. Bibby, Th e Bibby Report: Social Trends Canadian 9. Banting and Kymlicka, “Canadian Multiculturalism,” Style (Toronto: Stoddart, 1995), 38–39; Canada, Depart- 57–62, review Canadian responses to immigration and ment of Canadian Heritage, Strategic Evaluation of Multi- multiculturalism. culturalism Programs, 38–42. 10. Recent and earlier estimates of inequalities for minorities 22. Charles Taylor, “Th e Politics of Recognition,” in Multicul- are examined and reviewed in Krishna Pendakur and Ravi turalism and the “Politics of Recognition,” ed. Amy Gutman Pendakur, “Colour by Numbers: Minority Earnings in (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992); Will Kym- Canada 1996–2006,” accessed April 5, 2011, http://www licka, Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Th eory of Minor- .sfu.ca/~pendakur/Colour%20By%20Numbers.pdf. ity Rights (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995); Will Kymlicka, 11. John W. Berry, Rudolf Kain, and Donald M. Taylor, Multi- Finding Our Way: Rethinking Ethnocultural Relations in culturalism and Ethnic Attitudes in Canada (Ottawa: Min- Canada (Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1998). istry of Supply, 1977), 11; Canada, Department of Can- 23. Karl Peter, “Th e Myth of Multiculturalism and Other Pol- adian Heritage, Strategic Evaluation of Multiculturalism itical Fables,” in Ethnicity, Power and Politics in Canada,

47 Volume 27 Refuge Number 1

ed. Jorgen Dablie and Tissa Fernando (Toronto: Methuen, 44. Fraser and Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition?, 31. 1981); Reginald W. Bibby, Mosaic Madness: Pluralism with- 45. Ibid. out a Cause (Toronto: Stoddart, 1990). 46. Ibid., 36. 24. Neil Bissoondath, Selling Illusions: Th e Cult of Multicultur- 47. Th e project was conducted between 1993 and 1995. Th e alism in Canada (Toronto: Penguin Books, 1994). goal of the project was to examine settlement programs 25. See discussion in: Yasmeen Abu-Laban and Daiva Sta- and immigrant integration in Regina and investigate the siulis, “Ethnic Pluralism under Siege: Popular and Partisan meaning of successful settlement. Th e funding for the pro- Opposition to Multiculturalism,” in Canadian Public Policy ject originated from a grant by the Department of the Sec- 18, no. 4 (1992): 365–86; also Augie Fleras and Jean Leon- retary of State of Canada to the Saskatchewan Association ard Elliot, Multiculturalism in Canada: Th e Challenge of of Immigrant Settlement and Integration Agencies. Diversity, 2nd ed. (Scarborough: Nelson Canada, 2002); Li, 48. Bloemraad, Korteweg and Yurdakul, “Citizenship and “Th e Multiculturalism Debate.” Immigration,” 161. 26. Bohdan S. Kordan, “Multiculturalism, Citizenship and the 49. Ng, “Multiculturalism as Ideology,” 38–45; Fleras and Elliot, Canadian Nation: A Critique of the Proposed Redesign Multiculturalism in Canada, 62–65. for Program Renewal,” Canadian Ethnic Studies 29, no. 2 50. Between 1991 and 2006, the population of Regina remained (1997):136–43; Abu-Laban and Nieguth, “Reconsidering around 179,000. Recent expansion has increased the popu- the Constitution.” lation and the population of the Census Metropolitan Area 27. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship; Kymlicka, Finding Our was estimated to be 215,000 people in 2010. See Statistics Way. Canada, 2006 Census of Canada, “Population of Census 28. Ng, “Multiculturalism as Ideology,” 35. Metropolitan Areas,” accessed April 3, 2011, http://www40 29. Nancy Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition? .statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo05a-eng.htm. Dilemmas of Justice in a ‘Post-Socialist’ Age,” New Left 51. Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Fact and Figures Review, 1 / 212, (1995): 68–93; Nancy Fraser, Justice Inter- 2009: Immigrant Overview—Permanent and Temporary ruptus: Critical Refl ections on the “Postsocialist” Condition Residents (Ottawa: Citizenship and Immigration Canada, (New York: Routledge, 1997); Nancy Fraser, “Rethinking 2010). Th ere were 2,058 permanent resident immigrants Recognition,” New Left Review 3 (2000): 107–20; Nancy who gave Regina as their destination in 2010. Fraser and Axel Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition? A 52. In the 1931 Census of Canada, 69 per cent of the popula- Political-Philosophical Exchange (New York: Verso, 2003). tion gave British origins and 30 per cent gave other Euro- 30. Fraser, Justice Interruptus, 152. pean origins. Given the mixed origins that have become 31. Fraser and Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition?, 49. common in more recent years, with single, multiple, Can- 32. Ibid., 17. adian, and North American origins that respondents pro- 33. Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition?”; Fraser, Jus- vide in recent censuses, it is not possible to obtain precise tice Interruptus; Fraser, “Rethinking Recognition”; Fraser summary estimates of the ethnic origin of the current and Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition?. population. From data in the 2006 Census of Canada we 34. In their co-authored book, Fraser debates this point with estimate the current ethnic mix of Regina to be approxi- Axel Honneth, who argues that there is only one dimension mately 33 per cent British, 8 per cent French, and 43 per of social injustice, that of recognition, with maldistribution cent other European, recognizing that these estimates are emerging from misrecognition; see Fraser and Honneth, rough. From the Census, 9 per cent of Regina residents Redistribution or Recognition? were Aboriginal and 7 per cent visible minority origin in 35. Nancy Fraser, “Reframing Justice in a Globalizing World,” 2006. New Left Review, 36 (2005) 69–88; Nancy Fraser, Scales of 53. From the 2006 Census of Canada, the population of Toronto Justice: Reimagining Political Space in a Globalizing World and Vancouver was over 40 per cent visible minority. And, (New York: Columbia University Press, 2009). unlike Montreal, Regina has few residents of French origin. 36. Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition,” 70–71. Statistics Canada, 2006 Census of Population, “Profi le of 37. Ibid., 73. Ethnic Origin and Visible Minorities for Census Metropol- 38. In her recent work, Fraser argues that the concept of cit- itan Areas and Census Agglomerations,” Statistics Canada izenship or member of society is increasingly untenable catalogue no. 94-580-XCB2006004. (see Fraser, “Reframing Justice”; Fraser, Scales of Justice). 54. Baha Abu-Laban, “Application to SSHRC for the Establish- In this paper, we do not address the issues associated with ment of a Centre of Excellence for Research on Immigra- multiple and shift ing citizenship. tion and Immigrant Integration” (Edmonton: University of 39. Fraser and Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition?, 38. Alberta, 1995), 1. 40. Ibid., 36. 55. In the 2006 Census of Canada, no one ethnic group 41. Ibid. accounted for more than 7.6 per cent of any Regina cen- 42. Ibid. sus tract. And in no census tract do the number of immi- 43. Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition,” 83. grants who arrived in the city since 1980 account for 20 per

48 A “Great” Large Family

cent of the population. Qadeer, Agrawal, and Lovell state: 61. Canadian Heritage generously provided the authors with “Anywhere from 10% to 30% of a census tract’s population a copy of the data fi le from the Multiculturalism and Can- being of a specifi c ethnic background has been used as the adians survey conducted by the Angus Reid Group, 1991. criteria for identifying ethnic enclaves”; see Mohammad 62. For the aware group, n=24, the mean years of schooling Qadeer, Sandeep K. Agrawal, and Alexander Lovell, “Evo- was 15.0 with a standard deviation of 4.0, and for the less lution of Ethnic Enclaves in the Toronto Metropolitan Area, aware and unaware group, n=25, the mean was 11.0 with a 2001–2006,” Journal of International Migration and Integra- standard deviation of 4.7. Th is produces a t-value of 3.16. tion 11 (2010): 323–24. If the sample were a random sample, this would produce a 56. Individuals of Aboriginal identity account for more than one-tailed signifi cance of less than 0.002. We report signifi - 30 per cent of the population in three (two of which are cance levels even though the project sample was not ran- adjacent) of Regina’s fi ft y-two census tracts. dom. As a result, reported signifi cance levels may not be 57. See Feng Hou and Garnett Picot, “Visible Minority Neigh- very precise or meaningful, and we leave their interpreta- bourhoods in Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver,” Can- tion to the reader. adian Social Trends (Spring 2004): 8–13. 63. CMA, sections 3:1 (a) and (d), 5:1 (e) and (h). 58. Th ese are the seven largest Prairie cities: Edmonton, Red 64. Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition?”, 87. Deer, Calgary, Lethbridge, Saskatoon, Regina, and Winni- 65. Fraser, “Rethinking Recognition,” 108. peg. Calculated from Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 66. Fraser, “From Redistribution to Recognition?”, 82. Fact and Figures 2009: Immigrant Overview – Permanent 67. Will Kymlicka and Wayne Norman, eds., Citizenship in and Temporary Residents and Preliminary Tables—Perma- Diverse Societies (New York: Oxford University Press, nent and temporary residents, 2010, http://www.cic.gc.ca/ 2000), 5. Also see Kymlicka’s comments on citizenization english/resources/statistics/menu-fact.asp. in Will Kymlicka, “Th e Rise and Fall of Multiculturalism? 59. Many were convention refugees or persons in need of New Debates on Inclusion and Accommodation in Diverse protection. For current defi nitions, see Citizenship and Societies,” International Social Science Journal 199 (2010): Immigration Canada, Refugee claims in Canada – who can 100. apply, accessed April 8, 2011, http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/ 68. Fraser and Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition?, 31. refugees/inside/apply-who.asp. 69. Fraser, “Rethinking Recognition,” 119. 60. Of the 55 participants, 17 were originally from Cambodia, 70. Ibid., 82. Laos, or Vietnam and 21 were from El Salvador. For a dis- 71. Kymlicka, Multicultural Citizenship, 10–11. cussion of the background and experiences with integra- 72. Ibid., 31 tion in Regina of Salvadorans, see Doug Durst and Allison Lange, “Prairie Adjustments and the Social Integration of El Salvador Refugees in Regina, Saskatchewan,” Prairie Christopher J. Fries is a sociologist of health, medicine, and Forum 27, no. 1 (2002): 101–14. While we are unaware the body, in the Department of Sociology, University of of any comparable Regina study of those from South- Manitoba, whose primary research interests are in health life- east Asia, the volumes edited by Dorais, Chan, and Indra styles, critical public health, the social determinants of health, provide extensive analysis of their experiences in other and medical pluralism. He is co-author of Pursuing Health parts of Canada. See Kwok B. Chan and Doreen M. Indra, and Wellness Healthy Societies, Healthy People (Oxford eds., Uprooting, Loss and Adaptation: Th e Resettlement of Indochinese Refugees in Canada (Ottawa: Canadian Pub- University Press, 2011). lic Health Association, 1987); and Louis-Jacques Dorais, Paul Gingrich is professor emeritus of sociology and social Kwok B. Chan, and Doreen M. Indra, eds., Ten Years Later: studies, University of Regina, Saskatchewan. Indochinese Communities in Canada (Montreal: Canadian Asian Studies Association, 1988).