The fuss over Thomas Mulcair’s dual citizenship (Canada and France) as he campaigns for the leadership of the federal NDP is one of those issues that is more emotional than substantial.The question begs as to whether the leader of a federal political party should “appear” to be in a conflict of interest over citizenship.
Our beloved prime minister likes to remind people that he is Canadian and only Canadian and no other country has claim on his allegiance.
The National Post feels this remark is something of a cheap shot, considering that its polls show Mulcair’s appeal is close to double that of his closest rival, Peggy Nash (36% to 20%).
To most Canadians, it’s a given that a party leader should be 100% for Canada and not share loyalty with another country.
That’s something of a double-standard, since we unquestionably accept those who have, say, double citizenship with the U.S.
Other Canadians, who come here from places like Iran, may have double citizenship without realizing it — until they return to the country of their birth for a visit and land in jail, or they’re tortured and perhaps murdered. It’s hard for Canada to argue on behalf of such people, if indeed they carry dual citizenship.
Huseyincan Celil is such a case. When he returned to Uzbekistan for a visit, he was turned over to the Chinese, who consider him a citizen and he now is in prison, with Canada unable (and perhaps unwilling) to help him. An innocent victim.
There’s a certain hypocrisy involved in the fuss by some over Mulcair sharing his Canadian citizenship with France. Presumably he’s as loyal to Canada as any other Quebec politician.
Or is he? A former Liberal cabinet minister in the Quebec government, he’s now NDP and a federal MP.
More significant than possible divided loyalties over dual citizenship is the fact there’s no requirement for federal MPs to pledge allegiance to Canada, per se. There should be.
Instead of taking an oath of loyalty and fealty to Canada, MPs take an oath of allegiance to the Queen — which these days seems bizarre: “I (name), do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.”
That members of Parliament do not take an oath of allegiance on behalf of Canada is one of the great oversights of our country. New Canadians make such a pledge on receiving citizenship. Surely MPs should pledge to work on behalf of Canada?
Not if you’re a Bloc MP, it isn’t. Bloc MPs work for what they think Quebec should be — and that’s independent and sovereign. Fair enough, but should Canadian taxpayers be expected to finance Bloc MPs to work against Confederation?
This seems a greater failing than someone having dual citizenship, even if that person leads a political party. Yet there’s no discernible interest in changing the status quo.
If MPs were required to take an oath to work in Canada’s interests, Bloc MPs would have to perjure themselves, or refuse to take the oath and thus make targets of themselves, or be identifiable as honest people who won’t lie.
Still, it’ll be interesting to see if Thomas Mulcair surrenders to pressure and abandons his French citizenship, even while he pledges allegiance to the Queen.
Original Article
Source: ifPress
Author: Peter Worthington
No comments:
Post a Comment