Preserving Targeted Approaches to Combatting Hatred in Canada
As Canadian Muslims recently commemorated the anniversary of the tragic 2017 Quebec City mosque attack, where six men were murdered while praying in the deadliest assault on a house of worship in Canadian history, a critical message emerged from gatherings in Quebec City and Montreal. Remembrance must be accompanied by unwavering resolve. This sentiment arrives at a pivotal moment as the federal government contemplates significant structural changes to how Canada addresses religious and cultural hatred.
Questioning the Proposed Consolidation
The Canadian Identity and Culture Minister, Marc Miller, is facing calls to reconsider a decision to dissolve two crucial offices: the Office of the Special Representative on Combatting Islamophobia and the Office of the Special Envoy on Preserving Holocaust Remembrance and Combatting Antisemitism. The government's plan involves folding both entities into a broader advisory council, ostensibly to promote national unity. However, this administrative shift, reportedly made without substantial consultation with affected communities, risks achieving the opposite effect by diluting specialized focus and accountability.
Drawing from experience as the former CEO of the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, I have witnessed firsthand that consultation matters profoundly. Institutional clarity is paramount. Without genuine partnership with communities in policy implementation, even the most well-intentioned initiatives can falter. Human rights policy cannot operate in abstract terms; it must be grounded in specific, actionable mandates.
Distinct Histories Require Distinct Responses
Islamophobia and antisemitism are not interchangeable manifestations of generic hatred. Each possesses unique historical contexts, ideological foundations, and contemporary expressions. They manifest differently within educational settings, across social media platforms, in political discourse, and, at their most extreme, through violent acts. Effective countermeasures demand sustained expertise, clearly defined responsibilities, and tangible accountability mechanisms.
This principle was reinforced during a visit to the Museum of Tolerance in San Francisco, where participation in a commemoration ceremony highlighted a sobering truth. Holocaust remembrance exists precisely because societies historically failed to act decisively when early warning signs appeared. Hatred does not originate with violence; it begins with normalization, denial, and institutional hesitation.
Canada's Previous Commitments and Current Risks
Canada previously demonstrated understanding of this dynamic when it committed to the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance and established a dedicated envoy to advance Holocaust education and combat antisemitism. This understanding was reaffirmed following the Quebec City mosque attack, leading to the creation of a specific office to combat Islamophobia. These decisions embodied a vital principle: targeted hatred necessitates targeted prevention.
While advisory councils can play constructive roles by fostering dialogue and providing guidance, they typically do not implement policy, coordinate across jurisdictions, or ensure accountability. When specialized mandates are absorbed into broader structures, responsibility becomes diffuse, and urgency often diminishes. From my tenure at the Canadian Race Relations Foundation, I observed a recurring pattern: when responsibility is distributed too widely among departments, it frequently becomes owned by no one. The most complex and politically sensitive forms of hatred become the easiest to sideline.
The Imperative for Clear Mandates and Trust
This issue is not about privileging one community over another. It concerns protecting the integrity of Canada's human rights framework. Antisemitism remains the oldest and most persistent hatred in Western history. Islamophobia has intensified over recent decades and has proven deadly within Canada. Treating these distinct realities as interchangeable risks inadequate responses to both.
True unity is not constructed by flattening differences or evading difficult truths. It is built through recognition, accountability, and trust. Communities confronting rising hatred are not requesting special treatment; they seek visible leadership, institutional commitment, and meaningful consultation. When decisions impacting them are made without such engagement, trust erodes—and trust is considerably more challenging to rebuild than institutions.
Canada does not face a binary choice between unity and effectiveness. The nation can pursue both objectives simultaneously. However, achieving this requires clarity, not consolidation. Dedicated offices with explicit mandates, stable funding, and public accountability should be reinforced, not dissolved. Advisory bodies should support this specialized work, not supplant it.
A Call for Reconsideration
As we honor the memory of the Quebec City mosque attack victims and reflect on the enduring lessons of the Holocaust, Minister Marc Miller should reevaluate this decision. Combating hatred transcends administrative efficiency. A one-size-fits-all approach is insufficient for addressing deeply rooted, distinct forms of prejudice. Targeted prevention, through maintained separate offices, remains essential for a cohesive and just society.
