---

THE STANDING SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS

EVIDENCE

---

TORONTO, Thursday, September 22, 2022

The Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights met this day at 1:20 p.m. [ET] to examine such issues as may arise from time to time relating to human rights generally.

Senator Salma Ataullahjan (Chair) in the chair.

[English]

The Chair: Honourable senators, I am Salma Ataullahjan, senator from Toronto and chair of this committee. Today, we are conducting a meeting of the Standing Senate Committee on Human Rights, and I would like to take the opportunity to introduce my colleagues, the members of the committee who are participating in this meeting. We have Senator Gerba from Quebec and Senator Oh from Ontario. Unfortunately, Senator Arnot had to leave because he has a flight, the only flight to Saskatchewan. He had to leave, but we’re here. I’m excited to have you here too.

So, having held two meetings in June, in Ottawa, today we continue our study on Islamophobia in Canada under our general order of reference. Our study will cover, amongst other matters, the role of Islamophobia with respect to online and off-line violence against Muslims, gender discrimination and discrimination in employment, including Islamophobia in the federal public service. Our study will also examine the source of Islamophobia, its impact on individuals, including mental health and physical safety, and possible solutions and government responses.

We are pleased to be here in Toronto and to hear from witnesses about Islamophobia in this part of the country. This is the fourth of our public hearings outside of Ottawa. Two weeks ago, we were in Vancouver and Edmonton, and earlier this week, we were in Quebec.

Let me provide you with some details about our meeting today. This afternoon, we shall have two one-hour panels with a number of witnesses who have been invited. In each panel, we shall hear from witnesses, and then the senators will have a question-and-answer session.

Now, I will introduce our first panel of witnesses. Each witness has been asked to make an opening statement of five minutes, and I ask you to respect that. We shall hear from all witnesses, and then turn to questions from senators. From the Canadian Arab Institute, we have Jad El Tal, Director of Research and Policy. From Islamic Relief Canada, we have Reyhana Patel, Director of Communications and Government Relations, and from the Somali Canadian Association of Etobicoke, we have Adem Ali, Director of Programs.

I will now invite Jad El Tal to make his presentation.

Jad El Tal, Director of Research and Policy, Canadian Arab Institute: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, bonjour. Madame Chair and senators, thank you for inviting me to speak about a topic that is near and dear to the heart of the Canadian-Arab community. My name is Jad El Tal. I am the Director of Research and Policy at the Canadian Arab Institute. We are a non-partisan think-and-do-tank that focuses on the issues and interests of the Arab community in Canada through research, community programming and advocacy.

[Translation]

Today, I’m going to talk about Islamophobia and anti-Arab racism in English, but before I do, I have to acknowledge that our community in Quebec is facing an increasingly institutionalized form of discrimination, which I’m sure you heard a lot about on Tuesday in Quebec City.

[English]

The Canadian-Arab community is the largest newcomer population, and it also includes Muslim, Queer, Indigenous and Black community members, which is not usually highlighted in research and discussions about the Arab community. Arabs are often lumped only under “Middle Eastern” or “Muslim” categories, taking away from the various intersectional experiences and demographics of this diverse community in Canada.

According to the 2016 census, around half of the 1 million Arabs in Canada identify themselves as Muslim. This also means that half of the 1 million Muslims in Canada are Arab. This is an important statistic to highlight because not all Muslims are Arab and, of course, not all Arabs are Muslims. Yet, most Arab‑Canadians, Muslim or not, would agree that they are subject to discrimination in our country because Islamophobia and anti‑Arab racism are rooted within each other. Indeed, historically and currently, anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia have needed each other like a fire needs wind to spread across a forest.

Let me give the panel a few examples of how this wildfire of anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia manifests itself in the everyday lives of Arab-Canadians. In April of 2022, we published an investigative report on why Arabs — and specifically Arab women — have the highest unemployment and underemployment rates of any demographic group in Canada. This was around 18% during the pandemic, more than twice the unemployment rate of White Canadians. Among the employment barriers we examined, we found that identity was a significant one for employment and inclusion in the workplace.

Arab women that we interviewed across the country had a tough time feeling included in the workplace because of the stereotypes they faced about their background, including condescending questions about their education level, their marital status, their religion and their upbringing “in the desert.” Non-Muslim women in our community also faced Islamophobic micro-aggressions and questioning like, “Does your husband allow you to not wear the hijab?”

Visibly Muslim women in our community undoubtedly faced double the brunt because of their intersecting Arab and Muslim identities. For example, several of the veiled Arab women we interviewed have seriously contemplated, and have been advised by their peers, to take off their hijab in order to secure employment because they were told that that’s the only way to seek job security in this country, and for some of them, they actually had to do that.

But by far, the main reason Arab women cited for not receiving any callbacks for jobs is actually their names. It starts at the résumé. A majority of last names in the community include the prefix “Abu” or “El,” just like mine, “El Tal.” Many first names of Arab-Canadians are, unsurprisingly, in Arabic, such as Yasmeen, Bassma, Yara, Rima or Hoda. So, someone, for example, named “Bassma Abu Yasser” will anecdotally and statistically face increased discrimination in this country, and not just in employment. We’re also talking about housing; we’re talking about healthcare, the justice system, access to services, education, in the media, et cetera, all because of their name.

Finally, in the historical context, which is very important to highlight, it would be very convenient and easy for us to say that Islamophobia started 20 years ago after 9/11, but that’s simply not the case. The harsh truth is that anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia go back hundreds of years, as depicted in Edward Said’s Orientalism. We can’t talk about today’s fight against Islamophobia without acknowledging that Western powers have used anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiments to colonize our people — to “civilize the barbarians.” This notion has been institutionalized in the West’s foreign policies for centuries, and it has trickled down into the modern day-to-day domestic experiences of Arabs and Muslims in Canada today.

Ultimately, our testimony today highlights the diverse experiences of Arab-Canadians when it comes to the discrimination they face in Canada, whether or not they themselves are Muslim, and that is because anti-Arab racism and Islamophobia are the fire and wind needed to cause a wildfire.

So, I kindly ask the committee today to consider and closely study anti-Arab racism within their discussions and research of Islamophobia, because trust me — and if not me, trust the data — you will not be able to successfully eradicate Islamophobia in this country without addressing anti-Arab racism as well.

Thank you for listening, I yield the rest of my time back to the chair.

The Chair: Reyhana Patel, I’ll ask you to make your presentation. Thank you.

Reyhana Patel, Director of Communications and Government Relations, Islamic Relief Canada: Thank you, Madam Chair. Good afternoon, senators. Good afternoon, Madam Chair. My name is Reyhana Patel, and I’m here representing Islamic Relief Canada. We are one of Canada’s largest Muslim NGOs, and as one of the country’s largest Muslim NGOs, we have been at the frontlines of Islamophobia for many years. Our community has been at the receiving end of hate, especially online hate, for far too long. Over the years, it has increased in all forms and volume. We receive hateful and threatening comments, both online and off-line. Our office has been the target of hateful letters and mail, and our staff and volunteer teams have been physically harassed and attacked while carrying out their jobs.

We have seen other Muslim organizations face similar challenges and have noticed systematic Islamophobia even within government institutions like the CRA, Canada Revenue Agency, which have unfairly targeted Muslim organizations for over a decade now. And these attacks are carried out with relative impunity, because Islamophobia is seen as an acceptable form of racism and hate. Whereas direct expressions of racism and homophobia may often no longer be expressed freely in public, Islamophobia still passes “the dinner-table test” and can be readily mentioned in polite — and impolite — society. It is the go-to place for those who would otherwise be more discreet about their hate. This is because, somehow, Islamophobia can be seen as patriotic, non-racist and even grounded in reason. It is for this reason such apparent self-justification and self-deception of Islamophobes has to be called out and countered at every turn, in the same way many other forms of racism and sexism have been combatted in the post-war era.

In February 2021, Islamic Relief Canada published a report entitled, In Their Own Words: Untold Stories of Islamophobia in Canada, which featured several compelling stories of people across the country who experienced Islamophobia, and I just want to share some of the stories with you that stood out. One of these stories was about a young man in B.C. who switched schools entirely because of the barrage of Islamophobic attacks that he was facing. We spoke to a teacher in Quebec who was forced to leave their job because they had to remove their head scarf because of Bill 21. And then we spoke to Aymen Derbali, a survivor of the Quebec City mosque shooting. He was shot and was left paralyzed, and he is now suffering the consequences of that many years on.

Some of the major findings of this report that we found are that Islamophobia is gendered, with women bearing the brunt of attacks, and that it is being increasingly normalized across Canadian society, with many victims accepting insults as something routine and ordinary. We could see this gendered element even in the research participants themselves. As we made this call for participants for this research, a significantly higher percentage of women came forward than men, and many of these women’s encounters with Islamophobia revolved around their choice to wear the head scarf or the hijab.

In terms of normalization, nearly every single person we interviewed for this report prefaced the discussion with statements like, “I’m not that much of a victim,” or, “I haven’t experienced that much discrimination compared to others.” While much of this could demonstrate a disdain for the sensational, a trait that is highly valued in Islam, it became clear from the interviews that hatred and discrimination have become so routine in Canada that many victims felt these experiences are simply to be expected when living as a religious minority in Canadian society.

Throughout the development of this report, we spoke to a number of individuals who identified their workplace as the location in which they experienced the greatest degree of Islamophobia. Notably, some of these workplaces included government offices. Alarmed by this trend, we are now embarking on a study entitled Muslims at the Margins: Islamophobia & (Un)Employment, which we hope to have ready for publication in early 2023.

We also presented our recommendations to the federal government at the National Summit on Islamophobia last year, which we have included in our written submissions, but I’d also like to suggest the following guidelines also be followed. Firstly, we believe the government must be more proactive, as opposed to simply reactive, when a crisis occurs in its response to Islamophobia in Canada. Secondly, it is essential that any and all measures be actioned in an appropriate manner that does not allow for any new initiative or commitment to be perceived as “special treatment” for the Muslim community which, as we know, is a favoured trope of white supremacist groups. Lastly, in order to eradicate the ideological source of Islamophobia, the government must take a whole-of-government approach to uprooting White supremacy from every level of society.

Thank you kindly for your time and for listening to me.

The Chair: Thank you, and Adem Ali, now I turn to you.

Adem Ali, Director of Programs, Somali Canadian Association of Etobicoke: I am Adem Ali. I’m the Director of Programs at the Somali Canadian Association of Etobicoke. Etobicoke is just right by where we are right now. In particular, our organization obviously serves the Somali community, which has been in this area since the 1980s. Our organization is over 30 years old. We started off basically just doing things like immigration, helping people get their permanent residence, things like that. As the needs of the community changed, then our services also changed. So, today, we’re trying to serve more youth who have been born here. They are not newcomers; their parents were newcomers and then they were born here. Another thing that we really try to serve is food insecurity, which is a big issue.

So, over the past year, what we were doing was a research program on cyber hate crime, in particular toward Muslims, and, of course, mainly Somali and East Africans. We surveyed over 400 members of our community, and we split them into three different groups. It was seniors, adults and youth. We asked them just general questions: Have they ever experienced hate? Do they even know what a hate crime is? For a lot of those seniors, they did not know what a hate crime was, especially online. They’re obviously somewhat familiar with hate crimes in person, physically, but things online, after we had explained to them what it was, then they would say, “Oh, yes, we have actually experienced that.” Adults were somewhat of a mixed bag because some were newcomers, some were not. Some were very hesitant to speak of their experiences, and after a few sessions, then they were more open.

The youth in particular, though, I’d like to speak about, because they were very open about what was happening to them. They were saying that they were online mainly for — what was it? — six-plus hours. Our survey allowed them to put different amounts of time, you know, 0 to 1, 1 to 2 hours, but six-plus was the maximum that we had, and they were all ticking that.

So, these youth, for them, it is almost like another world. Even for us, maybe, you know, we can put away our devices, but for them, it’s always with them; they can always see it, and they said that really was the problem for them. So, when they were getting these messages about hate — just because they were who they were, they’re Muslim, maybe they’re even just Black — it was always there; it was always popping up, and the main culprit usually was social media.

When we were speaking to them, we were actually surprised, because we asked what solutions they’d want, and they would actually like more regulation on these social media websites. Most of the adults said that they would not want that. They’re very suspicious of the government. They did not want any type of interference, but the youth were more trusting, and they wanted these things to end because it was something that they did not obviously enjoy being a part of. They did not want to be targets of hate, and they thought that there should be more regulation so that people that do this would face consequences. They wanted, just in general, more safe spaces, and more things to be done so that they could feel that they were being protected when they were online.

So, that’s the main issue that we saw that was affecting youth. When they were experiencing these situations, these hate crimes, it was clearly affecting their mental health, in particular, their self-esteem. You know, I don’t want to really repeat the examples that were given, but it usually had to do with, say, their name or their appearance. A simple message would linger with them. We would ask them when this happened. Maybe it was months ago, weeks ago, years ago, but they still remembered it; they still felt bad about it, and it’s just not something, I think, our youth should be experiencing when they’re just trying to interact online. Thank you for your time.

The Chair: Thank you very much. So, now we’ll turn to the senators for questions. Senator Oh, I turn to you first.

Senator Oh: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, witnesses, for being here. For Jad, I have a question for you. Can you tell us your biggest concern in regard to the Egyptian community with which you are involved? What are the most critical and most concerning things that you want the committee to look at?

Mr. El Tal: Thank you, senator, for that question. I think the biggest concern of the Arab community in general, especially in the last year and two years is housing, and the discrimination that our community faces when trying to just rent a place anywhere in Canada. We did a survey last year in February, so it’s seven months ago, and we asked what the biggest concerns are. We asked participants to rank their top five biggest concerns. Number one was housing; two was healthcare; three was discrimination in general. And then when we asked more about discrimination, we got the results that I mentioned today, which is, you know, the names. For those who are visibly Muslim, obviously, it was their physical appearance that they worried about. They worried about their safety, so public safety is also a huge issue. And all of that is with regards to their Arab identity. So, those are the biggest issues.

Senator Oh: So, because of their identity, they have problems renting?

Mr. El Tal: Yes. Yes, and we did further interviews with specific people, and one of them specifically applied for three different condos in Toronto, and each time, there was a rejection, and there was no justification other than, “We just went with another candidate.” There was no justification. Their credit score was good. The job contract was there. They were employed and everything. It was just that they just weren’t chosen, and their feeling was that it was because they were discriminated against based on their name.

Senator Oh: Thank you.

Mr. El Tal: Thank you, senator.

Senator Oh: For Ms. Patel, you are from an NGO, you mentioned, right? So, can you tell me who funded your NGO? How do you get your funding?

Ms. Patel: Yes, so the majority of our funding comes from our community, Canadian Muslims across the country. We do get a few government grants as well, but that’s between 1 and 5% of our total revenue.

Senator Oh: Do you receive any funding from foreign countries?

Ms. Patel: No, we don’t. No.

Senator Oh: Absolutely none?

Ms. Patel: Islamic Relief Canada doesn’t. No. No. So, we have, obviously, partner offices around the world. So, our U.S.A. office will get funding from U.S.A.; our U.K. office will get funding from the U.K.

Senator Oh: But Canadian side, only strictly from Canada?

Ms. Patel: From the Canadian government or UN agencies as well.

Senator Oh: And what is your biggest concern that you want the committee to look into for your community in terms of Islamophobia or discrimination?

Ms. Patel: So, I think there’s two things. I think one of the things that facing the Muslim NGOs right now is the CRA and the targeting of Muslim charities by the CRA in terms of audits. We haven’t been audited by the CRA ever, but other Muslim charities have and some of the stuff that we’re hearing and the stuff that’s coming out is very concerning. So, we would like that addressed. I know there’s some work that’s been going on already.

And we do a lot of work under the gender-based violence portfolio at Islamic Relief Canada, and we do a lot of work with Muslim women. When we talk to the community about Islamophobia, people are really, really scared and concerned and they’re facing attacks every day. For me, for us, the one thing that stood out in the research that we do is that a lot of people feel that it’s normal to experience verbal abuse, and even some physical abuse, and it’s not being reported, or people aren’t coming forward.

Senator Oh: Thank you. For you, I know there are a lot of Somali communities in Etobicoke, Jane and Finch area mostly. So, can you tell us a little bit about what affects your community in regard to Islamophobia?

Mr. Ali: So, again, our project was about cyber hate crime, so it was looking at how people are affected when they’re online, what type of interactions they’re having. Again, you can look at it from a long period of time, but what has been happening lately is that there are groups targeting anybody that they see as not White or following a different religion that they see as different — in this case, of course, you know, Muslim. We’ve had some discussions with a Jewish organization, and they’re facing the same thing. You’ll find people that will target groups that are non-Christian — insulting their appearance, their religion, their way of life, asking, “Why do you this? Why do you do that?”

Just speaking from experience from our organization as well, as some of the other panellists have said, you will find discrimination in things like trying to rent a place, trying to find a job. A lot of times you know, someone will be interviewed for a job, and everything is in order, but then they will have no callback. Or they’ll try to apply to rent, and as I said, they’ll have a good credit score but they won’t get it. They’ll try to go for, you know, some type of food pickup. Like I said, we do a lot of things. Food insecurity is a very big issue in the Somali community right now because of high rents, and they’ll try to go to places to try to get food and they’ll be, like, “Oh, there’s nothing this week. Come back next week.” Then they’ll come back next week and be told, “Oh, there’s also nothing,” but they’ll see other people having access to those services.

So, luckily, we have gotten some funding from different levels of government, municipal and federal, and we have been able to provide food hampers and grocery gift cards to the community. But the demand just far exceeds anything that we can do. So, for online discrimination, it is being targeted by certain groups, and in terms of physical, in person, discrimination, it is things like rent and food insecurity.

Senator Oh: Do you ever get in touch with Minister Hussen? He is in your area, and he is from Somalia.

Mr. Ali: Yes. Our executive director could not be here because he is currently rehabilitating from an injury — he injured his leg — but he has been in contact with the minister. He has told us how to pursue things. He’s been very helpful to our organization over the years.

Another person who has helped us is Kirsty Duncan. She is actually located just down the street from us, and she really helps us with a lot of the issues that we face, as well as community members.

Senator Oh: Okay, good. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

The Chair: Thank you, senator. So, just a clarification. You were talking about food insecurity. Where do you go where you’re told there’s no food? Do you go to the local food banks?

Mr. Ali: So, in certain cases that we’ve seen, it’s organizations. So, like I said, for us, we do receive funding, and we do say on our application that we’ll give it to specific groups. Then we give it out, of course, to those groups. Other organizations that we’ve heard of are just ones in the Toronto area that have gotten the funding for that, and then when people try to go to access that, they’ve been unable to.

The Chair: And you feel that they will not give it to the Somali community while they are giving to others. Is that what I am to understand?

Mr. Ali: Yes. So, what we’ve seen is maybe it’s been more so against Muslims or even more so against Black people, because the majority of Somalis are Black. So, it’s more of that. Yeah.

The Chair: Thank you. And I will turn to Senator Gerba.

Senator Gerba: Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you for coming here today. I’ll start with Jad. You are from Montreal?

Mr. El Tal: I lived in Montreal before, but I’m not from Montreal.

Senator Gerba: Oh, okay. I don’t want to talk about Bill 21, but do you think that there is any link between the increase of Islamophobia in Quebec and this bill?

Mr. El Tal: I think that’s an excellent question, and I think that the answer is yes. In the interviews that we did, on the employment study that we did, our community members in Quebec actually named Bill 21 in their interview, saying that this is impacting their day-to-day lives, and I’m mentioning that because usually, as we know, the average Canadian doesn’t really know bills or numbers of specific bills, but our community knows Bill 21 because it impacts them so much.

Senator Gerba: Okay. So, what can the federal government do? What do you think the federal government could do to end this Islamophobic behaviour in our communities?

Mr. El Tal: I understand, obviously, there’s only so much the federal government could do without encroaching too much on the sovereignty of different provinces, but I think that a very positive approach would first be looking into their own backyard, how their Muslim employees in the federal government are being treated and how they feel about Islamophobia within their network. I always tell different organizations, “You have to look within first before you start looking outside and saying this person is not doing that action.”

And so, I think one of the first things that the federal government should do is make a very clear statement, obviously, against Islamophobia, which they have done, and also, start asking their own members who do live in Quebec what their thoughts and feelings are, because they have many.

Senator Gerba: Thank you. This question is for any of you. I don’t know if you have any study linking the increase of Islamophobia with the increase of the radicalization of Muslims. Are there any studies that link these issues?

[Translation]

I will say it in French. I am interested in knowing more. We observe that there is an increase in radicalization within the Muslim community. Are there any studies that have analyzed the effect of this radicalization on the rise of Islamophobia in Canada or elsewhere in the world?

[English]

Ms. Patel: This is not an area that I study, but I can give an overview. I don’t know of any study, I’m sure there has been, but I did do some work on radicalization and preventing extremism while I lived in the U.K. While there wasn’t a link, what we do is when communities feel excluded from communities and they’re being pushed aside or they have really bad experiences, they can kind of go down that path of radicalization.

But again, when we’re talking about Canada, I’m not entirely sure. Maybe my colleagues will be able to speak more about whether there’s a concrete study, but I do know, generally, when you’re looking at the topic of radicalization within any community, when people are sidelined, they’re pushed towards what makes them feel comfortable, into different ideologies, and that can lead them down that path.

Mr. Ali: I’m not sure on the exact dates, but I think there was a study done at our organization years before I started working there, and they did find that there was a correlation. As she just said, when people are excluded or maybe feel like they’re not part of the community, of the society, it is more likely that they will turn to radicalization. Not so much maybe domestically, like, doing things here, but they were going abroad to do things.

So, that’s why I said in my statement that it’s important, especially for the youth, that they feel safe here, that they feel that the government is taking care of them, is making sure that they’re not being attacked online or physically in person, you know, discriminated against.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: I would also like to ask another general question. I would like to know if there is anything that can be done, also with regard to the radicalization of Muslims, that would counteract or help to address the problem of Islamophobia.

Mr. El Tal: Thank you, Senator.

[English]

Just to answer the previous question and then lump into this question here as well, I’m not sure about the link between the radicalization of Muslims and increased Islamophobia, but what I know for sure is that Islamophobia existed way before the concept of radicalization of Muslims. And so, I’m not sure if they work together and they increase with each other. Maybe anecdotally they do, but I think something that has been successful in the past with de-radicalization, especially within religious communities, is to partner up with religious clergy people, partner up with mosques and other religious institutions, in order to spread the word of the actual religion, which is a religion of peace, because, like my friends here said before, the radicalization of our community members happens because of the exclusion they face from Canadian society.

When we have these types of conversations and the report comes out and we show that as a community, as a country, together, we are combatting Islamophobia, those who feel that they’re excluded might feel that, oh, actually, our country is working to the benefit of us. So, they might not feel the need to radicalize.

So, I think what you’re doing now is actually a perfect example of how we can make community members feel even more welcomed and included into Canada, so that the potential for radicalization in the future decreases.

Senator Gerba: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you. Just to explain a bit, I started this study because I was horrified when I looked at some of the statistics, and the one that particularly shocked me was when I found out that the most Muslims killed in a G7 country were in Canada. And as we have started the study and we’re continuing, we’re finding out that incidents of Islamophobia are higher in Canada than they are in the U.S. There was the U.K. study which, you know, also pinpointed Canada as being not a very safe place for Muslims, and, of course, we’re seeing a rise. I think three days ago there’s been an incident with a young boy in Bradford who suffered hemorrhaging. We’re also hearing maybe there’s been an incident in Ottawa with a young Syrian refugee. So, it’s continuing, and we’ve heard all these.

And so, I want to turn to you about an issue that’s been raised by others, Jad, about the portrayal of the Middle Eastern man in media. I think back to the attack that happened on Yonge Street, the van attack. And before anybody knew who the attacker was, a certain reporter on a certain local channel said it was a wild‑looking Middle Eastern man, but it wasn’t a wild-looking Middle Eastern man who carried out that attack. I asked a reporter at another forum we were in what the consequences were, and they said, “Well, she was suspended for 10 days.” You know, maybe we should be grateful for that suspension of 10 days. And she supposedly is of the faith also, you know.

As a family — I have two young daughters — we’ve developed a sense of humour at the portrayal of Muslims in Hollywood movies. I mean, a lot of it is really ridiculous. But in print media, on TV, we are beginning to see some positive images; there’s been a couple of them. What’s the sense in your community? Is it a sense of humour? Is it a sense of anger? Like, I mean, I see you, and I know we’ve had others sitting before us here. You’re not an angry wild-looking man, which is the perception everyone has.

Mr. El Tal: Yes, for sure. Thank you, senator, for the opportunity to speak on this issue, which impacts me personally, like you just said. So, in a survey that we did last year, we asked our community members, “Do you feel the representation of Arabs in the media is accurate in Canada?” Ninety-five per cent said no. And we know that, obviously, like you said, we maybe try to cope with the trauma through humour, but it does impact us in a large way. Netflix right now just released a show called “Mo,” I think a few weeks ago, and it talks about this Palestinian American and his experience of integrating into the U.S. as a refugee. And for the first time, I felt so much pride, because I saw someone who looked like me, who jokes like the way I do with my mom and my parents and my family. And so, I didn’t really understand personally the importance of representation until I saw someone that actually represents me and who I am.

The first time I ever saw someone that was Muslim on TV or that was, you know, from the Orient or was Arab, was Aladdin, which is a fictional character, and obviously, there’s a lot of stereotypes that go with that. And so, I think it’s a really important concept.

When we specifically talk about the issue of Palestine, if I may just go into that a little bit through this question, I think — not I think — I know our community members, especially in Canada, don’t feel comfortable or even, frankly, safe vocalizing support for Palestinian human rights, especially in the media, because they see what’s happening in the media, and they see how people lose their jobs, lose their housing, lose their dignity in Canada simply because they say that, you know, they support Palestinian human rights.

And so, I would just like to say that also, beyond just our own representation in the media, it’s also about how we’re being talked about in the media, specifically with foreign policy. So, yeah, I just wanted to say that.

The Chair: Thank you. Ms. Patel, you know, a lot of respect for your organization and the work you do. You raised an issue about the CRA audits. I don’t know if you’re aware, but some of us are working on this. We started some time ago. We had private meetings, and of eight charities, six of them were Muslim, and I asked, “Can you tell me why these?” They said, “Oh, we never know which charities are Muslim or non‑Muslim.” My response was, “If you see there’s a certain charity that’s working in majority Muslim countries, doesn’t that give you any idea?” They said, “No, it’s name blind.” So, you know, and I’ve said this in the committee because this issue is being raised, is that we don’t get the answers when we ask the questions, but we continue to ask the questions.

What would you like to tell us? I know we are already thinking about the CRA issue. This is the second time this has come up today, and we heard about it yesterday also when we went on a visit to ISNA, Islamic Society of North America; we went to the mosque. I’m thinking that we have to probably do a special segment about CRA when we’re talking about Islamophobia. I’ve been telling witnesses when they sort of ask me privately that it’s like an onion. We’ve peeled one layer, and there’s another layer, there’s another layer; there are so many issues there, and some of the witnesses this morning brought up other issues that we are looking at.

So, how do we get some of these agencies to at least admit what they’re doing and the burden it’s placing on these charities? Because some of those charities were doing really good work, and they can no longer do that.

Ms. Patel: Thank you for that, and I do know that you’ve been doing a lot of work on this. You’ve spoken out, so thank you. Thank you so much for that.

Again, we ask the questions. We’re still not getting the answers, but it is clear in what we’re seeing, you know, six of the eight charities. You know, a couple of things like calling for an investigation, a special committee to look into it a little bit more, but also, I think just generally more transparency. Like, how were these charities selected? What is the process that the CRA does to select them? How is it that six out of those eight are Muslim? You know, I’m sure there are other NGOs who work in majority Muslim countries as well. We know we’re part of something called the Humanitarian Coalition, and we know we work in a lot of similar countries. So, we would like to see more transparency. How were these selected? And I think if that information is provided in the most detail possible, then you’d be able to kind of see where that discrimination is coming from and why Muslim charities are being selected for these audits.

I guess what happens during the audit as well; we’re not entirely sure. We know the process, but how is that being done? Is it being done fairly across the board? The same way that Muslim charities are being audited, is it also being done with other non-Muslim charities? There’s not a lot of transparency in that so, you know, we do want to see that. And again, more speaking up and asking the right questions, I think that goes a long way, and again, thank you for your work on this file.

The Chair: Thank you. Thank you for being aware of the work we do, because sometimes we senators, we’re sitting in back rooms, and we’re working, working, and nobody knows, which brings me to this study. I mean, if you can get the word out that we’re doing this, because anyone can make a written submission to us. You know, they send it to the Human Rights Committee clerk. We have Sébastien Payet sitting here. So, you know, we will be looking at it.

Mr. Ali, when we’re looking outside, we have to also look inward sometimes, and it pains me when we sometimes talk about the Somali community, we talk about the violence that’s happening within that community. So, what are you doing to tackle that violence that is happening?

Mr. Ali: So, we have done a lot in the past few years, especially during COVID; we were actually able to speak with more youth because it was easier to get them through Zoom than it was in person. So, one of the things that we did was we gathered up youth that maybe were at risk of joining a gang or maybe already in a gang, and we had some seniors from the community meet with them, just maybe to talk about what issues they’re going through and how they could peacefully resolve them instead of using violence.

Another thing that we’re doing is our youth entrepreneurship program, which has been running now for six or seven years. Again, that is about getting adults, mentors and community members teaching youth how to do entrepreneurship, how to have their own businesses. Because some people don’t have the same opportunities that others have, teaching them entrepreneurship, teaching them that if they have their own idea that they can make it work, has been very good for them. With that, they’re able to know that they can have a business, have a career, and have income for their family without resorting to other methods of obtaining funds.

So, it’s going slowly, but it is going. We hope to continue to do this to help youth. That’s why now, as I said, we’re trying to focus more on them because they are the future, and all those clichés. But even for myself, because I have been involved in the community most of my life, a lot of the people that I grew up with, they got into trouble; they went to jail; maybe some of them even died. But the youth now, they’re doing a lot better. They go to school, they graduate, and they’re trying to make lives for themselves here in Canada. But again, as I said, if they feel that they’re forgotten, maybe they will turn more to crime or radicalization. So, that’s why we really stress that it should be that they feel included in society, that they are provided for, and they’re not an outsider.

The Chair: Thank you. So, as we travelled across the country, and I was very keen that we go to Edmonton, because we’ve all heard stories of what the young Black Muslims, those who wear the hijab, have faced in Edmonton. I think Senator Gerba and Senator Oh will agree with me that it was some of the most painful testimony we heard when we had these two representatives from the community sitting in front of us, and the young woman started crying, and we had to say, “It’s okay to show emotion. It’s okay,” because what was happening to her was impacting her life.

Is it similar over here? Because the young women regularly have their hijabs pulled. They face physical violence, you know, verbal abuse, coffee thrown at them. That was the picture that they painted and the fact that they don’t get any help from the police. Is it similar over here?

Mr. Ali: When we were asking them about their experiences, physically, yes, maybe it was things like trying to take off their hijab or things like that. A lot of it, though, is more verbal, you know, just demeaning them, just speaking down. Like I said, we were focusing on cyber hate crime, so it was just constant messages on social media, people they didn’t know. They just see that they had — maybe they thought their name was a Muslim name or what have you, and then they started messaging them.

So, a lot of them said that they had to, you know, have a display picture or a profile picture that was something else, was not they themselves, and they had to use a different name. If they had any name that people could identify, then all the hate messages would flood in.

The Chair: So, you bring up another interesting aspect. My young daughter who as a lawyer had trouble finding employment. She graduated from U of T, which is supposedly one of the best schools. Someone told me, he said, “Ask her to change her name.” So, that’s the thing we face.

And I remember this instance once where I was with another senator, and we were getting ready to board a plane. They said “Zone 1,” and I went, and the woman looked at me and said, “We’re boarding Zone 1 only.” I said, “Yes, ma’am. In one instance, you presumed I don’t understand English. I can’t afford to be in Zone 1.” I actually took it to the next level when Air Canada were appearing before the transport committee, because as a senator, I can go to any committee and ask a question. And I said, “Well, I have a question,” and the chair said, “Sure,” because he thought we were talking about the issue at hand. And I came out with this culture sensitivity training. Do you give your employees that? You know, do they recognize Canada has changed? Do they walk the streets of the major cities and realize who is there? And the CEO was there, and the person just came running to me afterwards, “Here, senator. Here, senator. If you ever have an issue, tell us.” But it’s at every level. It’s at every level, you know, that presumption that you can’t speak English, you don’t understand, just because you have a different name, just because you look different, you know. So, it’s there.

Through this study and as we are raising all these issues, the issue of names has come up again and again, so I thank you. Is there anything else you would like to add?

Ms. Patel: I can just add one point to what Adem is saying. A lot of this verbal abuse that we’re seeing is kind of in and around this area, but also, a lot of systematic Islamophobia within workplaces and institutions is not always verbal abuse; it’s more comments that are made, several comments. At the end of the day, it’s towards women wearing the head scarf or about the way that they lead their lifestyles. That also has a traumatic effect on them, and it stays with them for years and years. Many people don’t realize the effects of some of those comments. Even the women themselves don’t realize it’s Islamophobia. They think it’s okay: because I’m dressed like this, it’s normal for people to say that, but that’s not acceptable either. That is Islamophobia.

Mr. El Tal: Similar to that, we do a lot of research in the Institute — obviously, we’re a think tank — and it’s really difficult to extract a lot of information from the Arab community because of the lack of trust of just general institutions, but also because Arabs don’t want to complain about being here, because being here is much better for them than being back home, right? So, whatever they face — the anti-Arab racism, the Islamophobia — they’ll take, and they won’t even call it “Islamophobia,” because they’re just, like, it’s part of the package. I moved to Canada; I have to experience this.

And so, when we’re doing these studies, it’s like we’re pulling teeth, and we’re trying to extract it from them. Every time I hear about an experience — and sometimes it’s traumatic, you know, hair being pulled, not being treated well at work, et cetera — it always ends with, “But it’s okay. I’m fine. I’m fine.” I’m, like, “Yeah, I know you’re fine. I know that what you’re saying is that it’s okay, but in general, it’s not, and you shouldn’t be experiencing this.”

And so, thank you so much for doing this committee, because I think it’s shedding a light on something that might be behind closed doors still a little bit, even though, of course, there are great partners that are speaking out about this and in the media. However, the general Arab and Muslim community, I find they’re still talking about it behind closed doors, because they don’t see it as something that’s important, but it very much is. So, thank you for the opportunity.

The Chair: So, just before we end, I want to share with you, when I was talking about doing this study, I was at a friend’s, and there were a few other Muslims there, really well-to-do, really well-settled Muslims, and I said, “Oh, I’m doing this study,” and they said, “Oh, don’t rock the boat. You know, we’re lucky to be here,” and I thought, that’s a different attitude than young people take, because I am fortunate enough to have young people in my home. However, for the adults, the feeling is “don’t rock the boat, we’re lucky to be here, they’ve accepted us for what we are and we don’t want anything more,” which I find is not the right attitude.

So, I want to thank all of you for being here. Your testimony makes us think of other aspects of Islamophobia. I tell all the witnesses that we’re even struggling with the word “Islamophobia” — we are doing a study of “Islamophobia” — but “phobia” means when you’re afraid of somebody; it does not speak to the repercussions to the community that they are afraid of, which has led to physical and verbal violence. So, we’re rethinking the name. We’re toying with “anti-Muslim hate,” “anti-Muslim racism.” So, let’s see. By the time we’re done with the study, and we release it, it might have a different name.

You know, everything we heard will be recorded, and it will go into the final report. When the report is done, at the end of the report, we have recommendations to the government, and it will be available to the general public, and we’ll release it with a press conference in Ottawa, but I thank you.

I shall now introduce our second panel of the afternoon. So, witnesses, you have been asked to make an opening statement of five minutes. We shall hear from all witnesses and then turn to the questions from senators. And here, I have to apologize. Two of our senators had to leave, because we wear many hats and we commit to many things, but you have Amina and myself here and, just so you know, it will be shared with all the senators.

So, I want to introduce our panel of witnesses. We have Anver Saloojee, who is the Interim Vice-President of Equity and Community Inclusion, Toronto Metropolitan University. We have Nouman Ashraf, who is an assistant professor at University of Toronto, and from the Islamic Foundation of Toronto, Shaykh Yusuf Badat, who is the Imam and Director of Religious Affairs. The Islamic Foundation is where I go most often. Imam, I’m in there and out the door. Sometimes nobody even knows I’m there, but I come there quite often, and I want to thank you for having such a safe space for Muslims.

So, I will now invite Mr. Saloojee to make his presentation.

Anver Saloojee, Interim Vice-President, Equity and Community Inclusion, Toronto Metropolitan University, as an individual: Thank you so much, senator, and thank you for allowing me to be a part of this really fabulous panel. With my colleague next to me from U of T, we’ve had a nice chat. He actually stole one of my executive directors, so I’m not sure if I should be happy with him or angry with him, but my executive director is well placed. Thank you much for this.

I’m going to take a slightly different track, and I heard some of the comments and questions that were in the last panel, and to me, I think your work is going to be immensely important to cohesion and to inclusion in Canada in the future. So, I’d like to start with that. While I made a submission that is significantly longer than my presentation, I want to focus on two things out of my submission: first, the very notion of Islamophobia itself, and second, a series of recommendations for your consideration.

I know, and I heard earlier, that you have heard a lot about the term “Islamophobia,” which is now widely used, but it is a contentious and very problematic term. I think it has outlived its usefulness, and it obscures more than it actually reveals. While it’s popular, it’s a term that ought to be jettisoned, and I hope you do jettison it, and I hope that members of this committee can come up with a better term to replace it. Words do matter. As someone said earlier in the previous panel, representation matters, but so do words. What is at issue here is the greater definition of clarity, definition of position, and I think this panel, this committee as a whole and your work will allow us to get there.

So, what we are talking about is not “Islamophobia.” It’s actually anti-Muslim hate, anti-Muslim discrimination, and it’s not a “phobia” like an irrational fear of flying or of open spaces, of spiders, or anything else. It’s anti-Muslim hate, it’s anti‑Muslim discrimination. It has deep roots in western notions of the Orient, and this Orientalist narrative is now reproduced in new and complex ways in contemporary society.

In the post-Cold War era, it is a western debate about Islam, the so-called backwardness, or in the Canadian context in 2014/15, it was a debate about so-called barbaric cultural practices. It’s about an Islam that people view as immutable, unchanging. It’s a debate about migration to the west by Muslims, and it’s about the so-called integration of Muslims into western societies.

In the contemporary manifestation of Orientalism, complex intersecting identities of Muslims become and elide into one gigantic monolith of Muslims who have no differentiated identity. At its core, this trope finds expression in Huntington’s The Clash of Civilizations where Islam is seen as a threat to western civilization, and the young Muslim male is stereotyped as a terrorist, and the religious garb-wearing Muslim female is robbed of her agency as a woman.

Islamophobia highlights fears. It focuses on the individual, and it plays on the emotional and the visceral, and in a strict textual reading, it obscures the historical, the structural and the systemic. The term allows policy makers, judges, et cetera, to focus on the emotional state of the perpetrator, as the perpetrator has an irrational fear of the Muslim. The work of this committee comes, I think, at a very unique time, when a policy window has opened to reshape our thinking. First, abandon the term “Islamophobia,” and second, bring definitional clarity to a new term. I recommend that Islamophobia be replaced with “anti‑Muslim racial discrimination,” comprehensively defined, so as to encompass and direct attention and remedial preventative action towards individual and systemic practices, as well as state, state agency and state personnel practices that are motivated by discrimination, by hate, by hate crimes, by racist ideology and by racist speech. And these are actually, as I said before, perpetrated by state, state agencies. I heard you talk about the CRA earlier, but it’s not just the CRA; it’s CSIS, it’s the RCMP, and it’s personnel in the RCMP. As you know, there is a case against the RCMP, a $35 million case, on the basis of individual acts of discrimination against a person who is Muslim.

This replacement will signal the significant, uniquely Canadian, contribution to a global discourse. It speaks directly to a number of really important currents that I’m sure people have already addressed with you: individual, fear-based, irrational prejudice, discrimination and violence, the historical roots and the contemporary manifestations; the perpetuation of stereotypes about Islam as a backward religion, deeply antithetical to the west; the social construction and continued reproduction of stereotypes about Muslim men and women; and the complex interplay between what the state does, what the mass media does and the way in which ordinary, everyday Canadians view Muslims, that is, as a threat to cohesion, threats to stability, threats to the “Canadian way of life,” et cetera.

This approach is perfectly consistent with an intersectional approach that fractures the notion of a homogenous identity that shows that anti-Muslim racial discrimination is gendered, and I’m suggesting as well that it resonates loudly with both the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and in the case of the Province of Ontario, the Ontario Human Rights Code and the anti-racism legislation. Naming anti-Muslim racial discrimination for what it is is the first crucial step in dealing with it and in dealing with and building trust in the Muslim community.

The onslaught of predominantly negative images of Muslims and Islam in the media; the absence of positive portrayals; the representation of Muslims in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the reportage of so-called lone-wolf attacks; the veiled language in proposed legislation on the barbaric cultural practices act; the repeated coded legislation targeting Muslims, in the name of secularism, in Quebec; and security agencies reporting that Canada is under threat from Muslim terrorists, while the reality is that it’s actually the right-wing that threatens our democracy — all have the cumulative effect of heightening completely out of proportion the threat or the so-called threat and the fear of Muslims amongst Canadians. And this is both in the online and the off-line media.

So, it behooves us also to look at how the Canadian state-level discourses on anti-Muslim racial discrimination finds expression in form and content. I, and I am sure others who have appeared before you, have detailed a number of examples of how the state and its agencies and individuals have been complicit in anti-Muslim racial discrimination and the perpetuation of Muslim stereotypes. Often, it is subtle, and on occasion, it’s open and blatant, but in all instances, it has hugely deleterious effects on the Muslim community, their sense of belonging and the relationship of trust between the state and the community. So, I recommend the committee also needs to lift the veil of secrecy so we can better understand the degree to which the state, its agencies, and its employees are complicit in the reproduction of these images.

My policy recommendations are as follows.

First, replace “Islamophobia” with “anti-Muslim racial discrimination and hate.”

Second, provide a comprehensive definition of anti-Muslim racial discrimination, along the lines suggested.

Third, establish an enhanced monitoring analysis and reporting of systemic state practices of anti-Muslim racism and racial profiling by state security agents and the sectors of policing, national intelligence and border service agencies.

Fourth, uphold international and domestic human rights law and retract arbitrary and discretionary statutes and policies curtailing and suspending the rule of law in the name of anti‑terrorism and state security.

Fifth, review anti-terrorism and anti-hate efforts by the state with an equity lens to determine if there is racial bias and profiling.

Sixth, standardize hate crime and hate incident reporting standards and definitions across all jurisdictions.

Seventh, increase funding for securing sites of Islamic worship and assembly.

Last, integrate anti-racist, specifically anti-Muslim, racism and decolonial education into K-12 and post-secondary curriculum and teacher training core requirements.

So, let us be guided by our commitment to creating a better, more inclusive Canada for all who live in it, including Muslim Canadians. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much for that, and the recommendations you made, maybe if you could share the list with us? I know Brendan is keeping notes, but one of our analysts took ill, so if you can share that list, too, it would help.

Mr. Saloojee: Yes, I have sent an emailed copy of the presentation, the longer version, including data.

The Chair: Thank you. Mr. Ashraf, I turn to you now.

Nouman Ashraf, Assistant Professor, University of Toronto, as an individual: Thank you, senators, colleagues and friends. I want to begin by thanking you for this invitation. I’ll begin in the way that I know best. I come to you from the traditional lands of the Huron-Wendat, the Seneca, and most recently, the Mississaugas of the Credit. And colleagues and friends, I don’t simply say this because this is one of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but for a more fundamental reason than that, and that’s this: For me, public institutions of education like the University of Toronto, like the TMU, Toronto Metropolitan University, and others, only exist for two reasons. Reason number one is knowledge creation, and reason number two is knowledge mobilization. And I don’t think we can do our work meaningfully unless we recognize in all our systems and the ones who have come before us, the knowledge systems of the ones on whose land we work, and the knowledge systems of the ones who are actually dealing with systemic erasure through phenomena like residential schooling, the Sixties Scoop, and what continues to be the saga of murdered and missing Indigenous women.

On that note, I want to begin by quoting Tanya Talaga, who is a knowledge keeper, a journalist and author. In her book, All Our Relations, she reminds us that in Ojibwe and Cree culture, leadership did not mean power; it meant caring. This committee is evidence of us caring for all of our citizens and all of our nations and nationalities that call Canada home, irrespective of background or history. To me, as somebody who is a leadership scholar, I want to just suggest that the work of erasing anti‑Muslim racial discrimination and hate, as my colleague has correctly referred to it, is the work of claiming Canada’s place in the family of nations, and we have a precedent, and the precedent is this: We’re the first nation in the family of nations to actually have an official policy on multiculturalism. The 1971 multiculturalism policy states unequivocally that this shall be a policy for all Canadians, and that begins an understanding, a nation-to-nation understanding, that every Canadian is of one pedigree, not old stock, not second class, and I think that Muslims in particular have a claim to that equal citizenship.

Now, what’s unique about the Muslim experience is, in one word, intersectionality. As I think about the demographics of Muslims, I think about the overlap between gender, race, immigration status, socio-economic status, educational background, family patterns and so on and so forth. And why that matters is that there are four particular pieces that I’m going to layer on top of Professor Saloojee’s amazing recommendations. The first is we actually have to acknowledge that we cannot understand the Muslim identity unless we take an intersectional lens. The experience of an Albanian, third‑generation, White-passing male is not the same as someone who comes to Canada — into Toronto or any city — from the perspective of being a refugee from Somalia or Somaliland, who speaks a different language, who is visibly Black — and race enters the room before anything else — and who chooses to wear the hijab; she is castigated, seen as a different person, othered. The intersectional lens is really, really, really important.

Secondly, I think we have to actually talk about and do something about identifying the source of the bias that go undetected across the Muslim experience. I mean at the point of birth. So, when you think about the rituals that are involved in birthing a Muslim child, when you’re mocked for your name — and thank you, senator, for sharing your own family’s experience of the encouragement for résumé whitening, for really having access to job opportunities — the thinking happens at the point of birth, and then thinking through in K to 12 education. I am heartened by my colleague’s — I should say my mentor’s — recommendation about integrating through an anti-colonial, anti‑racist lens, addressing the biased depictions in our curriculum and pedagogy of how Muslims are depicted and educated. So, identifying the sources of bias that are going undetected through our educational system, our employment system and our government services is important.

Thirdly, we have to talk about systems. We have to talk about systems that are actively getting in the way of delivering on the promise of a unique and gratifying experience to Muslims. These are systems of employment, these are systems of education, these are systems of specific community engagement, they’re systems of incarceration and they’re systems of other forms of disablement of opportunity; this is where I think we have a challenge.

Lastly, we have to establish, through mechanisms like this one, feedback loops where communities can speak about their points of pain and demand follow-up action. Frederick Douglass once said, “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”

In closing, I think we have to reframe the work of this committee and the work that we have as Canadians to not simply look at the cost of Islamophobia or anti-Muslim bias and hatred in the form of racial discrimination; we have to actually ask, what is the return that we as Canadians can expect if we take a leadership role in ensuring that Muslims are not second-class citizens, but are equal in front of each other but under the law?

So what do I think needs to be done? We need to actually have a cohesive, comprehensive and state-funded curriculum on cultural fluency. I do not like the term “sensitivity.” It’s not about being more sensitive to Muslims. It’s not about even competence, because the opposite of competence is derogatory, incompetence. Sounds very colonial to me. Here we are, at the “summit of competence.” All of you down there are very incompetent. I reject that out of hand. The term that I prefer is “cultural fluency,” which begins with understanding that culture is both powerful and largely invisible to most people. Where the culture is largely invisible and deeply powerful, we have to go to an understanding that others experience culture differently. I want to say this unequivocally for the record of this committee: there is just as much difference within the Muslim community as across non-Muslim communities, and that’s the definition of an intersectional lens. We have to develop a skill to not just navigate, but to include and to embrace the entirety that is the Muslim body politic here in Canada.

Lastly, the result of that practice is what I refer to as “cultural fluency,” because cultural fluency picks up on the metaphor of language. I used to teach that language begins with the acquisition of vocabulary, until I was teaching a bunch of linguists. They said, “Professor, language does not begin with the picking up of, the acquisition of, vocabulary; language begins with” — wait for it — “attachment.” If we want Canadian Muslims or Muslims in Canada to have an attachment to Canada, we have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that Canada has an attachment to them. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much, Professor Ashraf. And now I turn to you, Imam Badat.

Shaykh Yusuf Badat, Imam, Islamic Foundation of Toronto: I begin by praising the Almighty and I convey the best of salutations to all the prophets, including Moses, Jesus and Muhammad. Peace and blessings upon each and every one of them.

I’m very grateful to this committee and Senator Salma for giving me this opportunity. Just sitting here and listening to the previous panel and what you have said, it depicts that you have considerable, not only knowledge but also experience in the matter of Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hate. I applaud your efforts and your great work, and I hope, and I can only be confident, that the result of all of this would be that we have a more inclusive Canada, we have a more peaceful Canada and we have one that is a role model for the entire world. As we say, inshallah, God willing.

I don’t want to make lengthy comments, but I do want to say that Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hate is real, and it does take place right from the point of time where children — as an imam firstly, I am connected with the community. In my mosque, I have approximately, every Friday, between 3,000 to 4,000 people attending for the congregational prayer. So, there are youth that come to me; there are adults that come to me; there are professionals that come to me, and on the note of anti‑Muslim hate, I’ve heard real-life stories of my own community and my own congregation facing difficulties, whether it is being bullied at school for being Muslim, or, as we’ve heard through the various panels, even acquiring a job, or getting a place to live or even filling up gas at a local gas station. So, it’s definitely something that exists. It cannot be denied. The facts are there. The stories, I’m sure the senators have heard.

What do we need to do? We need to be accountable for the recommendations that were made previously, and I don’t have any new recommendations. I refer to the National Summit on Islamophobia that took place last year around the same time, I believe it was July, and these recommendations were signed by more than 130 organizations across Canada: legal organizations, Muslim organizations and bodies and entities that are doing work on the ground and have research and facts primarily prepared by a student-at-law, I believe also a student of our professor here, Azeezah Kanji.

So, again, there are no new recommendations. We need to take account of ourselves as a government. What are we doing with all of these committees that are being put together to hear from the community and these recommendations that have been presented? What’s the accountability? What have we done, and how have we actually addressed and taken concrete action to eliminate all kinds of anti-Muslim hate and bring about a better inclusive Canada and a peaceful Canada? Those are my remarks. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much, and I’ll turn to Senator Gerba for questions, and then I will take my turn.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: I will begin by thanking our witnesses for being here today.

Your remarks, testimony, and recommendations are truly appreciated. I will start by addressing Mr. Ashraf. I very much appreciated your historical review of Canada’s history, the history of Canada’s multiculturalism. I enjoyed it very much. I especially appreciated the fact that you made the connection to the Canadian First Nations.

Why do I say that? I’ll take a personal example; it’s an anecdote that happened in a shop when I was with my husband. There was a person serving us who said to my husband: “You speak French very well; did you study in France? When did you come here?” My husband looked at her and then said, “Yes, I speak French and I come from Cameroon.” In fact, she asked where he was born. He said he was born in Cameroon. So he said, “I was born in Cameroon. And what are your origins?”

And he added, “Because as far as I know, it’s only the indigenous people, the First Nations people, who are originally from here in Canada.”

So it all depends on when we came; it’s the date that makes the difference between immigrants, because Canada is a country of immigration.

That said, being a country of immigration means that we have to accept differences. We have to accept all the differences. That’s why it’s very surprising to see figures that show us that Canada is the G7 country with the most murders or attacks on people who have died as a result of hate crimes attributable to Islamophobia.

I know you’ve provided a lot of recommendations, particularly in terms of organizations and the system, but if you had one particular recommendation for the federal government, what would it be?

As a senator — I’m a very young senator, I’m not young in age, but I’ve only been a senator for a year — what I like about this job is that we can have an influence. We can ask questions, we can do studies like the one we are doing right now. These studies don’t always stay on the shelf, as they say. There are often results from these studies, either the government will act — we don’t promise anything — or there may also be bills.

So, as a result of your testimony today — this is for all of you — what could you recommend, concretely, that we as senators, as legislators, can do to stop this rise in hatred towards Muslims?

[English]

Mr. Ashraf: Thank you, Senator Gerba. First of all, I want to say to you that age and wisdom have no correlation, in my books. So, I commend you for the wisdom of your comments and am grateful for your acknowledgement.

Let me give you just one definition in my response to your question. When I think about diversity, diversity, to me, is the entire range of different human experience. Inclusion, to me, is our ability to leverage the entire range of human difference and experience. Equity is when you leverage the entire range of human difference and experience with justice, and belonging is a result when, with justice, we can leverage the entire range of human difference and experience. Okay. To me the fundamental definition of an inclusive, equitable and just society is where every story matters. My recommendation is to amplify the stories of Muslims from coast-to-coast-to-coast, to weave that into the tapestry that is Canada. We are a nation of many nations, and Muslims have, for too long, been relegated to the background.

I am not making any accusations of conspiracy, but I am making a forthright accusation of ignorance. We need to end that ignorance and amplify the experiences of Canadians: the contributions of Canadians but also the sense of loss and disenfranchisement of Canadians that needs to stop today.

Mr. Badat: My particular response to this question is that humans, people, are the ones that bring about the anti-Muslim hate. It doesn’t matter whether we’re in the media, or in the government or a common citizen of the country, if our leadership, our government, can vocalize and let this information be known that no matter where you are or what you are doing as a Canadian, you need to treat everybody with the same lens that you look at yourself. The same justice I strive for, for myself, I need to also portray that justice for every other citizen or every other Canadian, regardless of their background, regardless of their skin colour, their language or their religion, et cetera. So, whether it’s a CRA audit, or whether it’s a bill, it’s humans. It’s people that are bringing about the results of, or the negativity of, anti-Muslim hate. So, if every person in their own space, whether leadership or otherwise, realizes this and acts in accordance with this principle, then, hopefully, we will see a better circumstance and situation on this topic.

Mr. Saloojee: So, thank you, senator, for your question. It’s really an interesting one. I made eight recommendations, the first of which was let’s abandon the use of the term Islamophobia, but I wouldn’t be an educationalist if I didn’t say, for me, the primary recommendation that you would make to the government — federal, provincial, municipal jurisdictions notwithstanding — has to be in the sphere of education. We have to look at future generations, current generations.

So, developing a curriculum that furthers an inclusive Canada, one that speaks directly to the positive impact that Muslim Canadians have in our country, the history of anti-Muslim hate. Building that curriculum from K through 12, and then putting it into our university system, I think will go a long way towards creating a more harmonious, hopefully more inclusive, Canada and give both non-Muslims and Muslims comfort in the view that a Canada that welcomes Muslims and welcomes the contributions of Canadian Muslims is one that will stand the test of time and will actually be an exemplar for other nations in the world. So, my focus would be on education, otherwise I wouldn’t be in my profession.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: Knowing that education is a provincial jurisdiction, and that today, in provinces such as Quebec, which is my province, they are more in favour of secularism, we have heard a lot of witnesses who come back to education; I am a big believer in it. I believe in communication, awareness and education, of course.

However, where do we start with this curriculum, knowing that we live in a country that advocates secularism in general and we ourselves, as Muslims, refuse to be taught the Catholic religion or other religions like the Protestant religion, the Bible and all?

Do you think this is possible, pragmatically?

[English]

Mr. Saloojee: Thank you for that question. You know, at one level you’re right. We do live in a secular society. At another level, our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms actually begins with a line that talks about the rule of law and God, right? And we built into the Charter a protection for Christianity in education. So, while we claim to be a secular society, there are elements that are not necessarily secular, and that goes back to the historic roots of the way in which Canada has been colonized by the two founding nations. So, primacy is given to some religions and not to others. So, if we want to be a completely secular society, then let’s be a completely secular society, and if we’re not, then let’s not claim the façade of that.

So, yes, it’s a complex question. I think at another level, the answer is — You know what? The federal government gives funding envelopes to the provinces. How about starting with conditionalities? How about working with the ministers of education across all provinces and school boards and districts? The federal government, certainly in my domain, which is post‑secondary education, the federal government has no jurisdiction with respect to that, but it found ways of intervening, and my colleague will know and speak more eloquently than I to this. The federal government found a way through the Canada Excellence Research Chairs, for example, to motivate post‑secondary education to actually embark on a more ambitious program of research.

So, there’s ways in which the federal government can use its fiscal levers, its power of persuasion and its various summits, to get ministers of education and school boards together to begin to affect the curriculum. It starts in K to 12, and it has to be multi‑pronged, simultaneously with colleges and universities in all our provinces. So, I don’t think it’s a difficult task. Listen, we did it with the anti-smoking campaign. Look at where we are today.

Mr. Ashraf: I’d like to add something to what Professor Saloojee said. I fundamentally believe organizational behaviours align two things, and he’s mentioned both of them. One is motivation and the other is incentives, right? So, if our motivation as a government is to create a sense of a common nationhood, then we actually have to create incentives for people to align. The example I want to give, actually, is bilingualism. I want to suggest that one of the most effective programs in Canadian history has been one where you have scholarships for young Canadians, new Canadians, to go and live in community en famille sometimes, with families, where they actually experience what French culture looks like in Quebec, in New Brunswick and parts of Ontario. And what that does is that it creates opportunities for cultural immersion. Maybe the motivation of that person was just to be able to put on their résumé that they are bilingual, but the incentive that was created was for them to not just be bilingual but to be bicultural. That, to me, is very important. Culture actually only permeates out of experience when we can experience it.

I want to suggest to you, by the way, that I’m not here to say we need to empathize with the idea of Muslims being equal to Canadian citizens. I’m suggesting we need to actually create the capacity for others to empathize with the experience of actually being with Muslims as equal and as Canadian.

Senator Gerba: Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you. So, while I have two educators here, the one thing that we have heard consistently as we have travelled B.C., Alberta and Quebec is that educators need to be educated. And yesterday, we heard — you know, where I sit, people come and we’ve had people who sort of really impress you — and we had these two young women Muslim teachers. I went to them before, and I said, “Listen, you are here to testify. I want you to be brutally honest. That’s why we’re doing this study,” and they were; they were. And the one told me afterwards, “Oh, I got emotional.” She said, “Maybe I was too brutally honest.” I said, “No, that’s what we need to hear, because if we are not honest about the issue of what the problem is, we can’t look for solutions.”

So, they talked of facing racism from other staff. So, you raised the issue of the federal government. Of course, the federal government has the power to tell provinces what they can do. We see the Prime Minister meets regularly with the premiers. We did have a witness who suggested that maybe what the federal ministers should be doing is meeting with the provincial education ministers. He was suggesting every month — which I know is not possible; I’d be happy with even once a year — just to go over what they’re teaching in the curriculum. Yesterday we were at a school, so we’re trying to cover as many aspects as we can of the study for me to feel we’ve done justice, justice to the study. I want this to be my legacy, please. Years later, I want people to say, Senator Ataullajhan looked at this.

So, we went to a school where we spoke to, I think it was, about 25 young Muslim students. What they had done is they divided them into groups to write — they had this big sheet of paper — what incident of Islamophobia they had experienced, what should be done and whether they feel included. And it was interesting because there was a long list, and as each group would move, they would add things. Most of them felt they had experienced Islamophobia. The young girls who had their heads covered felt it on a daily basis. So, something in our system is failing these young Canadians. I also heard from the young Canadians afterwards; there were some who came and gave me a hug.

I went in shalwar kameez yesterday, and it was a conversation I had. We were going to the mosque, and I asked whether I should be going in shalwar kameez. And Imam, forgive me; I said that if I walked into that mosque in shalwar kameez, they’ll look at me as another Muslim, subdued woman who is submissive, who will not have anything to say. They would judge me.

So, while we complain that we’re judged, we also do judging ourselves. I spoke to my oldest daughter who just started teaching at Western. I just called her, and I said, “Anushka, I’m thinking of going in pants and just taking a scarf.” She said, “No, mother.” She said, “You need to show that you can be dressed like you, and yet, you walk in the corridors of power.” And at some level, that made sense to me.

So, yesterday, I had students walk up to me and say, if we had known that you were coming in shalwar kameez, I would have worn shalwar kameez. And you know when you have one student come and say that to you, you say, “I have made a difference in this person’s life.”

So, we talk about positive role models, but then my one complaint — and I was very open with the mosque yesterday; some might be happy, some might be unhappy — is that you must recognize your champions within the community. We don’t recognize our champions. And you know, my life is no different, and Senator Gerba’s life is no different. We face what other people face too.

But how do we educate the educators? I go back again, mindful the staff hates me for talking about it, to my youngest in grade 5, Remembrance Day; they’re cutting crosses and poppies, and she’s cutting a poppy, and this boy turns to her and says, “Why are you cutting a poppy? You want to kill us. You’re Taliban.” She turned to him and said, “Shut up.” Well, he didn’t get into trouble for calling my daughter Taliban, but she got into trouble for telling him to shut up. Well, I’m not one of those mothers who sits down. I was in school the next day and I went to her, and I said, “Canada has no official religion. You have our children cutting crosses, and I’m okay with that. I’m not complaining. You are giving Bibles to children, which is fine also, but when my child is called a name and you, instead of supporting her penalize her for reacting to it. You mend your ways.” I went to the principal and said, “I’m going to the school board. I’m taking this all the way.” You know, because the same teacher had been talking about how the Muslim men wear towels over their heads. So, that was many years ago, but I find with some of the teachers, we’re still having that issue.

Where do we go? I’m asking you, because you’re both educators.

Mr. Saloojee: Well, you know, you’ve touched on a number of really critical things, senator, and I think it starts with, as I said, with education. There are two things I would say. Number one, we hold principals accountable for creating an inclusive environment in their schools. This means, therefore, that we’re dealing with principals, vice-principals and teachers. We’re also dealing with the supervisors, and we’re dealing with the school boards. So, an official policy that comes out is really critical.

And secondly, and in tandem, and not separate from, we also begin with a curriculum in teacher training schools — whether it’s at the University of Toronto, whether it’s at Queen’s, whether it’s at any of the other universities where our teachers have been trained — that there be a specific section of the curriculum that deals with anti-hate, anti-discrimination, and in particular, forms of discrimination against Muslims within the broader context of colonization and adherence to the Ontario human rights legislation, the federal legislation, the Ontario legislation on anti-racism and so on, and we hold these principals and vice-principals accountable for creating that environment. It is, as my colleague said, a series of carrots and sticks. If you’re creating a wonderful environment, you get the carrots; if you’re not, then the school board has to hold you accountable, and that’s the form of sticks.

So, I think, you know, it’s a comprehensive approach, but if, as an educator, I’m true to values and principles that I adhere to and espouse and practise, then the importance and significance of education can never be underestimated. So, we start in the schools, and at the same time, we start in those areas and arenas where the teachers are being trained.

Mr. Ashraf: I’m going to hold my comments and speak to the teacher who gets 4,000 students coming in unenrolled. I have to get people to sign up for my courses. I’ll go after Imam Badat, please.

Mr. Badat: Yes, I am in agreement with Professor Nouman. It’s all about cultural proficiency training, and the more we are educated about the “other,” the more we will appreciate the “other.” I teach interfaith courses, and I take my students to churches. I take my students to synagogues. I take my students to Buddhist temples. They have a better sense of appreciation of other cultures and other religions, and that makes them treat the “other” in a better sense.

So, I think, if educators or teachers or people in the education field who train the younger generations, the future of Canada, are not acquainted with these aspects, then it’s difficult, because students learn from their teachers. Imagine that teacher who you gave the example of, Senator Salma, in front of 30 students. If that happened, they’re learning something. It’s not only the words or the textbook, it’s how the teacher is operating in the classroom, and that sends a loud message, right? If she can do it or he can do it, I can also do it, and they build that confidence.

Earlier, in the previous panel, I heard about whether something triggers the extremism. So many times when these young ones feel excluded or treated in this manner, they say that others are not protecting them, the country is not protecting them, so now we’ve got to protect ourselves. We’ve got to fend for ourselves. So, it’s very important to echo the sentiments that we have to train the trainer. We have to train the educator with cultural fluency.

Mr. Ashraf: So, allow me to say that there are three levers that we haven’t touched upon that are uniquely Canadian. Number one, we have the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. We have this gem — I’m not referring to their app, which is called “Gem” — which I think has a really important role. To me, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation has the ability not only to contribute to the economic prosperity, but also the cultural prosperity of our regions, of our provinces, of our territories and of us globally. So, we need to think about the role of using the CBC as a motivator for educating educators, including programming that they can access.

Number two, Canada has a very strong labour movement. Unions need to be brought into this work because our education system across provinces and territories is highly unionized. Unions need to set expectations in collective bargaining agreements about how challenging anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination needs to be called out and practised in pedagogy — i.e., how we teach — and in curriculum — what we teach. I also want to say one more thing. We know this, through StatsCan data, that Muslims are high attainers when it comes to education. So, when they’re written out of the script in education, it hits them the hardest.

Number three, Canada has a higher proportion of Canadians employed in the not-for-profit sector than any other nation in the world, other than Denmark, per capita. So, we need to think about civic society and agencies and organizations that have a role to play: the gurdwaras, the mandirs, the schuls, the mosques and the Zoroastrian temples in being part of that. Yes, I agree that we live in a secular society. It should not be an anti‑religious, anti-cultural society.

Mr. Saloojee: Senator, I wonder if I could ask senators a question. What role does Senate see itself playing in the official domain the Senate operates in, which is in our Parliament? In 2015, the federal government — fortunately, an election was called and never happened — was proposing the legislation on what they called so-called barbaric cultural practices, which was a veiled reference, of course, to really significantly anti-Muslim state action, and had it passed, it would have been a blight on Canada. What role do you see the Senate playing as a watchdog on the state, agencies of the state — whether it’s the CRA, whether it’s CSIS, whether it’s other agencies of the state — and employees of the state that engage in these blatant or veiled practices of anti-Muslim hate, discrimination and bias?

The Chair: So, I’ll have to just wait a bit while the clerk checks what the rules regarding senators being asked questions at committee. We don’t want to be opening this floodgate where we have witnesses, and they come and ask us questions, but I can privately —-

Mr. Saloojee: Fair enough.

The Chair: — be very happy to answer your question. It’s a very old institution. We have certain rules, and the minute we decide to let a certain question go by, then it just becomes, “Well, so-and-so did this in this committee, so we’re going to do it,” and we might kind of lose control.

Sébastien Payet, Clerk of the Committee, Senate of Canada: Yes, you will be able to ask a question if it’s not the point of the meeting. So, you can have an exchange with the senator and ask a question. Yes.

Mr. Saloojee: Thank you. I appreciate that.

The Chair: Thank you. So, I have a question, Imam. I’ve just been told I have 10 minutes. I have an interview in 15 minutes, and we’re heading off to the mosque.

Do you think we place too much burden on Muslims? We’re constantly being asked to explain ourselves. I’m always told by colleagues, “Well, this has happened. We hope you will condemn it,” and my response is, “Which other religion condemns acts committed by crazies?” So, is there too much burden placed on Muslims?

Mr. Badat: Yes. There’s a lot of expectations upon Muslims, especially when an act of terrorism takes place. As you rightfully said, we’re expected to condemn it, and many times, prematurely, as you said in the previous panel, allegations are made before the facts are actually out in the public, and it just intensifies the whole anti-Islam situation. We are being accused just because we are Muslims. If we don’t condemn or if we don’t take out a statement, if we don’t release something, then we’re going to be seen as supporting it; whereas, as we know, any violent act or any criminal activity perpetrated by any other citizen or any other Canadian, it’s not looked upon in the same fashion or in the same way as when, presumably, a Muslim has committed that same offence. So, it is a burden that’s expected from the Muslim.

The Chair: Thank you. Professor Ashraf, I have a question for you, and then we’ll have Senator Gerba on second round. So, I want you to please elaborate on the difference between cultural diversity and cultural fluency. How might embracing cultural fluency help combat anti-Muslim discrimination?

Mr. Ashraf: So, to me, fluency takes on the metaphor of language, and the most fundamental piece about that is practice. I think leadership is practice. So, when we don’t use a language, we risk losing it, right? And this is why we have in our nation, rightfully, an insistence on bilingualism, because we will see cultural erasure, and by eroding that importance, we erode the whole phenomenon.

Not only is it true that we risk losing the language, there’s something else that happens with cultural fluency. Cultural fluency also allows us to make this practical. I am tired of proclamations. What I’m looking for is substantive action from the truck driver who deals with people on the roads and truck stops all over Canada to the Canada Research Chair who studies the link between immigration and economic policy at the nation’s finest institutions. Cultural fluency is about practice.

To me, what I’m advocating for is the difference between what I call diversity by default — i.e., we have diversity in Canada — into inclusion by design. We have to design for inclusion in a way that people have the tools to be able to leverage it. And I want to say one more thing. You asked a question whether there is an extra burden placed on Muslims. Not only is it placed in respect of imams and academics, to my right and to my left, it’s placed on those who have not even picked up the language to be able to defend themselves, like the grade 5 person that you described, who is being accused, by the way —

The Chair: My daughter.

Mr. Ashraf: Your daughter. For her to shut down hatred, she is called into school and called a troublemaker. Let me tell you what I worry about: I worry about the dimming of lights early on of our Muslim learners.

I’m going to share with you a personal anecdote, and I’m stepping out of my professor role into the most important role that I have, and that is of parent. I have a son. His name is Saad. I’m glad to share. You know Saad. He’s a graduate of the school. One Friday afternoon, I come home. It’s only about 4:30, and we have our family meal on Fridays, and Saad’s not downstairs. I said, “Well, where is he?” “He’s up in his room.” I go and find him face down in his bed. It’s 4:30 in the afternoon. I asked him, “What happened?” He said, “I don’t want to talk about it.” Later on, he says him and four of his closest friends, after Friday prayer, were going to get a shawarma in Scarborough, and they got kettled by three police cars, because they had backpacks. The police, in particular — guess what? — chose the one Black Muslim friend that was with them and say, “What are you doing here? Where are you going?” He stopped speaking because he was shocked. My son Saad says, “We were going to get shawarma.” He goes, “Shut up, kid. I’m not talking to you; I’m talking to him.” They made all of them empty out everything in their backpacks and lay on the grass in full public view. I have never seen my son so broken, so defeated, as I did that day at 4:30 on a Friday afternoon.

But wait. You see, when I talk about an anti-racist, when I talk about someone who fights anti-Black racism daily, I hadn’t imagined myself. I imagined an activist. That experience brought to me that racism, intersectional racism, anti-Muslim racial discrimination and hate crosses all socio-economic and educational privileges and boundaries. It’s true. I thought somehow living in Don Mills, Ontario, being highly educated and being socio-economically protected, my son wouldn’t have to face that. That’s not true.

The point I’m trying to make is that I worry about those whose spirit is broken early on, where they no longer see themselves as being worthy of the promise that is Canada.

The Chair: Thank you for sharing that very powerful story, and you know that makes the difference. The reason I keep sharing personal stories is because you’re real, I’m real, we’re sitting across from each other. When we share these stories, these stories are real. So, thank you. I know it’s not easy to talk about these things.

Mr. Ashraf: You’re welcome, senator. I thank you both and the ones who are not here for doing real work, real leadership work. As Brené Brown once said, “Maybe stories are just data with a soul.”

The Chair: Thank you. I always say that when I hear from my own community about the work I do and they appreciate it, it holds so much meaning. It’s like your parents saying, “We’re proud. We’re proud of what you’re doing,” so it means a lot to me, and I know it means a lot to Amina.

Imam, I have one request of you, please. Speak about the study. Let people know this is going on. I want the average Muslim to know that there is a place for them where they can write to. I return every single call, you know, that comes to my office.

Just to let you know, before this, we did a study on the prisons, and when I went, I made sure I spoke to the Muslim prisoners. I remember in Alberta, there were some who were so excited: “He wants to meet you. He wants to meet you. He’s Muslim.” Then they took us to some Muslims. I’m going off, but I can’t resist this opportunity to tell you a story. There were some in solitary confinement, individuals being watched constantly, and they said, “There’s this man, and he just stands in the corner, and it’s a tiny, tiny room. He just stands in the corner, just looking at that corner, and he does not respond to anything we say to him.” And they took his name, and I knew he was Muslim. So, I walked up to the window, and I said, “Salaam alaikum, brother,” and he said, “Wa alaikum salaam,” and then all of a sudden, he realized he had responded to me. He said that, and it was a moment where we connected. So, the importance of — you know, for me, my religion, it connects me to so many people in so many situations. The guards were surprised also because he responded. He responded automatically, and then he realized he was responding, and he kept quiet. So, anyway, these are the stories, so many stories to be told.

So, senator, I will turn to you for the last word.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: Actually, I just wanted to come back and make a comment on the importance of the interfaith teaching that you are doing, Imam Badat, because I come from a country that has a lot of religions; the Catholic religion is the majority religion. The Protestant religion follows and 20% or 25% of the population is Muslim, and we often do this kind of education. There are masses when there are big events, there are really masses —

[English]

It is multi-faith dialogue. It made a difference for me because I was born Muslim.

[Translation]

Then I went to the Protestant churches where I learned to read the Bible. Then I went to the Catholics where I found that, unlike the Protestants, communion was given every Sunday and people received communion.

So it allowed me to understand all these religions and to come back to my original religion, which is Islam, and it allowed me to come back to that religion with a much more human knowledge of all the other religions.

This is something, Madam Chair, that I wanted to mention, because it is part of a multicultural education that could be repeated throughout the country if we really want to maintain the image of this country that welcomes us, that welcomes everyone and that advocates multiculturalism.

I didn’t know this existed in Canada; I’m really impressed that it exists and it’s an avenue that can be explored by other Muslim communities.

[English]

The Chair: Thank you, senator. Does anybody want to respond to that? Did you want anyone to respond, or it was just a comment? Just a comment. Thank you.

Mr. Badat: I just wanted to say one thing. The grade 11 curriculum in Ontario has a world religions course. So, we have a lot of grade 11 students from even the public schools coming and visiting the mosque. I do a presentation to them about Islam, et cetera. Our grade 11 students go to various religious institutions to experience and learn from the leaders in those places of worship. So, it is part of the curriculum in Ontario.

[Translation]

Senator Gerba: That’s interesting to know. I wouldn’t want it to come from my words, but maybe you could recommend that? I wouldn’t want it to come from me.

[English]

The Chair: I just want to acknowledge that I have been to the high school. I was invited to talk to the students and, you know, again, thank you for playing your role and for them to see that there are role models in Muslims.

Mr. Ashraf: As the leadership, I just want to acknowledge all of the translators and staff that are here that are making this possible. I just want to thank you. I just want to say to you that your work takes our ideas and puts them into action. I just want to acknowledge each of you: the translators, the audio-visual people, the members of the clerk’s office and all of the ones that are sitting out there waiting for us to come. I just want to thank all of you. It just warms my heart to see such leadership in action. Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you, and that’s what keeps us going. I keep telling Sébastien and the analysts and everyone that we are what we are because of the work that you do, so without you, we would not be able to do anything. And it has been quite a journey for us. We get together on the bus, and we go to the mosque, and we sit and eat. You know, in our culture, eating together is a big part of bringing communities together. As we have travelled through Canada, I have been so happy to see my community welcome us into their mosques and feed us, in Edmonton, in B.C., in Quebec and here in Toronto. It’s been great, and I think it’s been a great learning experience for most of our staff too, so I want to thank you for that.

I want to thank you. I mean, we could probably talk for another hour, but there are time constraints. So, what’s happening with the study is we’ll go back to Ottawa, and we’ll continue our hearings. I cancelled the meeting for next Monday because we’re all really, really tired, and also, what we hear, we keep with us. We hold on to it, and it’s not easy. So, we’ll be meeting the following Monday, and we meet Monday between 5:00 and 7:00, and all our committees are broadcast live.

So, I want to thank you and let you know that once the report is out, we’ll make sure that you know. I might even send some of you an invitation to come to the press conference we hold. We can do that, right, Sébastien? You know, to come and see and be in the press room. Oh, he’s just reminding me we’re supposed to sit from 4:00 to 6:00. So, thank you for that, Sébastien. See how important the staff are?

So, I want to thank each and every one of you, and if you feel you’ve missed something, you can always make a written submission to us. You know, I’ll give you my card. Please call. And, you know, this will help us a long way when we formulate the formal report, which will end with recommendations to the government. I thank you and senators, the meeting is adjourned.

(The committee adjourned.)