Canadian Heritage committee  Yes. We actually were in a number of multi-faith coalitions that involved Muslim imams. We had regular communication with them and we worked together closely. We not only know the stats, but also we engage with Muslims in Canada.

Canadian Heritage committee  In some ways when I've been thinking about this in the last few months, I've asked myself if there are two solitudes in a different way from how the term was originally used: people of deep religious conviction and government and how the two intersect. We don't have a minister of

Canadian Heritage committee  I think what would be wonderful is if they followed the idea of having a multi-faith, interfaith cluster adviser group that could then work with the government in setting up protocols. I know religion is very divisive, hence the response to Motion M-103. I can imagine the polit

Canadian Heritage committee  No. We're again recommending that the committee use the terms “anti-Muslim hatred”, “anti-Muslim discrimination”, “anti-Muslim hatred, discrimination”. Again, we caution you that you may need to define it for the purposes of the report since the term is out there, but not recomme

Canadian Heritage committee  That's why you may want to define it, but again recommend that it not be used, and that the government be very explicit if it's dealing with anti-Muslim discrimination or hatred, then use the term.

Canadian Heritage committee  Yes, we think it's fair to amend it, when it talks about clergy, just to make it clear. I think it's understood that clergy refers to rabbis, imams, and so on, but if it would help to make it clearer that that's what it means, then replace the language.

Canadian Heritage committee  Restricting it, I'm not sure how you'd do that. I think it's important for public office holders, for people who represent the broader Canadian population, just as you as MPs represent your constituents, to be very judicious in their language. I think it was inappropriate, very t

Canadian Heritage committee  No, not at all. Again, it's a matter of being an office holder and the comments that marginalize. You think, when she represents Canada, does she actually represent me? I'm not part of whoever she's speaking on behalf of, or representing, and that's part of the marginalization. T

Canadian Heritage committee  I think the way to address it is, again, as we proposed to her in terms of a conversation, a dialogue. I think it follows Mr. Huang's suggestion. We need to get to know each other better. We need to have more places of engagement. I think it's the government in terms of a whole-o

Canadian Heritage committee  In many ways, I think the motion has, and I hate to use the analogy, picked a scab. Again, we're a deeply pluralistic society, so we have deep religious differences and people of faith and no faith. I think part of it is that some Canadians were concerned. Would the government be

Canadian Heritage committee  Third, a whole-of-government approach protects free and informed dialogue. Parliament should find ways to initiate a sustained conversation on differences and accommodation in a pluralist society. Parliament should affirm a robust commitment to freedom of speech. Deep pluralism c

Canadian Heritage committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada would like to thank the committee for the opportunity to participate in this study on systemic racism and religious discrimination. The Evangelical Fellowship of Canada is a national association of evangelical Christia

Justice committee  Yes.

Justice committee  Maybe we could put it this way. Many of the religious leaders I know would be very reluctant to move as far as the Criminal Code and prosecution; they would rather see if the issue could be resolved in a way that did not require criminal sanctions. Their effort would be to try to

Justice committee  Again, we sought to explain through our analysis of the legal decisions previously, at least in B.C. and the courts, and actually in a concurring minority opinion. Chief Justice Wilson talked about this section saying “in substance it is an enactment to prevent breaches of the pu