June 17, 2013: Our community will miss Ambassador Miriam Ziv

By Michael Regenstreif

Ambassador Miriam Ziv has been a familiar figure in Ottawa’s Jewish community since she arrived here almost five years ago as Israel’s chief diplomat in Canada.

Despite a demanding schedule in Ottawa and across the country, she frequently attended and participated in all manner of events in our community. And, under her tenure, the Embassy of Israel increased its partnerships with the community and collaborated on many events, such as this month’s Israeli Film Festival.

Indeed, as outgoing Jewish Federation of Ottawa Chair Debbie Halton-Weiss noted at the Federation’s annual general meeting on June 5, the ambassador has been very much a part of the community since her arrival in 2008.

The ambassador’s term in Canada, which was extended by one year, is scheduled to end this summer – although, as I write on June 7, the exact date of her departure has not been announced, nor the name of her successor – and she will leave Ottawa. As Debbie said, she will be missed by the Jewish community.

By all means of measurement, Ambassador Ziv’s tenure in Canada must be seen as a great success. Relations between Israel and Canada have grown closer, and Canada is one of Israel’s staunchest allies on the world stage.

She will certainly be missed on Parliament Hill. At a parliamentary reception on June 4, many cabinet members, MPs from all parties, senators, ambassadors from other countries, and other dignitaries and community leaders turned out to bid her a fond and very friendly farewell.

Senate Speaker Noel A. Kinsella, who hosted the reception with Senator Linda Frum, spoke about the impact the ambassador has had on the Hill and noted she was the only non-Canadian included on the list of the “25 most important people in Ottawa” published late last year by Maclean’s magazine.

Ambassador Ziv has always been a good friend to the Ottawa Jewish Bulletin and we, too, will miss her.

Census figures

In his From the Pulpit column on the opposite page, Rabbi Howard Finkelstein mentions that recently released census figures indicate Ottawa’s Jewish population has seen a decline in recent years.

While a cursory glance at the raw census numbers would seem to indicate that, we do not yet have the deep statistical analysis that examines overlap and divergence in census responses to questions of Jewish identification by religion and Jewish identification by ethnicity.

It is this essential analysis that we actually rely on to determine the real Jewish population and to make projections for the future.

Frankly, though, relying on this particular census may be fraught with problems given that responses to the detailed, long questionnaire in 2011 were voluntary. In previous censuses, responses were mandatory and thus had a negligible non-response rate. This time around, Statistics Canada reports a global non-response rate of 21.8 per cent.

In my editor’s column of August 16, 2010, I noted the Canadian census had always enjoyed a reputation for the reliability of its data. “However, thanks to a surprising order handed down this summer from Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative cabinet, the reliability of the census data to be gathered in May 2011 may be in doubt.”

As I further noted in that column, almost three years ago, “Social scientists and statisticians have uniformly condemned the Government’s action and raised serious doubts about the reliability of the data if answering the long-form questions becomes optional. Munir Sheikh, the head of Statistics Canada resigned in protest to the move.”

There were almost universal calls from editorialists and columnists from across the country, and from all manner of organizations that rely on accurate census data, that the decision to eliminate the mandatory nature of the detailed forms be reversed.

But the Harper Government refused to change its decision, and we are now left with attempting to interpret detailed questions to which nearly a quarter of those asked did not respond.

However, I should also mention that, no matter what deeper analysis of the census figures ultimately shows, and no matter the flaws in the census methodology, Rabbi Finkelstein addresses serious challenges being faced by our community and his suggestions are important and worthy of consideration.

August 16, 2010: We depend on the long-form census data

By Michael Regenstreif

On September 22 last year, Linda Kislowicz, CEO of UIA Federations Canada, and Andrea Freedman, its national director of planning and development, came to Ottawa and presented the Ottawa-oriented findings of the UIA National Task Force on Jewish Demographics to a gathering of lay leaders and senior staff of Ottawa’s various Jewish agencies and organizations.

The task force based its findings on detailed analysis of Canadian census results – going back to the 1981 census – along with estimates of results, based on identified trends, that it expected to see in data from the censuses due in 2011 and 2021.

Major community organizations – be they Jewish, other faith groups or secular – as well as governments of all levels, school boards, universities, hospitals, social service agencies, transportation boards like OC Transpo, and so many other bodies, rely on census data in the formulation of the long-term plans they need to make in order to serve their communities and clientele. As Federation Chair Donna Dolansky explained in the Federation Report (Ottawa Jewish Bulletin, November 2, 2009), much of the long-term strategic planning by the Federation is based on this information.

As almost every organization in the country involved in long-term planning will tell you, it is vital that the data they work with be as accurate and reliable as possible.

The Canadian census has long had a reputation for the reliability of its data. However, thanks to a surprising order handed down this summer from Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative cabinet, the reliability of the census records to be gathered in May 2011 may be in doubt.

Until now, 80 per cent of Canadian homes received the short-form census questionnaire with just a few basic questions that can be completed in about five minutes or so. The other 20 per cent of households received the long-form questionnaire, which takes about a half-hour to 45 minutes.

Filling out the census form – whether long or short – has always been mandatory, under penalty of law.

Now, all of a sudden, the Tories have decided to make the long-form census voluntary. According to Industry Minister Tony Clement, the mandatory long-form was scrapped because no one should have to face prison for not completing it.

Until the Harper Government took this action, there was no issue surrounding the long-form census. It was never an election issue, an anti-census mob had never gathered on Parliament Hill and, if it was ever even mentioned in Question Period, it didn’t make the news.

And no one has ever gone to jail for failing to fill out their long-form questionnaire.

Social scientists and statisticians have uniformly condemned the Government’s action and have raised serious doubts about the reliability of the data, if answering the long-form questions becomes optional. Munir Sheikh, now the former head of Statistics Canada, resigned in protest.

It makes no sense whatsoever to scrap the mandatory long-form. The Harper Government should act now to reverse the decision.

Rotem bill

There’s been much debate in the Jewish world about a bill, introduced in Israel’s Knesset by Israel Beiteinu MK David Rotem, which would change how conversion to Judaism is administered and recognized. The Israel Beiteinu party, led by Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, is part of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s ruling coalition.

The issue has proven to be extremely divisive in Israel – Netanyahu himself has come out against the bill – and has sparked rare intervention from the established leadership of Jewish communities throughout the Diaspora. On July 20, Federation Chair Donna Dolansky and President and CEO Mitchell Bellman wrote to Netanyahu expressing the Federation’s concerns about the negative impact passage of the bill would have on Israel-Diaspora relations.

On July 22, a deal was brokered to delay further debate and votes on the bill for six months.