Canada is a paradoxi . On the one hand, it is hailed as a model in managing diversity, as the first and only country that establishes multiculturalism as its official policy. On the other hand, it is criticized for marginalizing racialized minorities off the mainstream. To illustrate this paradox, let’s consider the following.
Since the change of our immigration policy in 1967, thousands of immigrants from non-western European countries have made Canada their home. Our society has become increasingly diverse, consisting of individuals of various racial, cultural and religious backgrounds. An overwhelming majority of Canadians feel that the multicultural nature of their society gives them a competitive advantage in today’s globlized economy. Canada is not only a country in the world, but also a country of the world. Strolling down the streets of large Canadian cities, one can sample cuisine from all parts of the world, ethnic motifs are chic in fashion, and Feng Shui is in vogue in decorating. In a nutshell, diversity and tolerance have been the trademarks of Canada since late 1970s. For this reason, many would liken our society to a plate of stir-fry with rich and varied ingredients infused by a delicious marinate.
From the introduction of Multiculturalism Policy in 1971 to the adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 and the passing of the Employment Equity Act in 1986, the federal government has taken actions to ensure that all Canadians can participate fully in our society and economy. Diversity is recognized and celebrated under a common citizenshipii . The Canadian government is committed to making our society “the most inclusive country in the world, where opportunity is shared among all Canadians.”iii . In describing the Canadian Way in the 21st century, Prime Minister Chretien emphasized that: “Canada has become a post-national, multicultural society. It contains the globe within its borders, and Canadians have learned that their two international languages and their diversity are a comparative advantage and a source of continuing creativity and innovation.”iv
While the stir-fry vision seems appealing, many would contend that what we have is actually a plate of fries, where diversity is mere ketchup and gravies used to liven an otherwise bland plate of potatos. That is because “while Canada embraces globalisation and romanticizes cultural diversity, there are persistent expressions of xenophobia and racial marginalisation that suggest a continuing political and cultural attachment to the concept of a white settler society.”v We like shopping in ethnic grocery stores or dining in ethnic restaurants, but we don’t like ethnic malls or our neighbours who cook ‘smelly’ food or speak with an accent. We welcome immigrants from the Third World as long as they do not threaten our way of life and the character of our society. The backlash on the Arab and Muslim communities in Canada following the September 11 event further shows that we are not above reproof. In fact, it was our neighbour to the South that provided us a lesson of pluralism in the special episode of ‘The West Wing’, Isaac and Ishmael, when the White House staff dealt with issues of racism, tolerance, and hate in the wake of a recent terrorist attack on the United States.
The marginalization of racial minorities has been observed, however, well before the September 11 event. Let us review some evidences of the economic disparity between visible minority and those who are not visible minority found in recent studies. Evidence has shown that visible minorities still have unequal access to the labour market.
Visible minorities are the most educated group in Canada. But the benefit of higher education is often offset by their ‘ethnicity’. When it comes to employment and income, visible minorities in general still pay an ‘ethnic penalty’. Even among those with a post-secondary education, visible minorities have higher unemployment rate than those who are not visible minorityvi . Compared to those who are not visible minority, visible minority university graduates are less likely to hold managerial or professional jobs. For visible minority immigrants, they face the double jeopardy of being both ‘ethnic’ and ‘foreign’.
In spite of the federal government’s efforts to promote inclusion and equality, good jobs still elude visible minorities. In the public service, for example, visible minorities represent 6 percent of the workforce but at the management level, the representation is reduced by half.vii Many visible minority employees observe that the higher the corporate ladder, the lighter the skin tone. As some people say: “I look around and think – there’s no chance of getting ahead. Of all the people in senior positions, no one is from an ethnic (minority) group.”
Even though open discrimination is rendered ‘politically incorrect’, visible minorities and Aboriginal peoples continue to face ‘hidden discrimination’ including being passed over for promotion, assigned unpleasant tasks, being stereotyped, and being excluded from the “inner circle” of the workplaceviii .
It is not surprising that six out of 10 individuals in the MacLean’s year-end poll (2000) believed that we should require all employers over a certain size to promote and hire visible minorities.
Aboriginal people and foreign-born visible minorities are over-represented in the bottom quintile (or bottom 20%) of the income scale. Even when they have a university education, they are still less likely than non-racialized groups to have incomes in the top 20% of the income scale. While the earnings gap between immigrants and non-immigrants could be attributed to immigrants’ lack of familiarity with the local labour market, a recent study shows that, among Canadian-born men aged 25-64, the earnings gap between visible minority and white Canadians has widened from 5 percent in 1971 to 15 percent in 1996.ix
According to the 1996 census, one in three visible minority lived in low-income conditions (i.e., with family income below LICO), compared to one in five among those who are not visible minorityx . Visible minority youth are more likely to live in low-income condition than those who are not visible minority.
Many racial minorities, immigrant or non-immigrant, place their hope on the younger generation. But the labour market outcomes of youth indicate that they may be too optimistic. Immigrant youth in general have higher unemployment rate than non-immigrants. In particular, visible minority youth fare less well in the labour market than others. They are more likely to be unemployed than those who are not visible minority. Among youth aged 15-24 in Ontario, the unemployment rate is 25 percent for visible minority, compared to 18 percent among all others.xi Nationally, Black youth have the highest unemployment rate, followed by Latin Americans, Southeast Asians, and Arab/West Asians.
Even with a university education, the unemployment rate is still higher among racial minorities than among those who are not racial minorities. Further, racial minority university graduates are less likely to obtain professional jobs than non-racial minorities.xii
For visible minority youth, the reason goes beyond familiarity with the host society or education. It has more to do with factors beyond their control, i.e., the colour of their skin or their accent. It is not surprising that three in four youth in Toronto identified racial discrimination as an issue of importance. Among teens, racial discrimination is ranked number three immediately following employment and affordable post-secondary education as things that are important to themxiii .
How have we ended up in this paradoxical situation? One explanation is the distance between the intent of the policies and our interpretation of them. We favour a stir-fry, but we are not willing to give up our fries. Policies and legislation do have the intent of creating an equal yet diverse society. Yet, when translating policies into practices, we are blindsided by our Euro-centric perceptions.
Multiculturalism recognizes that Canada is created by English, French, and Aboriginal peoples and joined by immigrants from all parts of the world. That Canada is a country of the world becomes the strength of our society. We share with each other our cultures and values in order to build a common citizenship. Individuals of all cultural backgrounds should take pride in their culture of origin under a common citizenship. Employment Equity measures are established to level the playing field for women, Aboriginal Peoples, visible minorities, and persons with disabilities who face insurmountable barriers to employment.
However, multiculturalism is often interpreted as promoting non-Anglo culture, ethnic song and dance. Inclusion means ethnic minorities conform to the Euro-centric mainstream culture. Diversity is in essence synonymous to non-white, a threat to the character of our society and value, as well as national security. Employment Equity has been misinterpreted as a quota system, based upon physical characteristics rather than on merits. Even if the government has the intention to increase the representation of visible minorities in its workforce, such initiatives are often met with reservations. In the wake of the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, for example, some have cautioned the federal government to rethink about recruiting visible minorities in general, and promoting them to senior positions in specific. Given that many visible minorities are from Third World countries, as the reasoning goes, these people may have questionable backgrounds that are not easily detected. While it might be noble to build a workforce that reflects the diverse population we serve, according to some, we should not do so at the expenses of our national security.xiv
Social inclusion, in this sense, seems impossible in a diverse society. No matter how ‘westernized’ racial minorities have become, they would always be the ‘outsider’ at the mercy of events beyond their control. How then can we be inclusive and diverse? I believe that we need to address two issues.
First, we must acknowledge that racism still exists in our society. Most people like to talk about diversity but not racism. In fact, few people would utter the ‘r-word’. After all, we are not Americans. We have all the right policy measures and legislation in place and few would dare to be ‘politically incorrect.’ But legislation is useful in reducing the overt forms of racism, it is less effective in addressing covert or ‘hidden’ forms of racism. ‘Hidden’ racism manifests both at individual and systemic levels. Whether open or hidden, racism has the effect of excluding racial minorities from our society.
Second, discriminatory behaviour generally reflects prejudicial attitudes. One can regulate behaviour, but not attitude. Public education should go hand in hand with policies and legislation. It is time to re-think what inclusion really means. Do we mean to include racial/ethnic minorities into the mainstream or do we want to create a new Canadian identity that truly reflects the diverse characteristic of our society? Demographically, the old line between the ethnic and the mainstream is increasingly blurred. In fact, the ethnic has become the mainstream. Racial minorities are not just spice to enliven our palette or brighten our house. They are the key ingredients in building our society.
Inclusion and diversity go hand in hand. Inclusion does not mean that all minority groups conform to the mode of the mainstream. Diversity does not imply that we all remain in our own enclaves. Equality should not be understood as sameness. “Diversity must be administered in a discriminating but not discriminatory manner.”xv .
1The views and opinions expressed here are completely my own, and do not reflect those of the Human Resources Development Canada.
iFleras, A. and Jean Lock Kunz (2001). Media and Minorities: Representing Diversity in a Multicultural Canada. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing , Inc.
iiCanadian Heritage (2001). Annual Report on the Operation of The Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 1999-2000. Catalogue No. Ci95-1/2000.
iiiCanadian Heritage (2001). Annual Report on the Operation of The Canadian Multiculturalism Act, 1999-2000. Catalogue No. Ci95-1/2000.
ivPrime Minister of Canada (2000). ‘The Canadian Way in the 21st Century’. A speech at the meeting on ‘Progressive Governance for the 21st Century’, Berlin, Germany, 2-3 June, 2000.
vGalabuzi, Grace-Edward. (2001). Canada’s Creeping Economic Apartheid: The economic segregation and social marginalisztion of racialised groups. Toronto: The CSJ Foundation. Page 3.
viKunz, Jean L., Sylvain Schetagne, Anne Milan (2001). Unequal Access: A Canadian Profile in Racial Differences in Education, Employment, and Income. Toronto: Canadian Race Relations Foundation.
viiTask Force on the Participation of Visible Minorities in the Federal Public Service, 2000. Embracing Change in the Federal Public Service. Catalogue No. BT22-67/2000.
viiiKunz, Jean L., Sylvain Schetagne, Anne Milan (2001). Unequal Access: A Canadian Profile in Racial Differences in Education, Employment, and Income. Toronto: Canadian Race Relations Foundation.
ixPendakur, Krishna and Ravi Pendakur (2001). Colour My World: Has the minority-majority earnings gap changed over time? Strategic Research and Analysis, Department of Canadian Heritage.
xStatistics Canada (2001). Visible Minorities in Canada. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics Profile Series. Catalogue No. 85F0033MIE.
xiOAYEC (2000). Window on Youth Employment, Ontario Association of Youth Employment Centres.
xiiAnisef, Paul, Robert Sweet, Carl James, Zeng Lin. 1999. “Higher Education, Racial Minorities, Immigrants and Labour Market Outcomes in Canada.” International Symposium on "Non-Traditional" Students, University of British Columbia, Aug. 16 and 17, 1999.
xiiiSocial Development and Administration Division, Community and Neighbourhood Services Department, City of Toronto (1999). Toronto Youth Profile.
xivCobb, Chris. PS told to tighten Third World hiring. The Ottawa Citizen. September 20, 2001.
xvParekh, Bhikhu (2000). Preface, The Future of multi-Ethnic Britain. Profile Books.
Dr. Jean Lock Kunz is a senior research officer at the Applied Research Branch, Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC). Prior to joining HRDC, Dr. Kunz was a senior research and policy associate with the Canadian Council on Social Development (CCSD) where she spearheaded the cultural diversity research program. Currently, she is a member of the Advisory group to the Cultural Diversity Research program at the CCSD, as well as a representative of HRDC for the Metropolis Project, a forum for research and public policy on immigration and diversity.
Jean obtained her Masters in Sociology at the University of Toronto and a PhD at the University of Waterloo. Dr. Kunz has taught university undergraduate courses on race relations, gender roles, aging, and social inequality. Recently, she initiated and co-organized a roundtable on the social and economic integration of recent immigrants in Canada, a discussion among senior policy-makers and researchers. She has written extensively on a number of subjects such as immigration and race relations, health, youth, and seniors. Her work on immigration and race relations includes media-minority relations in Canada, the social integration of immigrant and visible minority youth, medication use among ethnic seniors, as well as the social and economic circumstances of immigrants and refugees.
[ Conference Page ][ CCSD Home Page ] [ The Laidlaw Foundation ]