Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
Facilitator’s Report
Myer Siemiatycki, Ryerson University
Introduction
Over a three day period -- March 22-24, 2002 -- academic researchers, policy practitioners and community leaders met in Ottawa to identify priority directions for research on the political participation of newcomers and minority communities in Canada. During the conference, six group discussion periods were held, designed to elicit participants’ assessments of an optimal research agenda for this field. In this report, I will provide a summary, and ‘wish list’ of issues raised in the group sessions I had the pleasure to facilitate.
Day 1: Formal Participation in Electoral Processes
Discussion 1: The Research Agenda
Our goal in this session was to develop a consensus on 3 key research questions related to the participation of women, newcomers and minority communities in Canada’s electoral system. While a broad range of suggestions were identified by the group, they may be clustered into 3
broad questions.
Question # 1: What barriers (both imposed and internalized) inhibit political participation by these groups?
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
It is evident that marginalized collectivities face a variety of barriers to formal political participation. Discussion surfaced a variety of inhibiting factors: The gatekeeping function of political parties; limitations of time, finances and political information; non-recognition of newcomers as full and equal citizens; variations by region of the country and level of government; variations among newcomer and minority communities.
Question # 2: How can mainstream political institutions become more representative of newcomer and minority communities?
A significant pre-requisite of improved group representation in Canada’s political system will be adaptations in our political institutions. These were deemed to include: better outreach by political parties; replacement of a ‘first-past-the-post’ electoral system with proportional representation; greater government advertising in ethnic media; more inclusive consultation process in policy-making; experimentation with new non-elected, government institutions based on principles of ‘group government’.
Question #3: Are the groups we are studying themselves, internally homogenous or diverse?
There was considerable discussion about the potential for ‘group-based’ analysis to both clarify and distort our understanding of political participation. Thus while recognizing that gender and race are significant markers of political opportunity and outcome, internal complexities and differences were also acknowledged. Reference, for instance was made to differences between white and non-white women; the vast diversity within the category of ‘visible minority’; and the significant differences of class, sexual orientation, language and religion within specific groups. This points to the importance of inter-sectionalities in studying group political participation.
Discussion 2: Ideal Data Sets
There was strong consensus that basic data is needed on the electoral participation of newcomer and minority communities. At its most basic level, the data needs may by framed by 3 questions:
1. Who runs for elected office?
2. Who wins elected office?
3. Who votes?
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
If compiled across the country, by all three levels of government, this would provide rich insights into political participation of Canada’s diverse newcomer and minority communities. Group participants from community-based organizations then discussed their NGO’s efforts to boost community political participation. This would be a most promising further line of research.
Discussion 3: Indicators of Inclusion & Exclusion
This group was comprised largely of community-based leaders, active in NGOs. Accordingly, their comments reflected lived experience very acutely. A host of indicators of political inclusion & exclusion were identified. Prime indicators of exclusion were deemed to be:
1. Voter participation rates.
2. Representation in elected positions.
3. Participation in political parties, public forums and policy consultations.
There was a consensus that we will have achieved a healthy state of inclusion when the following indicators are in place:
1. Equitable government advertising in all ethnic media.
2. Improved representation of newcomers and minorities in public service employment.
3. The adoption of an ‘inclusion lens’ by all public decision-makers to weigh the implications of policy and programs on diverse communities.
Two additional themes recurred through this discussion. First was the link for many newcomers between economic marginalization and political exclusion. Second was the importance of language as a determinant of inclusion and exclusion – ranging from concerns over failure of public institutions to communicate multi-lingually and the exclusions often imposed on those speaking either of Canada’s official languages with a foreign accent.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
Starting Point For New Research:
It is evident that baseline pan-Canadian research is required to establish current levels of newcomer and minority group electoral representation. This would then permit further research into barriers to political participation, the response of both mainstream and community-based institutions and comparisons across different regions of the country, different levels of government and different newcomer and minority communities.
Day 2: Informal Political Participation
Discussion 1:The Research Agenda
Our goal again in this session was to develop a consensus on 3 key research questions related now to the participation of women, newcomers and minority communities in non-electoral civic engagement. While a broad range of suggestions were identified by the group, they may be clustered into 3 questions:
Question #1: How effectively do identity-specific organizations mobilize and engage community members?
This question opens into a host of important research directions including: What types of identity-based civic associations exist? How do they recruit and mobilize members? Does participation in such informal organizations promote participation in mainstream civic organizations or in electoral politics?
Question 2: How does government (funding and legislation) affect the role of community-based civic organizations?
Inherent in this query are such research issues as: What should be the goals of identity-based civic organizations? Does government funding distort the mission of these organizations? Does the Charities Act unduly restrict the political activity of such organizations?
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
Question 3: What can we learn from comparative studies of informal political participation?
This would entail comparisons within Canada (of differing regions and communities) and beyond
(comparing the Canadian experience to other countries).
Discussion 2: Ideal Data Sets
A consensus developed on several points:
1. Data to be generated by the various surveys described in plenary sessions are most welcome and valuable.
2. Notwithstanding the above, more qualitative data is required.
In particular there was an interest in data which would reveal the basis on which newcomers and minority community members decide to engage in formal and/or informal political activity.
3. An inventory or ‘mapping’ is required of civic associations in newcomer and minority communities.
No comprehensive picture of informal, associational activity at this scale exists. What types of organizations (eg. advocacy/service/social/recreational) exist? Such an inventory would be valuable in reflecting the social capital and community capacity in diverse communities; in promoting greater mutual support across communities and organizations; and in facilitating networking between mainstream and community-specific organizations.
Discussion 3: Indicators of Inclusion & Exclusion
A wide range of indicators were identified, which may be clustered in the following 3 prime criteria:
1. Equitable inclusion in the labour market.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
This affects the resources (time, money, status) individuals may draw upon for civic engagement. Various indicators of contemporary exclusion were cited, including: recognition of foreign credentials; admission rates to professional schools; typical employment patterns; elevated poverty rates for some groups.
2. Equitable recognition of the right to participate in Canada’s political process.
Some groups still suffer from denial of basic legitimacy and belonging. Canadian public opinion does not extend to all communities and groups now in the country, an equal right to participate in and lead the body politic. This may be seen in the criticism directed at various political leaders (eg. Sheila Copps, Sunera Thobani, etc), or at the involvement of entire groups (eg. newcomer communities in leadership races and constituency nomination campaigns).
3. Civic literacy awareness.
There was consensus that more educational initiatives – both in schools and in popular adult-directed format – were required to promote civic awareness and competencies across diverse groups and communities.
Starting Point for New Research:
It would be valuable to begin case studies of the associational life of selected newcomer and minority groups. This would permit a comparative ‘mapping’ of the extent of community organization, leading to a comparative analysis of mobilization, efficacy and transferral of engagement to both mainstream organizations and the formal political arena.
*****
In closing, it is important to note several over-arching themes which arose throughout these two days of discussion. They are appeals for attentiveness to:
·Linkages between the formal and informal spheres of political participation.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1
Facilitator’s Report - Myer Siemiatycki
·Both the commonalities and differences existing within any defined group or community.
·The importance of comparative research that examines the experience of different regions of Canada, different levels of government, different types of NGOs, and other countries.
·The significance of schooling as both a sphere of participation, and site for developing civic values and capacity in citizens.
.
*****
I have appreciated the opportunity to participate in this collective effort to advance the state of research on political participation in Canada.
Bringing Worlds Together Seminar Proceedings1