“Some” #TorCen Candidates debate on @TheAgenda

Some Toronto Centre Candidates interviewed by Steve Paikan @TheAgenda

Another Toronto Centre debate excluding the majority of Toronto Centre candidates.

I heard this after attending the November 20 debate at Jarvis Collegiate. (More on that in a separate post.) The discussion  with Steve Paikan was largely duplicated in the Jarvis Collegiate debate. Therefore those who couldn’t get to Jarvis Collegiate should listen to this.

For those interested in the FATCA question, I suggest that you listen for the few minutes starting at approximately 16:45. Chystia Freeland says some interesting things about equality of citizenship.

Should Canadian families who have a U.S. connection through citizenship, national origin or ancestry be entitled to the same rights as other Canadians?

To paraphrase Chrystia Freeland:

I was born in Canada. My daughter was born in Toronto Centre. There is no “back of the bus” when it comes to citizenship. Whether you are a descended from a United Empire Loyalist or arrived yesterday …

Does this mean there is no “second class” Canadian citizenship?

Those interested in this topic may want to read Chrystia Freeland’s 2011 New York Times article on the meaning of citizenship.

An excerpt includes:

 Attitudes toward these global citizens can get more complicated in the countries they live and work in, even as they retain their ties and emotional connections to their original homes. The cherished American idea of the melting pot, after all, is largely about cutting ties with the old country.

But Mr. Boyle said that in the age of globalization, a diaspora closely connected with its country of origin could be as economically valuable for its host country as it is for its native one: “Diasporas are a win-win. Silicon Valley wins, and the home country wins.”

That’s a big shift. But some countries and policy makers are predicting our concept of citizenship will soon be stretched even further — that we will go from Dr. Wang’s seagulls to thinking of countries as virtual, rather than physical, communities. In a presentation to the Canadian government in 2008, Alison Loat argued, “Canadians can no longer be thought of as only those living in the territory above North America’s 49th parallel, but more accurately as a potential network of people spanning the globe.”

Mr. Boyle said that New Zealand, with its geographical isolation, small population and large number of expatriates, has taken this idea the furthest: “New Zealand is fundamentally reimaging what it means to talk about the New Zealand nation. New Zealand is saying that it is at once a small island tucked away from the rest of the world and at the same time a globally networked nation with populations sprinkled across the globe.”

Living as we do in the age of Facebook, we shouldn’t be surprised that some countries are starting to imagine themselves more as social networks than as a physical place.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s