It seems a long time ago now that Conservative leadership contender Kellie Leitch was lambasted by politicians of all stripes for proposing to screen prospective immigrants for “anti-Canadian values.”
Leitch’s policy was based on her belief that there was such thing as a unified Canadian identity, including “equality of opportunity, hard work, giving back to the community, equality of men and women, as well tolerance for all religions, cultures, and sexual orientations, and the rejection of violence as a way to solve problems.”
She proposed increasing face-to-face interviews with “trained immigration officials” who would ask questions such as: “Are men and women equal and entitled to equal protection under the law?” and “Is it ever OK to coerce or use violence against an individual or a group who disagrees with your views?”
Detractors of the idea suggested Leitch was unfairly targeting Muslim cultures and there were immediate calls for her to withdraw her candidacy. Justin Trudeau reiterated his usual “diversity is our strength” maxim, while several of Leitch’s fellow Conservative MPs called it an “ideological purity test” that was “tapping into [a] fear of immigration.” Even Maxime Bernier, now a staunch critic of “importing lots of people with incompatible values,” voiced his disagreement with Leitch’s proposal.
Leitch’s leadership bid failed with a distant sixth-place finish in the 2017 race, capturing just 7 percent of the vote. Her values test is often cited as the primary cause of her political demise, described as a “brutishly cynical power play,” a “cautionary tale,” as “reeking of insecurity and fear,” and as an instance of “racism, fear, and xenophobia.”
In the face of blatant and repeated assaults on many of the Canadian values identified by Leitch, one has to wonder if the reception to her idea would be different today.
Recently, a proposed vigil in Mississauga sought to commemorate Hamas terrorist Yahya Sinwar’s “martyrdom” after he orchestrated the barbaric October 7 attacks on innocent Israeli citizens and was later killed. As if the veneration of a man responsible for the brutal, intentional deaths of civilians wasn’t bad enough, the flyer for the event included near-sacred symbolism normally reserved for honouring Canada’s fallen veterans—red poppies and the solemn words of remembrance: “Lest We Forget.” The phrase and imagery lie at the very core of Canadian values, used for nearly 100 years to honour our country’s soldiers who gave their lives for the freedoms we enjoy today.
On the anniversary of October 7, streets in many of Canada’s urban centres were taken over, not by those mourning the loss of the Israeli children, parents, and concert-goers who were the victims of the horrific pogrom, but by those celebrating the assault. In Vancouver, crowds vigorously cheered as a speaker crowed that, on October 7, “We celebrate the most brilliant and beautiful operation done by our resistance!” The throng eagerly applauded as another speaker expressed his desire to “Carry out October 7, 10 times more!”
While there was once a time when defenders of these gatherings pretended they were not rejoicing in acts of terror but merely drawing attention to the plight of Gaza, any remaining deniability has since been put to rest. Speakers in Vancouver have unabashedly declared “We ARE Hezbollah! We ARE Hamas!” The Canadian flag has been torn apart and burned, and large assemblies openly roar their approval to yells of “Death to Canada! Death to the United States! And death to Israel!” Similar mobs in Calgary chanted “Allahu Akbar,” as they barricaded a former Israeli government spokesperson, and last month there were reports of outright calls for jihad on the streets of Mississauga.
Wherever one stands on Leitch’s idea of a Canadian values test, there is no question that these demonstrators—newcomers and Canadian-born activists alike—represent the polar opposite of the values Leitch sought to defend.
The idea that Canadian values include tolerance for all religions and cultures has been enthusiastically trampled by the hordes of people repeatedly targeting Jewish people, businesses, community centres, and places of worship with their hateful rhetoric and actions.
The same is true of Leitch’s idea that Canadians reject violence as a way to solve problems, a sentiment now drastically at odds with the open calls of “Death to Canada,” the donning of military-style clothing and face coverings by demonstrators, and the urging of a repeat of the unrestrained violence, rape, murder, and hostage-taking of Israeli civilians that took place last year.
A recent Leger/National Post poll indicates that Canadians are perhaps becoming more protective of their values as they come under threat. It found that 70 percent of younger Canadians endorsed the idea of a values test for new arrivals. The same poll found that 72 percent of visible minorities endorsed a values test compared to 69 percent of white Canadians in the 18-39 age range.
It was just seven years ago that Canadian values were so taken for granted that the very idea of testing potential newcomers for alignment with them was deemed not only unnecessary but morally wrong. As Canada’s streets continue to be shut down by terror-celebrating, violence-inciting, flag-burning, hate-spewing mobs who threaten our citizens and co-opt our hallowed symbols for their murderous cause, we have to ask: was Leitch’s proposal really so far off the mark?
Caroline Elliott is a political commentator based in Vancouver. She has a PhD specializing in Canadian liberal democracy from Simon Fraser University. Follow her @NVanCaroline.
