Sometimes there are no good choices for government.
Sometimes the government has to answer questions with ambiguous language.
I find the niqab symbol profoundly offensive. I believe it reflects a misogynistic culture that - a treatment of women as property rather than people, which is anchored in Medieval tribal customs as opposed to any religious obligation, but I do not seek to regulate people wearing this objectionable symbol if they choose to do so.
I think I've chosen the right path.
It's easier for opposition members to condemn the government at the drop of a hat if they don't understand.
Rural Alberta is a lot less homogeneous than it used to be, partly because of my immigration policies.
You go to a lot of small communities in rural Alberta and you'll find a degree of diversity that probably hasn't existed in terms of immigration for a century - you'll find the Filipino grocery store, and the African Pentecostal church and maybe a mosque. Albertans are pro-immigration; they're also pro-integration. In my years in this province I cannot recall more than a handful of expressions of xenophobia or nativism that I've encountered. It's the land of new beginnings and fresh starts - it is rare Albertans who trace their roots here back more than a generation or two.
I thought very seriously having something more like a normal life where I might have my weekends and evenings off, and be able to read and have a more robust personal life.
For members who have only ever been in government, the negativity and aggressiveness of the opposition is easy to caricature.
I do believe there is absolutely space for legitimate debate in a liberal democracy about immigration selection, screening and integration.
Finally, as I've said, this is - why are you talking about Jewish women's wigs and people wearing turbans? That has nothing whatsoever to do with niqab.
I think very few people in Canada are seeking - to regulate any public expressions of individuals' religions.
Many, many times I would shake my head in dismay at the goings-on in the House of Commons, but that never caused me to lose my fundamental faith in the values of our parliamentary institutions.
I have said explicitly from day one when I announced this policy in, I believe, November of 2011, that I and our government oppose the idea of banning the wearing of the niqab in public.
Each year, members of Canada’s Ukrainian community, Parliamentarians and others commemorate the Holodomor at gatherings across the country. In doing so, we honour the memory of those who perished and the legacy of those who survived, including many who found refuge in Canada. It is by remembering the tragedies and atrocities of the past that we can equip ourselves to prevent them from happening again. That is why this national tour, which will reach Canadians of all ages and backgrounds, is an important initiative
You ought not to accept the claim that this is a religious practice. I think that's, frankly, problematic for Islam, for well-intentioned Liberals like you to say that this is a religious practice when the overwhelming consensus of Islamic scholars around the world, and the overwhelming majority of Canadian Muslims, believe this has absolutely - that the niqab as face covering, that this symbol of misogyny has nothing to do with Islam.
Naheed Nenshi is a friend of mine. We - he - knows how close I am to all of the cultural, ethnic, and religious communities in Canada, particularly his own Ismaili community. By the way, the vast majority of Canadian Muslims, particularly Ismaili Muslims that I know, strongly support our government's reinforcement of the public nature of the public citizenship oath.
The public citizenship oath done in a court in front of a judge and one's fellow citizens should be done publicly.
There's not a word in the Quran or the Hadith that requires that women cover their faces. To the contrary, the only requirement is that they uncover their faces when they're doing the haj.
I was very clear in saying that what I characterized as politically correct Liberals are unnecessarily inflaming what should not really be a contentious matter. The truth is, if anything we're uniting Canadians on this issue, and I believe uniting Muslim Canadians. And I believe that some folks who you might characterize as politically correct cultural relativists are unhelpfully inflaming - creating contention on this issue where there really is very little.
The federal court has not commented on niqab as being a violation of any putative Charter right, but rather has said that the court believes that the policy ought to be anchored in legislation or regulation as opposed to an administrative order from the Minister. We disagree with that. But this is not a Charter ruling.
My response to my friend Naheed Nenshi was simply to say that some of the hyperbolic language that's being used to critique this sensible reinforcement of the public nature of the citizenship oath is, I think, unhelpful, and is actually inflaming the situation.
