Download - News in review - CBC Learning

News in Review
Resource Guide
April 2012

Credits
Resource Guide Writers: Sean Dolan, Kim Earle, Peter Flaherty, Jim L’Abbé
Copy Editor and Desktop Publisher: Susan Rosenthal
Production Assistant: Carolyn McCarthy
Resource Guide Editor: Peter Flaherty and Jill Colyer
Supervising Manager: Laraine Bone
Host: Michael Serapio
Senior Producer: Nigel Gibson
Producer: Lou Kovacs
Video Writer: Nigel Gibson
Director: Douglas Syrota
Graphic Artist: Mark W. Harvey
Editor: Stanley Iwanski
Visit us at our Web site at our Web site at http://newsinreview.cbclearning.ca, where
you will find News in Review indexes and an electronic version of this resource guide.
As a companion resource, we recommend that students and teachers access CBC
News Online, a multimedia current news source that is found on the CBC’s home
page at www.cbc.ca/news/.
Close-captioning
News in Review programs are close-captioned. Subscribers may wish to obtain
decoders and “open” these captions for the hearing impaired, for English as a
Second Language students, or for situations in which the additional on-screen print
component will enhance learning.
CBC Learning authorizes the reproduction of material contained in this resource
guide for educational purposes. Please identify the source.
News in Review is distributed by:
CBC Learning, P.O. Box 500, Station A, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5W 1E6
Tel: (416) 205-6384 • Fax: (416) 205-2376 • E-mail: cbclearning@cbc.ca
Website: www.cbclearning.ca
Copyright © 2012 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
News in Review, April 2012
1. Election 2011 and the Robocall Scandal
(Length: 13:51)
2. Bill C-30 and Internet Privacy
(Length: 13:33)
3. Generation One: Living in Two Worlds
(Length: 13:55)
4. The Drug War in Mexico
(Length: 16:43)

Contents
In This Issue . . . ......................................................................................... 4
ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL .................... 6
Introduction ..............................................................................................................6
Video Review ...........................................................................................................7
Anatomy of a Scandal ..............................................................................................9
Finding Voters ........................................................................................................13
Four Corners Activity: You Be the Judge ..............................................................16
BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY ....................................... 17
Introduction ............................................................................................................17
Video Review .........................................................................................................18
What is Bill C-30? .................................................................................................20
Fixing Bill C-30 .....................................................................................................22
The Vikileaks Affair ...............................................................................................25
Activity: A Parliamentary Committee Hearing .....................................................27
GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS ...................... 29
Introduction ............................................................................................................29
Video Review .........................................................................................................30
Generational and Cultural Conflicts .......................................................................32
Generation One Profiles .........................................................................................36
Nahlah Ayed: The Face of Generation One ...........................................................39
Activity: The Challenges Facing Gen One ............................................................41
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO ................................................. 42
Introduction ............................................................................................................42
Video Review .........................................................................................................43
Mexico in Crisis: Drug Cartels ..............................................................................45
Mexico in Crisis: The Response of Two Presidents...............................................47
Canada and the World Respond ............................................................................49
The Canadian Connection ......................................................................................51
Activity: How to Deal with Drugs .........................................................................53
News in Review Index ............................................................................ 54
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 3

NiR Study
Modules
Using print and video
material from archival
issues of News in
Review, teachers and
students can create
thematic modules
for independent
assignments, and small
group study.
Related CBC Videos
Other videos available
from CBC Learning;
see the back cover for
contact details.
In This Issue . . .
ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL (Length: 13:51)
A large-scale investigation is underway into allegations of illegal behaviour during
the last federal election. Thousands of Canadians have complained that they received
phone calls aimed at discouraging them from voting. In this News in Review story we
look at the political reaction and at the search for those responsible.
NiR Study Modules
The Life and Death of Jack Layton
October 2011
Canadians Vote in a Spring Election
May 2011
Parliament and the Election Question
March 2011
Canadians to Vote in Federal Election
October 2008
BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY (Length: 13:33)
The federal government has tabled a bill that many believe could threaten the civil
rights of Canadians and the freedom of the Internet. Bill C-30 would require Internet
service providers to gather information on their clients and allow police to access that
information without a warrant. In this News in Review story we examine the bill and
why so many Canadians want it changed or scrapped.
NiR Study Modules
Canada’s Controversial Crime Bill
December 2011
How Facebook Changed the World
April 2011
Wikileaks and the Information War
February 2011
The Fate of the Long-Gun Registry
October 2010
The Controversy over the Census
September 2010
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 4
Related CBC Videos
The Making of a Political Animal
The Trouble with Experts
Related CBC Videos
Are We Digital Dummies?
Can You Hack It? The Attack on Your
Personal Info
Facebook Factor: Social Networking for
Profit
Facebook Follies
Google World
Hackers and Cyber Terrorists
Security Threat: The New World Order
Web Warriors

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS (Length: 13: )
Canada is a country of immigrants—who help change the country and who are in turn
changed by it. In this News in Review story we look at the so-called Generation One,
children of immigrants who were born in Canada but are still heavily influenced by
the cultures and traditions of the countries where their parents once lived.
NiR Study Modules
The Horror and Fear of Honour Killing
February 2012
A New Campaign to Fight Bullying
December 2010
How Tolerant Are Canadians? May 2010
Changing Canada’s Immigration Rules
May 2008
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO (Length: 16:43)
It’s one of the most violent wars in the world, and it’s happening in Mexico, a country
about a million Canadians visit every year. For years, the Mexican government has
been fighting that country’s powerful drug cartel, and tens of thousands of people
have been killed. In this News in Review story we look at that brutal war and why
defeating the cartels is proving so difficult.
NiR Study Modules
Vacation Nightmare in Mexico, March 2011
A Community Fights Gangs and Guns
November 2008
Harsh Reality: Mexico’s NAFTA Problem
June 2006
Sections marked with this symbol contain content suitable for younger viewers.
Exercises marked with this symbol indicate that a worksheet to aid in the exploration of
the topic is available online.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page
Related CBC Videos
Landed: Six New Lives in Canada
Little Mosque on the Prairie
Promised Land (audio)
Murder Unveiled
Queuing Up for Canada
Who Do We Think We Are?
Related CBC Videos
Broken Border
Cannabiz
Dealing With Drugs: New Options

Focus
This CBC News in
Review story focuses
on the robocall
scandal that has raised
disturbing questions
about whether voters
were given misleading
information that
could have affected
the result of the last
federal election.
ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL
Introduction
In late February 2012, a potentially
damaging scandal broke around Prime
Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative
government. It focused on allegations
that someone in the party may have been
involved in giving voters misleading
information about the location of polling
places during the federal election on
May 2, 2011. The affair quickly became
known as the robocall scandal because
the voters involved had received
this erroneous information through
automated phone calls, or robocalls,
purportedly from Elections Canada.
Elections Canada is the non-political
body responsible for running elections
in Canada. In some cases he calls were
received after voters had informed local
Conservative canvassers over the phone
that they would not be voting for the
party. The calls told voters that due to
a high turnout, their polling stations
had been moved to a different location,
but when they went where they were
instructed to go, they quickly found that
they had been misled. But by whom and
for what purpose?
Evidence began to emerge that
seemed to prove that the calls had
been placed to voters in a significant
number of ridings across Canada on
Election Day. Many of these ridings
had been tight races, and some had only
been narrowly won by Conservative
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 6
candidates over their Liberal or NDP
opponents. To those who alleged that the
scandal was a Conservative-instigated
attempt at voter suppression, they asked
that the results of the election in at least
those ridings had to be viewed as invalid
and by-elections called immediately.
For its part, the Harper government
strongly denied it had been responsible
for any wrongdoing and challenged
the opposition parties to provide hard
evidence to support their claims. It called
upon Elections Canada to investigate
the whole affair. The Conservatives also
charged that both the Liberals and NDP
had been responsible for some telephone
dirty tricks of their own during the
election campaign, including a Guelph
Liberal MP who had spread misleading
information about his Conservative
opponent’s position on abortion.
Marc Mayrand, the Chief Electoral
Officer of Canada, promised a full
investigation, but also cautioned
Canadians not to jump to conclusions
before all the evidence had been
examined. He stated that a thorough
probe into the robocall scandal might
take a very long time to complete. It
remains to be seen whether the attention
of Canadian voters will have shifted to
another issue by then and what might be
the consequences if it turns out that voter
fraud did indeed occur.
To Consider
1. a) What does it mean to have fair and impartial elections and are they a
crucial aspect of democracy?
b) Is Canada usually associated with fair and impartial elections?
2. Do you think the allegations that voters were misled during the last
election warrants a full investigation by Elections Canada? Why or why not?
3. What do you think should happen if significant evidence emerges that
some elements in the Conservative Party may have been involved in the
robocall scandal?

ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL
Video Review
Pre-viewing Questions
With a partner or in a small group discuss and respond to the following.
1. What do you know about the robocall scandal?
2. If it were true that the Conservative government deliberately misled voters
and prevented them from voting, how serious a breach of trust would you
consider that action to be?
3. Before the robocall scandal, how fair and secure did you think Canadian
elections were? Why?
Viewing Questions
1. What are robocalls? What information did the calls give to some voters
during the last federal election, in 2011?
2. Where was the company responsible for making the calls located?
3. How many ridings in Canada could have been potentially targeted by
misleading robocalls during the election?
4. Why do some defeated Liberal and NDP candidates feel the robocalls could
have cost them the election?
5. What challenge did Prime Minister Stephen Harper make to those who were
claiming his party may have been responsible for the misleading robocalls?
6. How did the opposition respond to the Conservatives’ position on the issue?
7. Why is the robocall scandal a potentially big problem for the Conservatives?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 7

8. Why do all political parties use robocalls, and what do they use them for?
9. In what way does the Internet make robocalls a cheap and effective way
for political parties to communicate with potential supporters?
10. Why does Internet consultant Jesse Hirsh think it may be possible to
discover who was behind the whole robocall affair?
11. What evidence is there that some voters received misleading robocalls
after informing local Conservative canvassers that they were not
supporting the party?
12. What steps is Elections Canada taking to find out who was responsible for
the robocall affair?
Post-viewing Questions
1. After watching the video, revisit your responses to the Pre-viewing
questions. Did watching the video help you respond to the questions in
greater depth? In what way?
2. Based on what you have seen in the video, do you think there is sufficient
evidence to prove that some elements in the Conservative Party may have
been responsible for the robocall scandal? Why or why not?
3. How do you think events like the robocall scandal affect the way
Canadians view elections and the political process in general?
)
4. Do you think Canadians will ever find out who was really responsible for
the robocall scandal? Why or why not?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 8

ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL
Anatomy of a Scandal
Focus for Reading
In your notebooks, create an organizer like the one below. As you read the
following information, record key points in your organizer. You should be
able to enter at least two or three points in each section. You will be using this
information in the activities that follow the text material.
The Scandal Breaks
• Two media outlets reported that voters had received misleading robocalls from
Elections Canada on Election Day 2011.
• The calls were traced to a fake name but were later linked to a phone company
with ties to the Conservative Party.
The Scandal Grows
The Scandal Widens
The Scandal Continues
The Scandal Breaks
In late February 2012 two media
outlets—Postmedia News and the
Ottawa Citizen—broke the story that
on May 2, 2011, federal Election
Day, misleading automated telephone
calls had been placed to voters in at
least 14 ridings across Canada. The
calls—purportedly from Elections
Canada—occurred in some too-close-tocall
ridings, including the hotly contested
seat of Guelph, Ontario. The calls
informed voters that, due to higher than
expected voter turnout, the locations of
their polling stations had been changed.
But when voters in Guelph and other
ridings went to the new locations, they
found that the information they had been
given was not correct, and that no voting
was taking place there. Elections Canada
made a public statement that it never
contacts voters by phone to deliver any
information on the location of polling
places and that it does not, in fact, keep
a record of voters’ telephone numbers on
the voters’ list.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 9
The calls displayed a phone number
that was traced to a prepaid cell phone
registered to Pierre Poutine of Separatist
Street in Joliette, Quebec. Although
the name was obviously phony, the
person responsible for the calls had
also established a PayPal account for an
automated telephone company based in
Edmonton that works exclusively for the
Conservative Party. On Election Day,
thousands of people in Guelph were
reporting that they had received robocalls
from Elections Canada in which an
automated female voice directed them
to go to a new polling station. At least
150 to 200 people went to the Quebec
Street mall on these instructions, only
to find that no polling station existed at
that location. Some of them tore up their
voter registration cards in frustration and
ended up not voting at all. In the end,
the Liberal incumbent, Frank Valeriote,
easily retained the Guelph riding—but
this was not the end of the scandal by
any means.

Further Research
To learn more about
this topic, visit CBC
News at www.cbc.ca/
news.
The Scandal Grows
In the wake of the initial revelations
about questionable Election Day
activities in Guelph, a young
Conservative organizer, Michael Sona,
was linked to the robocalls placed in
that riding. Sona was the director of
communications for Marty Burke, the
local Conservative candidate, and had
gained notoriety when he tried to shut
down an advance poll at the University
of Guelph by grabbing the ballot box.
As the allegations broke around him,
Sona stepped down from his staff
position with Conservative MP Eve
Adams, stating that he was innocent of
any wrongdoing in the affair, but was
resigning because the media coverage
of it had made it impossible for him to
fulfill his responsibilities.
By early March the robocall scandal
had reached the floor of the House of
Commons in Ottawa, with government
and opposition MPs trading charges
and counter-charges relating to the
affair. Interim Liberal leader Bob Rae
and Winnipeg NDP MP Pat Martin
were especially aggressive in their
criticisms of the Harper government,
alleging that at least some elements
in the Conservative Party must have
had prior knowledge of, if not actually
been involved with, the calls. Their
case appeared to be strengthened
after a growing number of voters
began to report that they had received
the misleading calls from Elections
Canada shortly after they had identified
themselves to local Conservative phone
canvassers that they did not intend to
vote for that party’s candidate.
Rae, Martin, and others were
beginning to suspect that an orchestrated
campaign of voter suppression had been
in effect on Election Day, possibly with
the knowledge or even connivance of the
Conservative Party. Voter suppression
refers to efforts by a political party to
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 10
erect barriers for potential voters who
are not among its supporters in order to
prevent them from voting. In the United
States, a number of highly sophisticated
techniques of voter suppression have
been perfected, frequently directed at
low-income or minority voters; but
before the robocall scandal broke, the
issue had not raised much concern in this
country.
In response, Prime Minister Stephen
Harper hotly denied that he or his party
had any involvement in orchestrating the
misleading robocalls. They brushed aside
opposition charges as unfounded smears
that had no real evidence to substantiate
them and challenged the NDP and
Liberals to submit proof of Conservative
involvement to Elections Canada. They
also accused the two opposition parties
of having played their own telephone
dirty tricks during the election, including
calls to voters from Guelph Liberal MP
Frank Valeriote misrepresenting his
Conservative opponent’s position on the
abortion issue.
The Scandal Widens
During March 2012, the robocall scandal
began to take on a much broader and
more troubling dimension. The number
of ridings where voters were reporting
that they had received misleading calls
from Elections Canada grew from the
original 14 to almost 100. In addition, it
seemed that voters received calls only
after identifying themselves as not being
Conservative supporters to a phone
canvasser. Many of the ridings where
such calls had been reported were hotly
contested between the Conservatives
and either the NDP or Liberals, with
Conservative candidates winning by very
small margins—in some cases fewer than
100 votes.
Although robocalls remained the main
focus of the affair, other accusations
of dirty tricks began to emerge from

across the country. For example, Jewish
voters in two Toronto-area ridings that
switched from Liberal to Conservative
reported having received phone calls
purportedly on behalf of the Liberal
Party at mealtimes during the Sabbath,
when telephone use is strictly forbidden
on religious grounds. When contacted,
the local Liberal campaigns vehemently
denied having placed any such calls. In
addition, some people reported having
received aggressive or even insulting
calls in the middle of the night asking
for campaign contributions to the Liberal
Party. And in the riding of Eglinton-
Lawrence, former Liberal MP Joe Volpe
commenced a legal challenge of the
election results after evidence emerged
that thousands of people had been added
to the voters’ list at the last minute after
having given fraudulent addresses as
proof of residence.
The Scandal Continues
By late March 2012, a month after
it broke, the robocall scandal was
still simmering on the back burner
of the country’s political awareness.
Small demonstrations against what
some believed to be a Conservativeinstigated
voter suppression campaign
had taken place across Canada, and the
opposition in the House of Commons
was continuing its pressure on the
government on the issue. The Council
of Canadians, a left-of-centre advocacy
group, announced on March 27 that it
was initiating a legal challenge to the
election results in seven ridings, all
of them won by the Conservatives by
narrow margins, where it believed there
was enough evidence to overturn the
results. And Elections Canada, the nonpartisan
government body responsible
for administering federal elections, was
continuing to collect evidence and take
testimony from voters across the country
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 11
who claimed to have been misled by
robocalls on Election Day.
Marc Mayrand, Canada’s Chief
Electoral Officer, appeared before a
parliamentary committee on March
29 to report on the progress of the
ongoing Elections Canada investigation
into the robocall affair. This meeting
was scheduled for the same day as the
government’s delivery of the federal
budget, which was sure to attract far
more media and public attention.
Mayrand told the MPs that Elections
Canada was looking into about 800
complaints concerning robocalls and
live calls placed to voters on Election
Day, in 200 ridings across the country.
While he indicated that he was taking
the allegations of electoral fraud very
seriously, he was careful not to jump to
any premature conclusions concerning
who might have been responsible for the
calls. He called the robocalls outrageous
and praised Canadians for being so
concerned about them. But because
of the scope and seriousness of the
investigation, he advised that it might
take Elections Canada a year or more to
complete it.
Public opinion polls taken in the
wake of the robocall scandal failed
to show any significant slump in the
Harper government’s popular support.
And because no smoking gun directly
linking the Conservatives to potentially
illegal voter suppression activities had
yet been found, it appeared possible
that the government might be able to
weather the storm long enough for public
attention to shift to other concerns. But
with the NDP and Liberal opposition
continuing to smell blood on the issue,
and Elections Canada slowly proceeding
with its investigation, it appeared highly
unlikely that the robocall scandal would
completely disappear from the national
political radar screen any time soon.

Follow-up
1. With a partner, compare the information in your summary chart. Help each
other complete any missing information.
2. Do you think there is enough evidence from the robocall scandal to link
the Conservative Party to an organized campaign of voter suppression?
Why or why not?
3. Do you think that the robocall scandal will fade from public view, or will
Canadians actively await the results of the investigation? Give reasons for
your answer.
4. How do you think issues like the robocall scandal affect the way young
people view elections and the political process in Canada today?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 12

ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL
Finding Voters
Reading Prompt
As you read this section, make notes on how new developments in information
technology have changed the way political parties communicate with voters at
election time.
How the Parties Find Voters
The methods political parties use to
identify and track potential supporters
and donors have become much more
sophisticated in recent years. In the past,
they relied on door-to-door canvassers to
find people likely to vote for them during
election campaigns. But in the age of
the Internet, it has become possible to
compile huge databases of prospective
supporters. These are invaluable sources
of information, funds, and votes during
an election campaign. And with the
advent of robocalls as an inexpensive
means of communicating with their
supporters, the parties can also track who
is likely to vote for or donate money
to them, and also who may not be so
inclined. While all of these methods of
contacting voters are completely legal
and legitimate, the robocall scandal has
drawn attention to how such data might
lend themselves to less honorable and
possibly even criminal activities.
Voter Identification
Any seasoned political campaign worker
will tell you that voter identification is
the key to winning an election. Every
political party wants to know which
voters in any given riding are likely to
vote for it and which are not. Armed with
this information, the local campaigns can
direct their attention at ensuring that their
identified supporters turn out to vote on
Election Day while ignoring those who
have indicated they are not backing that
particular political party. This is called
pulling the vote, and it can make all the
difference between electoral victory
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 13
and defeat, especially if the race in a
given riding is close. In the past, local
constituency organizations maintained
paper records of their supporters drawn
from the lists of voters they received
from Elections Canada. But in today’s
electronic age it is possible to gather far
more accurate, up-to-date, and detailed
information using large, computergenerated
databases.
The federal Conservative Party was
the first to develop such a national
database and used it effectively during
the 2004 election when it gained
21 seats and reduced Paul Martin’s
Liberal government to a minority
position. In subsequent elections the
NDP and Liberals followed suit. From
2004 to 2011 a succession of minority
governments and frequent elections
made the collection of up-to-date voter
information data essential for the parties
in plotting their electoral campaigns.
Since Elections Canada does not collect
voters’ telephone numbers, party workers
have to match the names and addresses
from the voters’ list with information
taken from telephone directories or direct
phone calls. In addition, voters can be
contacted electronically via e-mail or
through social media networks such as
Facebook or Twitter.
Besides their names, addresses,
and contact information, other data
about prospective supporters are also
collected and preserved on the parties’
databases. These can include credit
card information for potential donors,
birthdays or wedding anniversaries
for personal greetings, ethnicities

or religious affiliations for special
outreach campaigns to specific groups
in the area, and even educational and
work profiles for targeted messages on
issues of concern to people of various
socio-economic backgrounds. The
databases may also contain information
gathered from polling on what positions
prospective supporters may hold on
issues such as the long-gun registry or
the legalization of marijuana, in order
to determine whether they parallel those
of the party. These can be especially
valuable should a given issue emerge
as crucial in influencing the way people
may vote in an election.
Getting Out the Vote
It is one thing to have a large list of
potential supporters preserved in a
computer database, but such information
is of no value to a political party unless
it can be translated into votes placed in
the ballot box on Election Day. Since
approximately 60 per cent of eligible
Canadians exercised their right to vote
in the May 2011 federal election, it is
absolutely essential for the parties to
ensure that their supporters actually
make the trip to the polls and cast their
ballots.
Political parties employ a number of
techniques to make sure their supporters
come out to vote and sometimes to
ensure that those not backing them
do not. At one time, riding campaign
offices were equipped with banks of
telephones, where volunteers tirelessly
called potential supporters, sometimes
more than once, reminding them that
it was Election Day and urging them
to go to the polling station and vote.
But with the advent of robocalls it has
become far easier, quicker, and cheaper
for the parties to reach a larger number
of prospective voters. New social media
sites such as Facebook and Twitter, along
with text messaging, have also been
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 14
used to encourage voter participation,
especially among young people.
While every political party wants to
ensure that 100 per cent of its supporters
make their trip to the polling booth,
the same cannot be said for those who
have indicated another voting intention.
Any voters who have been identified as
hostile are unlikely to receive a phone
call from a political party they do not
support reminding them to vote. But
what the robocall scandal has unveiled is
something entirely different and far more
unsavoury—that is, the possibility that
a campaign of voter suppression might
have been in play on Election Day 2011
designed to confuse voters and make
it difficult, if not impossible, for them
to cast their ballots, especially if it was
known that they would not be supporting
a particular political party.
Voter suppression is unfortunately
a well-documented phenomenon in
the United States, where it may have
played a decisive role in determining the
results of the 2000 and 2004 presidential
elections. There are reported cases of
police roadblocks deterring voters in
African-American communities from
reaching polling stations in Florida, and
telephone calls in Virginia telling people
that the election had been extended by
one day due to a higher-than-expected
voter turnout. In the race for governor
of Maryland in 2010, the Republican
Party placed robocalls to predominantly
Democratic-leaning African-American
neighbourhoods, informing people that
their candidate had already won, and
that it was not necessary for them to
vote, when the polls were actually still
open. Some U.S. states have recently
enacted legislation tightening personal
identification requirements, a move
some believe is especially targeted
against low-income and minority voters
unlikely to support their Republican
legislators. Since the widespread and

systematic denial of voting rights to
African-Americans in southern states
was a stain on U.S. democracy until
the passage of the Voting Rights Act of
1965, voter suppression remains a touchy
and controversial issue in U.S. politics
to this day, especially after the election
of the country’s first African-American
President, Barrack Obama, in 2008.
Prior to the robocall scandal, few
Canadians had given any thought to
the possibility that voter suppression
might be something that could occur
in this country’s elections. While some
American political imports such as
negative television attack advertisements
had become more common in recent
years, receiving a mixed reception
among voters, not many would have
believed that any political party would
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 15
seriously contemplate attempting voter
suppression as a means of ensuring
victory. Aside from the unethical—to say
nothing of the possibly illegal—aspects
of such a strategy, there was also the
great danger that it might backfire,
causing immeasurable damage to the
party’s credibility and image. But the
number of reported suspicious phone
calls to voters developing out of the
robocall scandal had at least raised the
possibility that something very troubling
may have occurred during the May 2,
2011, election. As of late March 2012, it
remained unclear whether the Elections
Canada investigation of the entire affair
would discover any concrete evidence
that voter suppression had actually taken
place.
Follow-up
1. With a partner, share the information you gathered about how
information technology has changed the way political parties
communicate with voters at election time.
2. What do you consider to be the advantages and the disadvantages of the
new technologies of voter identification and getting out the vote?
3. How have these developments in technology opened the door for possible
abuses of the electoral process, including voter suppression?
4. Do you think that elections and the political process in general in Canada
are becoming more Americanized? If so, do you consider this a positive or
a negative development? Why?

ELECTION 2011 AND THE ROBOCALL SCANDAL
Four Corners Activity: You Be the Judge
The robocall scandal has caused a great deal of debate among politicians and
ordinary Canadians alike. Some people have concluded that there is enough
evidence to indicate that the Conservative government of Stephen Harper
may have been involved in an illegal voter suppression effort, while others are
equally sure that there is no concrete proof of any serious wrongdoing on the
part of the government.
Your task is to examine the evidence that has emerged so far from media
reports and complaints made by voters to Elections Canada. You should also
consider the allegations made by Liberal and NDP MPs in Parliament and the
Conservative responses to them. Based on this information, and your own
point of view, decide whether you agree, disagree, or are undecided about the
following statement:
“The Conservative Party was implicated in the robocall scandal and should be
held responsible for any voter suppression it caused.”
Go to the section of the classroom that has the sign that best reflects your
position on this issue:
Group 1: Strongly Agree
Group 2: Somewhat Agree
Group 3: Somewhat Disagree
Group 4: Strongly Disagree
Group 5: Undecided
After taking your place in the group, discuss your viewpoint and the reasons for
it with the other group members. Make a list of the main reasons that support
your position. Then select a spokesperson to present the group’s arguments to
the rest of the class.
After each group has made its presentation, participants can decide whether
the arguments they have heard have caused them to reconsider their original
positions. Students should then be given the opportunity to move from one
group to another based on this reconsideration. Once everyone has taken
his/her position, the group that has attracted the most new members may be
declared the winner of the contest.
Following the Four Corners Activity, the class may wish to hold a general
debriefing session where the main points of the presentations are summarized
and a general conclusion or consensus is formed on the issue.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 16

Focus
After Prime Minister
Stephen Harper’s
Conservative
government was reelected
in 2011, it
decided to resurrect
a bill that would give
police the power
to access subscriber
information from
Internet providers
without a warrant.
This News in
Review story looks
at the controversy
surrounding this
legislation, known as
Bill C-30.
BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
Introduction
The government calls it “lawful access.”
Opponents call it an unprecedented
invasion of privacy. Bill C-30 set off a
national debate regarding what information
should and should not be legally protected
from the curious eyes of the authorities.
When the Conservatives were re-elected
on May 2, 2011, this time with a majority,
the proposed legislation giving the police
easier access to Internet subscriber
information was back on the table.
It fell to Public Safety Minster Vic
Toews to introduce the bill in the House
of Commons. Put simply: Bill C-30
would give the police the right to access
subscriber information from Internet
service providers (ISPs) without a warrant
while also compelling those providers to
build in a surveillance network for police
to monitor alleged criminal activities
taking place online. The monitoring itself
would require a warrant.
While Toews felt the bill was
reasonable and fair, opponents responded
that the legislation was unnecessary
and too far-reaching. After all, ISPs
had already been accommodating close
to 95 per cent of all police requests
for subscriber information. When an
opposition critic challenged the minister
in the House, Toews responded that the
member could “either stand with us or
with the child pornographers.” This set
off a firestorm of debate that eventually
forced Toews and the Conservatives into
a major retreat. Opponents knew they
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 17
had scored points when the government
volunteered to send the bill to committee
after second reading for amendments and
revisions—a step usually skipped because
majority governments can pass whatever
legislation they want without having to
entertain additional debate.
Meanwhile, other opponents took
Toews to task. Local and national news
media challenged the government’s
disregard for privacy, with most pointing
out that the Conservatives scrapped the
long-gun registry and the long-form
census in the interests of public privacy
and now they were introducing legislation
that was much more intrusive. The hacker
group Anonymous posted a YouTube
video threatening to invade the privacy of
Toews, and several Twitter feeds streamed
personal information about him. One
Twitter account, called #vikileaks30,
turned out to be the work of a Liberal
staffer who tweeted details of Toews’s
divorce. This individual was eventually
identified and forced to resign.
The irony of the situation is that Bill
C-30 probably would have passed
virtually unnoticed if Toews had not cast
anyone who opposed his legislation as
an ally of child pornographers. Privacy
advocates owe a debt of gratitude to the
Public Safety Minister for his statements.
By April 2012, it appeared that the final
version of Bill C-30 will look quite
different from the one Toews initially
presented to the House.
To Consider
1. What is “lawful access” and how does it apply to the Internet?
2. Outline the main goals of Bill C-30.
3. Why did the comments of Public Safety Minister Vic Toews in the House of
Commons set off a national debate on privacy?
4. Why do privacy advocates owe a debt of gratitude to Public Safety Minister
Toews for his statement while defending Bill C-30 in the House of Commons?

Did you know . . .
A warrant is a
document issued by a
judge that gives the
police the power to
conduct surveillance,
arrest, and/or search
the property of
suspected criminals.
BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
Video Review
Pre-viewing Activity
With a partner or in a small group discuss and respond to the following. The law
enforcement community is concerned about criminal activity occurring online.
It claims it needs more power to investigate certain individuals suspected of
involvement in such activities so they can be quickly identified and brought
to justice. Should the police be given the opportunity to gather information
on people suspected of criminal activity without a warrant issued by a judge?
Should they be allowed to monitor a suspect’s online activity without a warrant?
Viewing Questions
As you watch the video, respond to the questions in the spaces provided.
1. What is Bill C-30? Why is it so controversial?
2. What is the government hoping to accomplish with Bill C-30?
3. How many people signed an online petition protesting Bill C-30? Did this
have any impact on the government’s decision to move ahead with the bill?
4. a) What information could the authorities access under Bill C-30?
b) What justification would authorities need in order to access the
information?
c) At what point would a person be notified that he or she was the subject
of a police investigation?
5. a) Why do some critics believe that Bill C-30 will turn Internet service
providers into government spies?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 18

) What does Public Safety Minister Vic Toews think of this concern?
6. What comments did Vic Toews make to cause outrage in the House of
Commons and across Canada?
7. How much do experts estimate surveillance technologies will cost
Canadians if Bill C-30 passes?
8. What upsets Open Media’s Steve Anderson about Bill C-30?
9. a) What was the online reaction to Bill C-30?
b) What happened to the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police website?
10. a) What did the Ottawa Citizen discover about the Vikileaks Twitter feed?
b) Why was this development embarrassing to the Liberal Party?
c) What happened to the creator of Vikileaks?
Post-viewing Questions
1. After watching the video, revisit your responses in the Pre-viewing Activity.
Did watching the video help you respond to the questions in greater
depth? In what way?
2. In the introduction to the video, New in Review host Michael Serapio notes
that, whether we like it or not, our personal information is being tracked just
about every time we turn on a computer. Both Facebook and Google target
advertising based on our online surfing, with Facebook taking the extra step
of using your age, birthday, and “likes” to target its advertising. All this is
done with little protest from the public. However, when the government
introduced Bill C-30, people were vocal about the potential intrusion into
their personal privacy. How do you explain the fact that Facebook and Google
can track online behaviour without much protest, but when the government
announces something similar there is a great deal of controversy?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 19

Did you know . . .
An Internet protocol
(IP) address is a unique
number assigned to
a computer working
on a network that
functions about the
same way as a home
address. The IP address
identifies the Internet
subscriber and acts as
a point of reference
as people send and
receive data to him/
her over the Internet.
BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
What is Bill C-30?
Before Reading
How would you feel if you knew the police had the right to force your Internet
service provider (ISP) to provide your name, home address, e-mail address,
phone number, mobile number, and ISP address without a warrant issued by
the courts? Would you consider this an invasion of your privacy or just a case of
the police doing their job? What potential benefits would there be to giving
the police these powers? How could such powers be abused? With a partner,
respond to these questions before reading the following section, and then
revisit your responses after you have finished reading it.
Lawful Access
For over a decade, members of
Parliament have been trying to draft
legislation to give police more power
to investigate and charge people who
commit crimes via the Internet. A key
component of this type of legislation is
so-called “lawful access,” which would
give police access to information without
a judicial warrant. Governments have
been trying to introduce a bill concerning
lawful access since the late 1990s.
A good time to pass a bill?
The latest edition of the lawful access
legislation came in the form of Bill C-30.
At first, the Conservatives tried to push
the legislation through in an omnibus bill
that contained a cluster of Conservative
policies that died on the Order Paper
prior to the last election. Eventually the
lawful access bill was removed from
the omnibus package, and Public Safety
Minister Vic Toews presented the standalone
bill in the House of Commons.
Toews had two things on his side: one,
many tech-savvy Canadians understood
that it was just a matter of time before
the Internet was subject to more policing
and, two, many Canadians held fairly
relaxed views regarding their personal
privacy. The online behaviour of many
people on Facebook and Google—where
privacy is routinely surrendered—was
clear evidence of this trend. These two
things created a climate where Canadians
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 20
implicitly understood the rapid growth
and development of Internet technologies
and indicated a willingness to concede
their right to privacy if this meant a
more pleasant Web surfing experience.
Even with various privacy advocates
expressing their concerns to the media,
most Canadians did not seem to be
paying much attention to Bill C-30.
Critical Error
But Toews made a critical error shortly
after introducing the bill. When
challenged by a fellow member of
Parliament about the validity of the
bill, Toews told the member that he
could “either stand with us or with the
child pornographers.” The provocative
statement set off a public outcry.
Suddenly all eyes turned to Bill
C-30—and people were shocked to see
the wide-ranging powers the government
was trying to hand over to the police.
In its original form, Bill C-30 would
have given the police access to a great
deal of private subscriber information
held by ISPs—including a person’s
name, address, phone number, mobile
number, and IP address—without a
warrant. It also would give the police
broad surveillance powers to monitor
criminal activities in real time with the
mandatory co-operation of the ISPs. The
bill continued to describe the hardware
upgrades ISPs would need to purchase
to improve police surveillance powers

FYI
The RCMP made more
than 28 000 requests
for customer names
and addresses from
ISPs in 2010. The
customers would never
have known that a
request was made
about them.
while also providing law enforcement
authorities with the opportunity to install
their own hardware on the network of
any ISP if they felt such a move to be
necessary.
The Critics
Critics of the bill suddenly had a
voice after Toews’s inopportune and
controversial comment. The main thrust
of the criticism was: if police want to
investigate Canadians—get a warrant!
All opposition parties, and even a few
Conservatives, took up this refrain.
Meanwhile, many Canadians were
shocked to learn that ISPs had been
voluntarily surrendering personal
information (mainly names, addresses,
phone numbers and IP addresses) to
police for years. In fact one report claimed
that ISPs accommodated police requests
95 per cent of the time, so a climate of
warrantless access already existed.
You’ll be paying
Canadians were also worried about the
surveillance technology costs associated
with Bill C-30. Essentially, the bill
would create an infrastructure for police
to access subscriber information without
a warrant and to monitor subscribers
with a warrant. Currently, no such
infrastructure exists, and experts estimate
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 21
the cost would be a minimum of
$80-million. This cost would either be
assumed by the taxpayer or the Internet
subscriber. In other words, either way,
Canadians would pay.
Future Misuse?
Finally, privacy advocates were worried
that, once legal access legislation was
passed, the opportunity for misuse of
Internet subscriber information would
follow. Since basic information could be
accessed without a warrant, what would
stop the authorities from randomly
looking into the private information of
some Internet users? And since the police
would have the power to access certain
information without a warrant, those
subject to an investigation would never
know they had been investigated.
Back to Committee
The torrent of controversy and concern
was so intense that the government
had to retreat on Bill C-30. The bill
was sent back to committee after
second reading (a step rarely taken by
majority governments) for revisions and
amendments. Critics hope the revised
version of the legislation would clearly
define what the police could and could
not investigate when it comes to the
online lives of Canadians.
To Consider
1. With a partner, revisit your responses to the questions asked in the Before
Reading instructions above. How did reading this section influence your
responses to these questions?
2. Why did some people support Bill C-30?
3. What happened that made the bill an issue of concern to many Canadians?
4. What surveillance powers would Bill C-30 give to police? Who would pay
for the surveillance technology? Do you agree with this? Why or why not?
5. Bill C-30 was so controversial that the government decided to send the bill
back to committee after second reading for amendments and revisions.
From what you have read, what were the main flaws of the bill? Which of
its terms were in need of major revisions?

BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
Fixing Bill C-30
Reading Prompt
The public debate over the government’s controversial online surveillance bill
became so intense that the Conservatives took the very rare step of sending
the bill back to committee for debate and review after second reading in the
House of Commons. To critics of the bill this was a small victory that indicated
that the government was aware that Bill C-30 constituted a major breach in
the online privacy of Canadians. Keep this in mind as you read Michael Geist’s
recommendations for fixing Bill C-30.
Professor Michael Geist and the
Bill C-30 Fix
If you do any serious research about
Canadian law and the Internet, you
are bound to come across the name
Michael Geist. The University of Ottawa
professor is the Canada Research Chair
in Internet and E-commerce Law for the
university and is a regular contributor to
the public debate on issues dealing with
the Internet. Therefore, it was no surprise
that, when Bill C-30 was introduced
in the House of Commons, Geist had a
great deal to say—and most of it wasn’t
very flattering for the Conservative
government and Bill C-30.
From the very start, Geist pointed
out that police had consistently failed
to demonstrate the need for the lawful
access provisions found in Bill C-30.
Canadian Privacy Commissioner Jennifer
Stoddart reinforced this point when she
said: “Canadian authorities have yet
to provide the public with evidence to
suggest that CSIS or Canadian police
cannot perform their duties under the
current regime.” The current regime
calls for police to obtain a warrant if
they want to access and monitor the
online behaviour of people they suspect
of conducting criminal activities on the
Internet.
As the controversy over Bill C-30
forced the legislation back to committee
for debate and revision, Geist proposed
12 steps to fix the online surveillance
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 22
bill. The following is a simplified
summary of his ideas.
The Bill C-30 Fix
1. Provide Canadians with evidence that
law enforcement needs lawful access
legislation. The existing warrantbased
system seems to be working
reasonably well. Why change it in
favour of a new system that might be
more prone to abuse?
2. Create a proper warrant for
investigating Internet crime.
Warrantless access to information is
the most contentious aspect of the
bill. While police complain that some
warrants do not effectively cover the
type of information they are looking
for, Geist argues that a new kind of
warrant could be created to allow
police timely access to the information
they need.
3. Report warrantless disclosure of
subscriber information by ISPs. While
Bill C-30 would create a reporting
system for warrantless sharing of
information, Geist worries that the
voluntary system that already sees
police requests honoured 95 per cent
of the time already constitutes a major
breach of privacy. However, if the
legislation is pushed through, proper
reporting of warrantless disclosure
needs to take place.

4. Remove the disclosure gag order.
Bill C-30 would prohibit ISPs from
informing their subscribers that their
information was disclosed to the
police. Geist argues that informing
subscribers is not unreasonable in
many cases and that the government
should work with ISPs to determine
when disclosure would be appropriate.
5. Scrap voluntary warrantless sharing
of information. Bill C-30 opens the
door for police to ask ISPs to share
subscriber e-mail and Web surfing
histories. The fear is that the voluntary
sharing of information that is already
occurring might go one step further,
with ISPs giving police information
that should be the subject of a judicial
warrant. Some sections of the bill also
encourage this kind of sharing and
provide immunity to ISPs for their cooperation.
Geist thinks the legislation
needs to do away with voluntary
information sharing.
6. Clarify the extent to which
surveillance technology will be used.
The section dealing with surveillance
is vague enough for law enforcement
agencies and the government to take
substantial liberties when it comes to
looking into the online behaviour of
Canadians. In fact, Bill C-30 gives
the government the right to compel
ISPs to install certain surveillance
software and hardware at their expense
as well as equipment provided by the
government itself. The language of the
bill needs to be much more specific
when it comes to what constitutes
legitimate surveillance and how
surveillance technologies will be used.
7. Take another look at the burden being
placed on ISPs. The government is
asking ISPs to dramatically change
their networks to make surveillance
easier for law enforcement. It also
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 23
goes to great lengths to outline the
reporting process that ISPs will have
to complete to demonstrate to the
government that they are fulfilling the
surveillance wishes of the police. In
essence, the language of the bill makes
the ISPs look more like an agent of the
state than a private company working
in the interests of its customers.
8. Create accountability in the law.
Geist would like to see a much more
comprehensive system of reporting
so that confidential watchdogs (like
the privacy commissioner) can make
sure that the surveillance system is not
being abused by law enforcement.
9. Limit the law to serious crimes.
Determine which crimes are subject
to surveillance and which are not. An
open-ended bill could lead to simple
snooping by police. Vic Toews and
the Conservatives claimed that the
bill was designed to lead to the arrest
and conviction of people involved in
child pornography. This is certainly an
example of a serious crime.
10. Let Canadians know how much it is
going to cost. Initial estimates put the
surveillance technology and system
upgrades at $80-million. Geist claims
that the cost will be much higher given
the infrastructure and bureaucratic
changes the legislation will mandate
both at the government level and with
the ISPs. If the real cost is going to be
over $80-million, Canadians need to
know how this will affect their taxes
if the government is footing the bill or
how much more they will pay for their
Internet if they are downloading the
costs onto the ISPs.
11. Fill in the blanks. Geist encourages
those drafting Bill C-30 to fully
disclose the language that will appear
in the final version of the bill. He feels
that there are unspecified regulations

that can be shaped and used in a
variety of ways that might lead to
inappropriate surveillance by law
enforcement.
12. Improve Canada’s privacy laws. If
the government wants lawful access
legislation, they should also agree
to update Canada’s privacy laws to
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 24
clearly define what privacy means in
the digital age.
Source: “How to fix Canada’s
online surveillance bill: A 12-step
to-do list,” www.michaelgeist.ca/
content/view/6339/125/. For a more
comprehensive understanding of the
Geist’s perspective on this issue, visit
www.michaelgeist.ca.
To Consider
1. Based on Geist’s recommendations, do you think Bill C-30 can be reworked
into something Canadians accept as not constituting an unreasonable
intrusion on their personal privacy?
2. Is there really a need for the kind of surveillance the police are looking to
obtain when it comes to Internet crime?
3. Does Bill C-30 infringe on the rights of ISPs to operate a private business?

BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
The Vikileaks Affair
Before Reading
Imagine that the government was trying to pass legislation that you disagreed
with on principle. Would it be acceptable for you to show your opposition
by setting up a website condemning the government’s action? Would it be
acceptable for you to make the website anonymous so that no one knew that
the site was created by you? Would it be acceptable for you to post personal
and private information about cabinet ministers in an effort to embarrass or
humiliate them as part of your campaign against the government’s legislation?
With a partner, respond to these questions and revisit your responses to them
after reading this section.
When Public Safety Minister Vic Toews
responded to an opposition critic’s
concerns about Bill C-30 by saying “he
can either stand with us or with the child
pornographers,” he set off an explosion
of outrage. The media were quick to
attack Toews for his incendiary rhetoric,
with more than a few journalists using
the minister’s “child pornographers”
analogy to add fuel to the fire of their
argument.
While a great deal of ink was spilled
in opposition to Bill C-30, it was the
Internet where the most damaging
attacks on the legislation appeared,
which makes sense given the fact that the
bill dealt with surveillance of people’s
online activity. Websites surfaced almost
immediately decrying Toews and the
Conservatives for threatening to invade
the online private lives of all Canadians.
The hacker group Anonymous posted
a YouTube video threatening to release
private information about Vic Toews
if he didn’t withdraw Bill C-30. It
also hacked the website of the Ontario
Association of Chiefs of Police after
the organization released a statement in
support of Toews and the bill. But the
most damaging attack of all came from a
Twitter account called #vikileaks30.
The Vikileaks Twitter account started
with the provocative declaration, “Vic
wants to know about you. Let’s get
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 25
to know Vic.” What followed were
intimate details of Vic Toews’s divorce
proceedings. While the information
was a matter of public record, many
questioned the ethical legitimacy of such
a personal attack that was not related to
Bill C-30.
As Vikileaks posts streamed on, a
campaign to catch the author ensued.
Toews’s colleague John Baird initially
blamed the NDP. But after a few
days it became clear that catching the
tweeter would be no easy task and
any accusation without some kind of
proof would do nothing but inflame the
situation. That is until the Ottawa Citizen
set up an online sting. A reporter sent
#vikileaks30 an e-mail with a link to
another website. The author of Vikileaks
took the bait and clicked on the link. This
allowed the Citizen reporter to isolate
the IP address of the computer the author
was using and, after a bit more digging,
determine that the address belonged to a
House of Commons computer. Shortly
after the Citizen reported its discovery,
Vikileaks went silent.
While the Twitter account lay dormant,
the hunt for the Vikileaks author
ramped up. The Speaker of the House
of Commons launched an investigation
into the account. The computer could
be identified, but not the author. Finally,
with the pressure of the investigation

mounting, and potential damage to his
political masters in the balance, Liberal
staffer Adam Carroll informed the party’s
interim leader Bob Rae that he was the
author of the feed and promptly resigned
from his job as a researcher.
A humbled Bob Rae apologized to
Toews and the House of Commons for
the ethical breach. He said that personal
attacks have no place in public life. The
message was clear: If an opposition
member wants to criticize a public figure
from the government, he or she needs to
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 26
focus on policies and issues and avoid
resorting to mudslinging and personal
gossip.
While Bill C-30 was sent back
to committee after second reading,
politicians wondered if they had entered
a new era in public life. Suddenly
the prospect of making enemies for
supporting policy initiatives (a routine
hazard in politics) was being combined
with potential public humiliation on the
Internet.
To Consider
1. With your partner, revisit your responses to the questions in the Before
Reading instructions above. How did reading this section influence your
responses?
2. How did the online community react to Bill C-30?
3. What is Vikileaks?
4. Do you think Vikileaks crossed the line from an ethical standpoint?
5. If a group like Anonymous can hack into large, secure websites, what
can prevent it from hacking into the surveillance network that Bill C-30
is asking ISPs to create? In other words, could the proposed surveillance
network make the private information of Canadians even more vulnerable
to the hacking skills of groups like Anonymous?

BILL C-30 AND INTERNET PRIVACY
Activity: A Parliamentary Committee Hearing
Your Task
For this activity you will prepare and present a debate regarding Bill C-30 and
any amendments that might be made to it as it might occur during a session
of the parliamentary committee investigating the bill. Sending any proposed
piece of legislation to such committees for detailed review after it has been
introduced in Parliament is a normal part of the procedure involved in enacting
a new law.
Resources
Use the information included in this News in Review story to prepare for your
debate. You may also wish to consult the following link from the CBC website
and other links related to this story: “Online surveillance critics point to foreign
experience,” www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2012/02/21/pol-c30surveillance-caution.html.
Background
The Harper government conceded that more work needed to be done before
Bill C-30 could be passed. On the one hand, the government maintained its
commitment to giving law enforcement authorities more power to investigate
crimes occurring on the Internet. On the other, privacy advocates were able to
demonstrate to the government that some information should remain private
and that obtaining a warrant prior to an investigation was not an unreasonable
requirement for police. Based on these two perspectives, the government
agreed to send the bill back to committee for more debate and legislative
amendments before reintroducing it to Parliament. Your task is to assume the
role of a representative of one of the political parties at the committee meeting
arguing for one of the perspectives indicated above.
Process
1. Form a group of four people. Each person in the group will pretend to be
a member of one of the following political parties:
Conservative — in favour of Bill C-30
Liberal — opposed to Bill C-30 after first reading
NDP — opposed to Bill C-30 after first reading
Green — opposed to Bill C-30 after first reading
2. Conduct research into the details surrounding Bill C-30. Once you feel you
have gained enough information to present your viewpoint, stage a mock
committee meeting where you debate the strengths and weaknesses of
the bill. The Conservative group member will chair the meeting.
3. The meeting will follow this agenda:
a) Summary with briefing notes for each party
b) Conservative perspective — 5 minutes
You want to obtain information from Internet service providers (ISPs)
without a warrant. Meanwhile monitoring online activity will only be
possible with a warrant. You also want ISPs to install $80-million in
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 27

software and hardware upgrades so you can monitor online criminal
activity in real time and with greater ease.
c) NDP, Liberal and Green perspectives — 5 minutes each
Collectively you oppose the need to put warrantless access to information
into law since i) this constitutes an invasion of an Internet user’s privacy
and ii) ISPs are already honouring police requests for user information 95
per cent of the time. You also believe that the $80-million surveillance
technology upgrade will mean either higher taxes for Canadians (if the
government pays for the equipment) or higher Internet bills (if the ISPs pay
for the equipment).
d) Challenge
Each party will have three minutes to challenge the perspectives put
forward by any of the other parties.
e) Amendments
Hold a roundtable discussion of perspectives and challenges. Take the
existing bill and decide which components to keep and which to discard.
This should take around 15 minutes to complete.
4. The New Bill C-30: As a group, prepare a summary of your revised bill as
you would like to see it presented to the House of Commons. Hand your
new Bill C-30 in to your teacher or present it to your classmates. As a class,
evaluate the new Bill C-30 to determine whether it addresses the concerns
that were made at the time when the government introduced the original
version of the bill in Parliament.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 28

Focus
Canadian
multiculturalism has
become a legally and
politically entrenched
institution, as well
as an identifiable
and, for many other
countries, an enviable
characteristic of
Canadian life. But
today’s Generation
One youths are
challenging this
multicultural ideal as
they struggle to secure
an identity within
Canadian society.
This News in Review
story profiles the
experiences of various
Generation Ones and
examines their imprint
on Canada’s cultural
fabric.
Did you know . . .
In 1988, the federal
government passed
the Canadian
Multiculturalism Act,
which recognizes
the importance
of preserving and
enhancing the
heritage of Canadians,
protecting the
rights of aboriginal
peoples, and ensuring
that every person is
equal under the law
regardless of his/her
ethnicity.
GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Introduction
Canada’s ethnically diverse population
is often referred to as a cultural mosaic.
According to Statistics Canada, recent
census data identified over 200 ethnic
origins and 100 languages spoken in the
country. One out of every five persons
in Canada was born in another country,
with the vast majority of new immigrants
settling in Canada’s three largest cities:
Toronto, Vancouver, and Montreal.
Canada’s ethno-cultural diversity is
expected to further increase, and by
2016, it is estimated that foreign-born
youth and Canadian-born youth from
immigrant families will make up a
quarter of the country’s population. This
number will increase to nearly one-half
of Canadians by 2031, with the majority
of immigrants coming from Asia and the
Middle East.
Diversity will also continue to grow
among “Generation Ones,” who are
defined as the first generation born in
Canada to immigrant parents. Almost
one-half of this demographic group
is projected to belong to a visible
minority—nearly double the proportion
reported in the 2006 census. However,
Canada’s ideal of multiculturalism is
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 29
under greater scrutiny as new data and
surveys reveal significant challenges
facing today’s Generation One youths.
Contrary to past assumptions that
Generation One youths are high
achievers, some groups, especially those
from some visible minorities, continue
to face discrimination, wage gaps, and
barriers to post-secondary opportunities.
In addition, these Canadian-born youths
seem to be caught between the customs,
cultures, and expectations of their
immigrant parents and the need to find
acceptance within societal norms—
especially those of their teenaged peers.
In order to learn more about this
group of Canadians, Nahlah Ayed, an
award- winning CBC journalist, returned
to her old school, Churchill High
School, in her hometown of Winnipeg,
Manitoba, to investigate why today’s
Generation One youths do not feel “100
per cent Canadian.” A Canadian-born
daughter of Palestinian immigrants,
Ayed and her journey not only reflect
her own Generation One experiences but
highlight the struggles encountered by
today’s Generation One youths in their
search for Canadian identity.
To Consider
1. What does it mean to you to be Canadian? Reflect on your own experience
or those of your classmates.
2. Do you think Canada’s multiculturalism makes it easier or more difficult
for new immigrants and Generation Ones to feel they belong to Canadian
society? Explain.

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Video Review
Pre-viewing Questions
With a partner or in a small group, discuss and respond to the following
questions.
1. Are you are newcomer, a Generation One, or some other generation of
Canadian?
2. Do you speak a language other than English or French at home? Which
one(s)?
3. Would you classify yourself as a visible minority?
4. With which ethno-cultural group(s) would you identify yourself?
Viewing Questions
As you watch the video, respond to the the questions in the spaces provided.
1. How are Generation One Canadians defined?
2. Do Generation One citizens feel 100 per cent Canadian? Why or why not?
3. Why do some parents of Generation One youths think they are in a
cultural war zone 24/7?
4. Why do some Generation One youths feel less Canadian at home
compared with when they are at school?
5. What do recent surveys tell us about today’s Generation One youths?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 30

6. What are these people’s viewpoints on being Canadian: Nahlah Ayed
(reporter), Tariq (Generation One student), Shirin (Tariq’s mom from
Egypt), Melissa (Generation One student), Elizabeth (Melissa’s mom from
Portugal)?
7. Why is the struggle for a Canadian identity among today’s Generation One
youths a potential concern for our society?
Post-viewing Questions
1. Review your answers from the Pre-viewing Questions and reflect on your
responses from the Viewing Questions. Has watching the video changed
your views regarding what it means to be Canadian? If so, in what way(s)?
2. Based on the viewpoints of the Generation One youths in the video, do
you think we should be greatly concerned, somewhat concerned, or not
concerned about how they feel about being Canadian? Support and
discuss your position.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 31

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Generational and Cultural Conflicts
Focus for Reading
While you read this section, complete a multiple causation web. A copy of this
organizer can be accessed at http://newsinreview.cbclearning.ca/wp-content/
uploads/worksheets/nir-sw2-multiple-consequences2.pdf.
In the centre triangle write Generation One and then record all of the
challenges impacting today’s Generation One youths.
Today’s Generation One youths
describe themselves as living in
two, at times conflicting, worlds: the
cultural expectations of their immigrant
parents and the social norms of their
Canadian peer group. They often
feel they do not fit in to Canada’s
diverse cultural landscape. Along with
dealing with typical teenage pressures
about acceptance and popularity, this
demographic group, especially those
belonging to visible minorities, is
exhibiting a drop in post-secondary
education, income earnings, and an
overall sense of belonging to Canadian
society. These trends, coupled with
Statistics Canada’s population projection
that by 2031 almost one-half of
Generation One Canadians will belong
to a visible minority, are prompting
increased research and more programs to
strengthen their societal integration and
enhance their sense of self-esteem.
Education
Canadian immigrant students, including
both newcomers and Generation One
students, have ranked at the top of
the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development’s (OECD)
standardized tests of math and reading.
Statistics Canada has reported that
Generation One youths tend to have
lower high school drop-out rates when
compared with youths of Canadian-born
parents (www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001x/2007110/article/10372-eng.htm).
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 32
However, what these studies fail to
show is that “not all immigrant groups
are thriving in Canadian schools.” The
success of groups from China and other
Asian countries is “masking the struggles
of others” (The Globe and Mail, January
22, 2011). For example, the Toronto
District School Board, where 70 per cent
of students from grades seven through 12
have both parents born outside Canada,
noted that students from Latin American
or Caribbean immigrant groups have
some of the lowest rates of postsecondary
education. Student responses
indicated that discrimination, difficulties
with language, and low levels of income
prevented them from entering postsecondary
institutions.
Filipino youths, part of an immigrant
community that has become a prominent
source of workers for Canada’s
caregiving industries, are showing
declining numbers of universitydegree
completion—from 37 per cent
for newcomers to 24 per cent in the
Generation One category. Lengthy
separation of family members, financial
pressures to send earnings back home,
and efforts to leave caregiving jobs in
order to retrain for alternate employment,
are placing additional strains on the next
generation (The Globe and Mail, March
19, 2011). Even though the overall
percentage of Generation One youths
attending university is higher than that of
its non-immigrant counterparts, ensuring
that all immigrant groups have academic

success is vital to Canada’s economic
future.
Income
Canadian multiculturalism involves the
long-standing belief that the children of
immigrants will do better economically
than their parents (The Globe and Mail,
February 26, 2011). But how well are
the offspring of immigrants—especially
visible minorities—really doing?
Research indicates that the cultural,
linguistic, economic, and educational
barriers faced by their immigrant parents
may continue to persist into the ranks of
Generation One Canadians (Association
for Canadian Studies, http://canada.
metropolis.net/publications/Diversity/
can_diversity_vol_62_spring08_e.pdf).
Discrimination plays a significant role
in the workplace, starting with the job
application process. Researchers have
found that “applicants with Englishsounding
names were 40 per cent more
likely to get an interview than those
with identical resumes and an Indian
or Chinese name” (The Globe and
Mail, February, 26, 2011). The result?
Visible minority Generation Ones may
experience lower levels of employment
and income earnings than non-visible
minority groups. For males with
similar educational and employment
experience, the income gap is 18 per
cent. Females appear to have a smaller
gap, at three per cent, due to the fact that
young women with immigrant parents
tend to live at home longer, were less
likely to be married or have children,
and predominantly lived in large urban
centres with greater employment
opportunities (Statistics Canada, www.
statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-001-x/2007110/
article/10372-eng.htm).
Researchers also found income
disparities among visible minority
Generation One groups when compared
with their non-minority, Canadian-born
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 33
counterparts. For example, the wage gap
for Canadian-born children of Chinese
immigrants was eight per cent, for
South Asians it was 13 per cent, and for
African-Canadians it was approximately
19 per cent. This wage gap tends to
decline over time for some groups, but
does not completely disappear, which
may cause future social tensions.
Family Expectations
The relationship between immigrant
parents and their Canadian-born
children is one that is often stereotyped
as a clash of cultures. In reality, this
relationship is complex and dynamic.
Parenting teenagers can be stressful at
the best of times, but employment and
income loss, language barriers, and a
lack of familiarity with Canadian social
institutions and cultural values pose
additional challenges for immigrant
parents.
Often many immigrant parents work
multiple jobs or face re-training and
underemployment. As a result, their
children may share less of their parent’s
time, and some offspring may need to
work in order to contribute to the family
income. Female family members might
also be required to work which, in some
cultures, challenges their traditional
norms. A role reversal can occur in
families when immigrant parents need to
rely on the language skills and societal
awareness of their children. Some
parents may find this shift in authority
difficult and feel they are losing their
position as the heads of the household
(Association for Canadian Studies,
Canadian Diversity, http://canada.
metropolis.net/pdfs/Pgs_can_diversity_
parents_spring08_e.pdf).
The CBC’s The National’s Generation
One feature further examined the impact
of immigrant parents’ expectations on
their Canadian-born children. In it,
journalist Nahlah Ayed reflects on her

experience growing up in a Generation
One cohort and how she was encouraged
by her parents to embrace the Canadian
identity and fit in with Canadian society.
She thought of herself as Canadian first
and placed her Palestinian ethno-cultural
heritage second.
However, many of the parents of
today’s Generation One youths want their
children to know and be proud of their
heritage. The mother of Tarek Elmayergi,
one of the teenagers featured, wants
him to embrace more of his Egyptian
background. She says, “I’m not going
to turn my back and say, ‘Okay, I’m an
Egyptian in Egypt, but here I’m going to
become Canadian.’ I can’t do that. They
(my Generation One children) can’t do
that” (CBC News Online, www.cbc.ca/
news/yourcommunity/2012/02/are-you-ageneration-one-canadian.html).
These parents also feel at a loss in
Canadian society since they were not
born or raised in Canada. Like most
parents of teenagers, they expressed
concern about their children’s
performance in school and the influences
of their peers, but they also want their
children to place their cultural heritage at
the forefront of who they are.
Possible Solutions
Needless to say, Generation One youths
often feel torn between their desire to
fit in with their peer groups in Canadian
society and their desire to meet their
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 34
parent’s expectations. Possible solutions
to bridge this gap and to help Generation
One youths succeed could include the
following:
• Expand research to focus on the
experiences and perceptions of all
family members, especially those from
today’s Generation One youths.
• Ensure future research makes
distinctions between first, second,
and third immigrant generations to
examine the different expectations and
experiences these groups have toward
education and employment.
• Extend employment equity laws to the
private sector to help close the wage
gap between visible minorities and
their “white” counterparts.
• Improve co-ordination of educational
support from parents, schools,
governments, and local communities
for youths. Also, restore recent federal
funding cuts to Settlement Worker
programs in the schools that help
newcomer and Generation One students
and their parents integrate.
• Broaden availability of community
support programs where each adult is
paired with a youth who teaches him/
her English language and computer
skills.
• Help immigrant parents find jobs
that recognize their experiences and
qualifications through government
programs such as the Canadian
Immigration Integration Program.
Follow-up
1. Review your completed causation web organizer. Beside each recorded
challenge, provide at least one solution you think could help Generation
One youth to deal with it.
2. Read the following three statements. Write a one- to two-sentence
response for each statement. Pass your responses to at least three other
classmates. Review and add new ideas to their responses.
Rakhi Henderson, 42, is a senior brand manager at ING Direct. She recalls
her father, a geologist from India, often complaining about the wage gap
and being passed over for job opportunities in Canada. Her situation is

markedly different than his, but at times in her career, “there were people
that I saw rising very quickly without additional qualifications whereas I
was left behind. You never knew, what it is, but there were opportunities
where I just went, Hmmmm” (The Globe and Mail, February 26, 2011).
Carolina Estrella, 17, a high-school student in Toronto, was born in Canada
to parents from Uruguay and Ecuador. She should be graduating but has
only completed about one-third of the required credits to earn her high
school diploma. “You know what the problem is in these school districts?
The lower people like the Latinos don’t go to school and don’t graduate.
I don’t think it’s our culture, I think it’s more that they don’t have enough
money” (The Globe and Mail, January 22, 2011).
Sophia Juan, 21, a university student, is the Canadian-born child of
immigrants from the Philippines. “Education is really important in my
family and in Filipino culture. They always teach you that you have to go
on to post-secondary school” (The Globe and Mail, January 22, 2011).
3. What do you think are the most serious challenges facing Generation One
youth in Canada today? How can they be overcome?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 35

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Generation One Profiles
Focus for Reading
In your notebook, create a chart like the one below and, as you read each of the
following profiles, record information for each one.
Profile
Khalid Elgazzar
Joyce Yan
Nazem Kadri
Esi Edugyan
Ronia Arab
Sammy Farah
Jamil Peyawary
Heritage Occupation Challenges What it means to be
Canadian
Generation One Canadians are defined as
either being born in Canada to immigrant
parents or having immigrated to Canada
as young children. But let’s look
beyond this definition and explore their
experiences, struggles, and perceptions
of what it means to be Canadian. The
following profiles outline their varied
experiences.
Profile: Khalid Elgazzar
Age: 33 years • Heritage: Egyptian
Occupation: Lawyer living in Ottawa
“When I was in high school, I listened
to a lot of hip hop and gangsta rap. I
definitely wouldn’t be blasting it at
home, but if I was at school, I would
be playing it and discussing it with
my friends. It’s sometimes a matter of
survival; you want to fit in with your
friends and you don’t want to fall out
with your parents. You live different
roles. It’s not necessarily healthy. You
can sometimes lose yourself and you are
not really sure where you belong. There
is a responsibility on those who have
gone through that experience to say, ‘It’s
not the end of the world, make sure to
communicate with your family, things
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 36
will get better’” (The Globe and Mail,
February 18, 2012).
Profile: Joyce Yan
Age: 22 years • Heritage: Chinese
Occupation: Undergraduate student
at Simon Fraser University, British
Columbia
“Growing up, I was always strongheaded.
Mom said not to go out; I went
anyway. I didn’t see it as rebellious
against my parents. I was just doing what
I wanted to do. One day, we got into a
big argument about how I was wasting
my life away. I used to say to my father
all the time: ‘You’re not in China. You’re
in Canada now.’ But within the last few
years I’ve definitely grown up a lot,
figured out what I wanted to do. I’ve
settled down and my dad has become
more tolerant and understanding. It’s
wonderful at home now” (The Globe and
Mail, February18, 2012).
Profile: Nazem Kadri
Age: 21 • Born: London, Ontario
Heritage: Lebanese • Occupation: NHL
hockey player
“First thing that comes to mind when

Quote
“Many immigrant
children feel torn
about their identity.
Sometimes they
express their conflict
by asserting their
Canadian-ness, other
times they express it
by talking about how
they feel excluded.” —
Dr. Audrey Kobayashi,
cultural geography
professor at Queen’s
University (CBC News
Online, www.cbc.
ca/news/canada/
story/2012/02/15/
f-audio-photosimmigrant-canadianchildren.html)
I think of Canada is hockey, pancakes,
and the maple leaf. By playing hockey
and other sports it helped me to fit in
and to become part of Canadian society.
I have always felt part of the Canadian
culture but do not feel that I have lost
my heritage” (CBC News Online, www.
cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/
generationone/).
Profile: Esi Edugyan
Age: 33 • Born: Calgary, Alberta
Heritage: Ghanaian • Occupation:
Award-winning novelist
“I felt very Canadian growing up. But,
of course, my parents’ culture was
constantly balanced against the world
outside of home. I went to a French
immersion school and learned both
official languages—an important part
of our national fabric. There were very
few African-Canadian students at my
school and sometimes I was viewed
as ‘other.’ Nevertheless, I have always
felt Canadian and it is not a big issue
for me” (CBC News Online, www.
cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/
generationone/).
Profile: Ronia Arab
Age: 16 years • Heritage: Kurdish
Occupation: High school student in
Winnipeg, Manitoba
“My parents do not like how I dress. I
do not wear revealing clothes, but my
dad makes a big deal out of it. He thinks
that because of the way I dress, I am
acting like a Canadian. He wants me to
wear traditional Iraqi clothing and to
act like I am from Iraq. But I was born
in Canada. I don’t know much about
my parents’ culture or homeland since
I have never been there. My father
wants to send me to Iraq to learn the
culture and the lifestyle, but this is not
what I want. I have been living away
from home for one year. For the future,
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 37
I would like a good job and a family”
(CBC News Online, www.cbc.ca/news/
yourcommunity/2012/02/are-you-ageneration-one-canadian.html).
Profile: Sammy Farah
Age: 14 years • Heritage: Somali
Occupation: High School student in
Winnipeg, Manitoba
“Gangs, crime, getting arrested—I’ve
seen it happen and I do not want to be
a part of it. I want to finish high school
and go to college. I don’t want to be
just an average person. My mom has
been a good influence. She wants me
be to be a good kid, a good person, and
to stay away from drugs—this is what I
am working towards. Some immigrant
parents are strict since they want their
kids to do the right thing and to become
better people—this is why they came
here” (CBC News Online, www.cbc.ca/
news/yourcommunity/2012/02/are-youa-generation-one-canadian.html).
Profile: Jamil Peyawary
Age: 18 years • Heritage: Afghan
Occupation: Working in a restaurant in
Winnipeg, Manitoba
“My parents had a hard life in their
home country. From their experiences
and stories, I am very grateful to be here
in Canada and not there. However, it
was difficult as a kid. I was bullied and
named called—I tried to correct them
that I was Afghan not Pakistani, but it
didn’t work. In grade eight and nine I
hung around with gang members and
thought I could fit in with that crowd.
By grade 10 I realized that this was not
my scene. The biggest expectation and
challenge for my family is to succeed.
In the future, I want to become a chef”
(CBC News Online, www.cbc.ca/news/
yourcommunity/2012/02/are-you-ageneration-one-canadian.html).

Follow-up
1. Using a Venn diagram summarize the challenges that are unique to
Generation One Canadian teenagers on one side and challenges that
are unique to older Generation One Canadians on the other side. Record
challenges that are shared by both groups at the points where the circles
overlap. For a template of a Venn diagram, consult http://office.microsoft.
com/en-us/templates/venn-diagram-chart-TC030002098.aspx.
2. For each of the profiles, write a two- or three-line response from the
respective parent’s point of view. What challenges would they face? What
is their perception of being Canadian?
3. Select one of the Generation One profiles and create a mock Facebook
profile page for it. Your page could contain information about the person’s
heritage, occupation, reasons parents came to Canada, and a two- or
three-line statement that starts with “Being a Canadian means . . .”
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 38

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Nahlah Ayed: The Face of Generation One
Focus for Reading
In The National’s special feature on Generation One youths, journalist Nahlah
Ayed commented that, “the place where you grow you grow up makes you.
Some parts of it stay with you, even if you leave it behind. While we knew
that our origin was from elsewhere, we were Canadian kids.” Do you agree
or disagree with this statement? As you read the following section, gather
evidence to support your position.
Nahlah Ayed, an award-winning CBC
journalist and Generation One Canadian
of Palestinian background, recently
returned to Churchill High School in her
hometown of Winnipeg, Manitoba, to
report on the cultural struggles facing
today’s Generation One youths.
Biography
• Born and raised in Winnipeg, Manitoba
• Palestinian heritage
• Speaks English and Arabic fluently
• Attended Churchill High School in the
1980s
• Graduated from Carleton University’s
master of journalism program
• Graduated from the University
of Manitoba master’s degree in
interdisciplinary studies program
• Holds a bachelor of science degree
from the University of Manitoba
• Former parliamentary reporter for the
Canadian Press
• Joined CBC News in 2002 as a foreign
news correspondent reporting mostly
on Middle East events
• Currently is The National’s
correspondent focusing on Canada’s
foreign policy, the country’s cultural
diversity, and international events,
especially the Middle East
Source: www.cbc.ca/thenational/about/
correspondents/nahlahayed/
Accomplishments
Nahlah Ayed is a familiar and trusted
foreign news correspondent, particularly
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 39
dealing with events occurring in the
Middle East. Reporting for the CBC on
national television, radio, and online,
Ayed has covered numerous high-profile
news stories such as the Iraq war and
subsequent fall of its capital, Baghdad
(2003), the war in Afghanistan, the Arab
Spring (2011-12) political uprisings,
and most recently, the crisis in Syria.
Ayed has also reported on major stories
beyond the Middle East, including the
Haiti earthquake, the Pakistan floods,
the London riots, and the 2011 mass
shootings in Norway.
In 2004 and 2010, Ayed received
Gemini awards for her news reports
about conflicts in the Middle East. She
received a doctor of laws (honorary
doctorate degree) from the University of
Manitoba in 2008 for her distinguished
achievements in broadcast journalism.
The University of Manitoba also
established the Nahlah Ayed Prize
for Student Leadership and Global
Citizenship to celebrate the achievements
of their former graduate. Ayed joined
other prominent Canadian journalists as
part of a media panel discussing the high
pressures and often dangerous work of
foreign news correspondents.
Away from the media spotlight, Ayed
penned and recently released a memoir
entitled A Thousand Farewells: A
Reporter’s Journey from Refugee Camp
to the Arab Spring.

Additional Research
Find out about other
famous Generation
One Canadians by
going to www.cbc.
ca/thenational/
indepthanalysis/
generationone/.
Canadian Identity
Nahlah Ayed offers a unique Generation
One experience. Born in Canada to
Palestinian immigrant parents, her family
returned to the Middle East where she
spent a number of childhood years in a
refugee camp in Amman, Jordan. As a
teenager, she and her family came back
to Winnipeg. Some of these experiences
were highlighted in her recent book.
But it is in the CBC’s The National’s
Generation One segment where Ayed
explores the question of why her sense
of being Canadian is different from that
of today’s generation of high-school
students. Attending high school in
the mid-1980s, she was one of a few
students classified as Generation One.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 40
For Ayed, it was sometimes difficult
adjusting to new social norms, but she
viewed herself as a Canadian first and
someone of Palestinian-Arab background
second.
Ayed’s journey not only reflects on
her Canadian identity, but also the
struggles of today’s Generation One
youth caught between their parent’s
cultural expectations and their desire to
fit in with Canadian society. As the face
of Generation One, Ayed’s impressive
accomplishments as a journalist and a
writer, as well as her personal cultural
experiences, may help to guide today’s
Generation One youths in their search for
Canadian identity.
Follow-up
1. Now that you have finished reading this section, return to the quote
by Ayed in the Focus for Reading section. Has your stance—agree or
disagree—in response to her statement changed? If so, why? Discuss your
stance with a partner. Does he/she agree or disagree? Why or why not?
2. Select three of Ayed’s accomplishments that you found to be most
interesting. Explain the reasons for your choices.
3. Do you think Ayed is representative of the faces of today’s Generation
One youth or is there too much of a generational divide between her and
today’s Generation Ones? Record and discuss your thoughts.

GENERATION ONE: LIVING IN TWO WORLDS
Activity: The Challenges Facing Gen One
• I don’t feel 100 per cent Canadian.
• I act less Canadian at home.
• Where do I fit in with Canadian society?
The statements above mirror recent surveys that indicate that today’s
Generation One youths do not share the same sense of belonging to Canada
as many others. Many Generation One youths feel torn between two worlds—
upholding their parent’s cultural expectations versus their desire to integrate
with Canadian society.
Your Task
Working in small groups, discuss the present concerns and challenges of
Generation One youths in Canada, based on your experiences and those of
your classmates. Your group will also need to develop a five-point Gen One
action plan to outline how each of the following groups can help Generation
One youths become: a) aware of the importance of being part of Canada’s
diverse fabric and b) aware of strategies to help them achieve greater success
personally, academically, and in their present or future jobs.
• Teenaged peers
• Parents
• Teachers/guidance counsellors/school administration
• Employers
• Federal, provincial, and municipal governments
Use information from this News in Review video and guide as well as the
CBC Generation One online link at www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/
generationone/ to help develop your action plan.
If appropriate, share your own and/or your classmates’ Generation One
experiences to help start the discussion about why today’s Generation One
youths have mixed feelings about being Canadian.
When the Gen One action plans are complete, display, share, and discuss them
with the entire class. Select at least one additional suggestion from each of the
other groups’ action plans that will strengthen your original Gen One action
plan. On a scale of 1 (low) to 10 (high), determine and explain how successful
your final action plan will be to help Generation One youths integrate into
Canadian society.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 41

Focus
This story examines
Mexico’s campaign
against the drug
cartels and how this
drug war is affecting
Mexico as well as
its North American
neighbours: the
United States and
Canada.
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Introduction
Since 2006 the Mexican government
has been locked in a violent battle
with its drug traffickers. Shortly after
his election in 2006, President Felipe
Calderón moved his troops into areas of
Mexico long controlled by criminals, the
members of what are usually referred to
as drug cartels.
The criminals behind the cartels are
drug traffickers. Originally they worked
with drug suppliers from Colombia,
moving their product through Mexico
and across the border into the United
States, with some of it eventually making
its way into Canada. Beginning in the
1990s, two major cartels, one on the east
coast and one on the west, controlled
much of this business. Thanks to a
combination of threats and bribery, local
police and officials mostly overlooked
the drug trade.
Initially, Calderón’s campaign had
positive results. Several drug lords were
captured and jailed, and millions of
dollars’ worth of drugs was seized. The
general public was enthusiastic about
the action. The military, seen as the one
uncorrupted authority in the nation, were
national heroes.
By 2012, however, the campaign
has resulted in some unpleasant
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 42
consequences. The number of cartels
has actually mushroomed as the
victories over the original ones created
opportunities for new criminals groups
to fill the vacuum. Turf wars among the
cartels have increased both in frequency
and level of violence. The cartels have
expanded their activities to include
crimes like kidnapping, extortion, and
human smuggling. They have maintained
their influence over the areas in which
they operate, and now regularly use
murder as their principal means of
intimidation. Where they are powerful,
no one—police, mayors, or even state
governors—is safe. And the army has
seen its public reputation badly tarnished
by a long series of human rights abuses.
In just a few months Mexico will elect
a new president. The election is seen
by many as a referendum on the drug
war—a war that so far has claimed about
50 000 lives. Three months before the
July 1, 2012, election, the ruling party
is trailing the opposition in the polls.
The drug war is at a crossroads; how it
will be conducted after July 1 is unclear.
What is certain, however, is that this is a
war with no winners—and with Mexico
as the loser.
To Consider
In 2009 former Mexican president Vicente Fox attended a gala in Calgary.
Speaking with reporters, he said that any Canadian or American who used
drugs shipped through his country—cocaine, cannabis, methamphetamines,
or heroin—was partly responsible for the drug violence in Mexico (in 2009
Canadians are believed to have used 14 tonnes of cocaine alone).
Do you agree with Fox’s statement? Why or why not? If you do agree, what
steps do you think Canada might take to acknowledge this responsibility?

THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Video Review
Pre-viewing Discussion
Mexico is in the Canadian news surprisingly often. In 2010 alone there were
23 000 stories in the Canadian media about Mexico. The trend has continued in
2011 and 2012.
What kinds of stories have you heard about Mexico? Have you been there
yourself on holiday or do you have family or friends who have visited? Is your
opinion of Mexico positive or negative? Would you like to visit or revisit the
country? Why or why not? Would media reports of drug-related violence in
Mexico influence your decision to travel there?
Viewing Questions
As you watch the video, answer the questions in the spaces provided.
1. How many Canadian tourists visit Mexico each year?
2. When did the Mexican government declare war on the drug cartels?
3. Who are Los Zetas?
4. Briefly describe some of the tactics Los Zetas employ in their war with the
Mexican government.
5. Why do marines hunting drug cartel members routinely wear masks?
6. What is the most common route used to take drugs into Mexico? What is
the most common route for guns?
7. How long does it usually take to cross the border from Mexico into the
United States? From the United States into Mexico?
8. Briefly describe how Mayor Mauricio Fernandez ensures that the laws are
enforced in the city of San Pedro.
9. How many people have been killed in the six years since the drug wars
began?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 43

Post-viewing Questions
1. Has your opinion of Mexico and whether or not you would like to visit the
country changed in any way after watching the video?
2. If you were a resident of San Pedro, how would you feel about the mayor’s
methods for responding to the threats of drug cartels?
3. Purchasing guns in the U.S. areas bordering Mexico is fairly simple and
straightforward. What responsibility, if any, does the U.S. have to restrict
the sale of guns likely to end up in the hands of drug cartel members?
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 44

Did you know . . .
The term cartel is
routinely used to
describe the gangs
that control the drug
trade in Mexico, but it
is actually a misnomer.
A cartel is a group
of organizations
that work together
to control the
manufacturing or
distribution of a
product in order to
keep prices and profits
high. Mexico’s drug
cartels are actually as
much in conflict with
one other as they
are at war with the
government. Because
the term is in common
usage, we will also
use it in this News in
Review guide.
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Mexico in Crisis: Drug Cartels
Focus for Reading
As you read this section of the guide, answer the following questions in your
notebook.
1. Why were the drug cartels originally formed?
2. Which politicians have taken serious action against the cartels? With what
results?
3. How have the cartels changed since the drug war began?
4. What tactics do the cartels use to enforce their authority in the regions
where they operate?
The Conflict Begins
For several decades, Mexico has been an
important player in the manufacture and
international distribution of illegal drugs.
Long a producer of both heroin and
marijuana, in the 1980s Mexico became
a leading distributor of cocaine produced
in Colombia. The distribution routes
normally used by Colombian traffickers
in Florida and the Caribbean to access
U.S. market were increasingly subject
to intense police scrutiny. Colombians
turned to Mexican gangs to take their
product across the U.S. border by land.
They often paid for these services
in kind—up to 50 per cent of each
shipment—making the Mexican drug
gangs both distributors and traffickers.
Two particular gangs, or drug cartels,
took the lead in the Mexican drug
business during these years. They
were the Sinaloa Federation, based on
Mexico’s west coast, and the Gulf cartel,
operating from Gulf of Mexico coast in
the northeastern part of the country.
For most of the 20 th century, Mexico
was ruled by one political party, the
Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI).
The PRI for the most part turned a blind
eye to drug smuggling. Many of its
leaders had an “arrangement” with the
various cartels, and in return for bribes
and political contributions ignored the
activities of the various gangs.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 45
But in 2000 the right-of-centre
National Action Party (PAN) came to
power under the leadership of Vicente
Fox. In an attempt to lessen political
corruption, the new government began
a campaign against the major cartels.
Soon after his election, Fox sent troops
into the border city of Nuevo Laredo to
fight the cartels. During his presidency,
several prominent members of the cartel
leadership were arrested.
The War Years
The Mexican drug war really began in
2006, with the election of Felipe Calderón
of PAN as president. It was at that time
that levels of violent crime began to rise.
Nearly 1 800 people were killed in cartelrelated
crimes in 2006. For 2011 the total
is estimated at about 17 000. Some 50 000
people have been killed since 2006.
During Fox’s presidency new cartels
were forming. The gangs began to
fight among themselves to extend their
territorial control. At least 90 per cent of
Mexico’s murder victims are believed
to be people associated with the cartels.
One reason the fight for territory became
so significant was domestic. Originally
most cartel activity was dedicated to
supplying drugs to the U.S. market. But
by 2006 Mexicans’ own demand for
illegal drugs was increasing at about 20
per cent per year.

FYI
How powerful are the
cartels? In the state of
Durango, one cartel
arranged for 14 of its
incarcerated members
to be released
overnight from their
jail so they could
murder 18 rival gang
members at a party
in a neighbouring
state. They returned
to their prison after
the murders and, of
course, to protection
from revenge by the
rival gang.
Digging Deeper
For more on the
Mexican drug cartels
go to the CBC
website at www.
cbc.ca/news/world/
story/2011/08/28/fmexico-drug-cartels.
html.
Despite government crackdown efforts
the cartels have managed to retain
control of some of the country’s major
states and cities. Especially in those
states bordering the U.S.—Chihuahua,
Coahuila, Sonora, Baja California,
Nuevo León, and Tamaulipas—levels
of cartel influence and the resulting
violence remain extremely high.
The cartels no longer devote
themselves solely to drugs. Many
have expanded to include kidnapping,
extortion, and human smuggling among
their illegal activities.
Gun running is also a major activity.
Relaxed gun-control policies in the
United States have made it easy for
the cartels to purchase sophisticated
weaponry for smuggling into Mexico. As
a result, the cartels are often a match for
the authorities in gun battles.
Where they are active, the cartels
often exert influence over the police,
the military, the justice system, and
politicians. Sometimes they use bribes
to subvert the system; other times they
intimidate with violence. Many police
and government officials have been
killed as examples to others. Lately
journalists who publicize cartel activities
have also become favourite targets.
The Big Three
There are many major and minor players
among the cartels, but three in particular
are deserving of mention.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 46
First is the Sinaloa Federation, headed
by Joaquin “El Chapo (Shorty)” Guzman
Loera, one of the world’s richest men,
worth more than USD$1-billion.
Sinaloa is Mexico’s largest producer of
methamphetamines and a major grower
of marijuana (government officials
recently uncovered a 2 120 hectare
marijuana plantation in Baja California).
It remains most active on the west coast.
This cartel is known for bribery of
public officials as its major tactic. Many
also believe it has bought favours from
the government by providing evidence
against some of its rival cartels. It
operates in 16 Mexican states.
One of those rivals is Los Zetas,
widely known as the most brutal of all
the cartels. It is an offshoot of the Gulf
cartel made up of ex-members of the
Mexican Special Forces and operates
mostly on the Gulf coast. Beheadings,
arson, torture, and bombings are just
some of the methods they have used in
the past. It now operates in at least 17
states.
Until 2010, Los Zetas were the armed
wing of the Gulf cartel, centered in the
northern state of Tamaulipas. The Gulf
cartel has been weakened by arrests and
infighting among its leaders, as well as
turf wars with Los Zetas. But it remains
a significant player in the drug traffic
along the Texas border.
Follow-up
1. With a partner, compare your answers with the questions in the Focus for
Reading. Help each other complete any missing information.
2. How effective do you think the Mexican government’s war on the drug
cartels has been since it began in 2000?
3. What are the main reasons for the continued influence of drug cartels in
Mexican society today?
4. What steps do you think would be required for the Mexican government
to achieve victory over the drug cartels?

Quote
Bernardo León, a
legal adviser to the
government, summed
up the situation: “In
Mexico the law is an
aspiration, not the
norm. We made many
laws to look good,
not to obey them.
There is no public
condemnation of
lawbreakers” (The
Economist, November
18, 2006).
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Mexico in Crisis: The Response of Two Presidents
Focus for Reading
In your notebook, organize your notes on this section under the following
headings:
• Roadblocks for the government in the war against drugs
• Government action and successes under President Vicente Fox (2000–06)
• New problems under Fox
• Government action and successes under President Felipe Calderón (2006–12)
• New problems under Calderón
Politicians, Police, the War on Drugs
Drug cartels were active in Mexico for
decades before the Mexican government
began to take them seriously in 2000. But
a concerted attempt to deal with the social
and economic impact of cartel activity
had to await the election of Vicente Fox of
the National Action Party (PAN).
Fox inherited a situation in which
the cartels had infiltrated all levels of
government—municipal, state, and
federal. Officials, bribed or provided
with “product,” were content to ignore
the cartels. Most of their activities
involved smuggling drugs into the United
States, the country that really drove the
demand for illegal drugs, especially
methamphetamines and cocaine.
The various Mexican police forces
were a special problem. Policing
in Mexico is still largely a local
responsibility. As a result, there are
about 400 000 police officers scattered
across hundreds of different forces and
jurisdictions. A 2006 study reported
that, on average, they had six years of
schooling and only two weeks of training
before becoming officers. Pay averaged
USD$370 a month, and 35 per cent of
them admitted to using drugs. About 40
per cent leave the police each year for
other jobs. In the most violent regions,
many actively work in support of the
drug cartels.
Mexican police are not trained as an
investigative force. Federally, criminal
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 47
investigation in Mexico is the work of
the office of the Attorney General. At the
state level, it is the responsibility of the
AG’s counterparts there. The system is
notoriously inefficient. As a result, about
75 per cent of crimes are never reported.
Of those that are reported, fewer than 10
per cent are ever prosecuted successfully.
A New Approach
After being elected president of Mexico
in 2000, Vicente Fox was determined to
change the government’s way of fighting
the drug cartels. He began by creating
a new national police force, the Federal
Investigations Agency (AFI), modelled
after the Federal Bureau of Investigation
(FBI) in the United States.
Fox also began using the army to
enforce the law and deal with the
increasingly violent activities of
drug cartels. One of the most notable
examples of this approach was in the
city of Nuevo Laredo on the border with
Texas. The city was without a police
chief for some time after two were
murdered in 2005. More than once troops
were sent to patrol the city and make
arrests; on occasion they were also used
to search vehicles at border crossings to
and from the U.S.
Fox’s efforts did result in the capture of
several cartel leaders and the seizure of
record amounts of drugs. The government
also extradited about 50 suspected drug
traffickers to the U.S.—something it had

een reluctant to do in the past.
With success came new problems. By
weakening some cartels the government
created opportunities for the expansion
of others. As well, the demand for illegal
drugs in Mexico was growing. Turf wars
broke out among the gangs, resulting in
frequent violence in recent years. And the
cartels have turned to other kinds of crime,
especially kidnapping and extortion, as
further sources of illegal income. By 2005,
nearing the end of his six-year presidency,
Fox referred to the fight against the cartels
as the mother of all wars.
The Mexican Drug War
The election of Felipe Calderón in 2006
is considered to be the real start of what
is now referred to as the Mexican Drug
War. Immediately after his election,
Calderón expanded the use of the
military, sending troops into Michoacan,
Tijuana, and Acapulco. In the areas
considered most corrupt, the troops
immediately disarmed the police and
then tested their weapons for ballistic
evidence that they might have been used
in committing cartel-related crimes.
The level of violence, however,
continues to rise. In 2005 there were
1 600 murders linked to organized crime,
and by 2006 the number was 2 200. By
2011 the total had risen to more than
14 000. In all, approximately 50 000
people were killed between 2006 and
2011 in cartel-driven violence. According
to the government, at least 90 per cent
of those killed were gang members or
associates, with the remainder being
innocent victims or bystanders.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 48
Yet another effect of the drug war has
been a large increase in the number of
smaller organized crime groups. One
estimate by a leading academic placed
the number of such groups in 2007 at
11; by 2010 that estimate had risen to
114. Predicting the future activities of all
these groups poses a major challenge to
the government.
In Mexico 2012 is a presidential
election year. Under the country’s
constitution, the president may serve
only one six-year term and is barred
from seeking re-election. This means
that Mexicans will be selecting a new
president who will inherit the drug war
his two predecessors have fought but
failed to win. Many believe that the
election will be a referendum on the
drug war begun by Fox and pursued
by Calderón, both of whom represent
PAN. Mexicans are tired of the violence
and appalled by the number of human
rights abuses that have been attributed
to the military in their actions against
the cartels. Enrique Peña Nieto of
the Institutional Revolutionary Party
(PRI) currently holds a 10-point lead
in the opinion polls over his two major
opponents, Andres Lopez Manuel
Obrador of the left-leaning PRD
(Democratic Revolution Party), who
narrowly lost to Calderón in 2006, and
Josefina Vazquez Mota of PAN, the first
woman in Mexican history to run for
president from one of the three main
parties. The outcome of the contest—and
the future direction of Mexico’s drug
war—will be determined on Election
Day, July 1, 2012.
Follow-up
1. With a partner, review the notes you made on the information in this
section based on the headings in the Focus for Reading. Help each other
complete any missing information.
2. Based on the information in this guide and what you have seen in the
video, what advice would you give to Mexico’s next president on how to
deal with the drug cartels? Are there changes you feel he or she could
make to make the drug war more effective and possibly even win it?

Quote
The British magazine
The Economist
(November 18,
2006) identified a
fundamental reason
for the growth of the
cartels: “The violence
in Mexico is in large
part a result of the
continuing failure
of drug policy in the
United States. Over
the past decade the
locus of power in
the drug trade, as
in so many other
businesses, has moved
closer to the final
consumer. That means
it has shifted from
Colombia to Mexico,
which is now the
gateway for up to 90
per cent of cocaine
entering the United
States, as well as everincreasing
amounts
of marijuana and
methamphetamine.”
THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Canada and the World Respond
This section of the guide is divided into two parts. The first part looks at how
Mexico’s allies are helping or hindering it in its war against the drug cartels. The
second part looks at recent recommendations—international and Canadian—on
how to approach the problems associated with drug abuse. Create an organizer
in your notebook and answer the following questions as you read the article:
• Why is the United States such an important factor in Mexico’s war against
drugs?
• What role is the United States playing in the Mexican war against drugs?
• How is Canada involving itself in the drug war?
• How would the Global Commission on Drug Policy like to see countries deal
with the problems caused by illegal drugs?
• What does a recent Canadian study contribute to the discussion of the war on
drugs?
The rise of the drug cartels is not solely attributable to conditions in Mexico
itself. Although organized crime in the country has diversified in recent years,
illegal drugs remain the major source of their income. And the bulk of those
drugs are not being sold in Mexico.
Drugs and the United States
A “war on drugs” has been a feature of
United States policy for presidents of
both the Republican and Democratic
parties since Richard Nixon (1969–
1974), who first used the term. Under
George H.W. Bush (1989–1993), the
country even appointed a drug czar to
lead its fight against the use of illegal
drugs. An Office of National Drug
Control Policy (ONDCP) is currently
charged with overseeing the fight.
But while the country has some of
the toughest drug abuse legislation in
the world—with mandatory sentences
common in many states—the use of
illegal drugs has continued to rise.
In 2009 the administration of Barack
Obama stopped using the term war on
drugs to describe its policies. It remains
committed, however, to keeping the use of
all drugs illegal. This policy seems to have
the support of the majority of Americans.
A recent referendum in California—which
shares a border with Mexico and is
considered one of the most liberal states
when it comes to drug use—turned down
a proposal to legalize marijuana.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 49
Assisting Mexico with Its Drug
War
The United States has tried to assist
Mexico in its fight against the cartels.
In 2008, the Mérida Initiative became a
security arrangement joining the U.S.,
Mexico, and the Central American
countries of Guatemala, Nicaragua, El
Salvador, Costa Rica, and Honduras in a
fight against drug trafficking, organized
crime, and money laundering. Much of
the U.S. assistance is financial—$300million
to Mexico and $65-million to
Central America in 2008—but it also
includes special equipment, police
training, and shared intelligence.
The United States is also looking for
ways to keep U.S. guns out of the hands
of the Mexican cartels. Guns are easy to
obtain legally in the U.S., and the cartels
are good at smuggling them into Mexico.
In 2009 and 2010, at least 70 per cent of
the guns captured by Mexican authorities
could be traced back to the U.S.
Recently, a report by three U.S. senators
has called for a new plan to prevent the
illegal export of firearms to Mexico.

Digging Deeper
For more on the new
defence agreement,
go to www.cbc.
ca/news/world/
story/2012/03/27/poldefence-summittuesday.html.
Canada has also joined the battle. On
March 26–27, 2012, a meeting in Ottawa
of the Canadian, U.S., and Mexican
defence ministers established a new
co-operative framework to confront
a variety of threats to North America.
Specifically targeted were the problems
caused by Mexico’s drug cartels.
The Global Commission on Drug
Policy
Meanwhile an international commission
has called for an end to the war on drugs.
The Global Commission on Drug Policy
(GCDP) was formed to explore ways in
which national policies on illegal drugs
could be improved to better deal with the
problems the use of drugs causes.
The commission (www.global
commissionondrugs.org/what-we-do/)
has three main goals:
• review the basic assumption,
effectiveness, and consequences of the
“war on drugs” approach
• evaluate the risks and benefits of
different national responses to the drug
problem
• develop actionable, evidence-based
recommendations for constructive legal
and drug-policy reform
The commission urges that drug
abuse be treated as a health issue rather
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 50
than a criminal problem. This approach
has been endorsed by a recent report
(available at www.openmedicine.
ca/article/view/501/455) prepared by
the Chief Medical Health Officers of
British Columbia, Saskatchewan, and
Nova Scotia, along with a professor of
medicine at the University of British
Columbia.
The authors argue that the federal
government should do away with
mandatory minimum sentences for drug
crimes and “use scientific evidence to
create drug policies that work” (The
Globe and Mail, March 28, 2012).
The authors also argue that almost all
resources aimed at controlling drug use
now go into policing, and that there is
little evidence that shows this has any
effect in lowering drug use.
The paper points out that there is
increasing evidence that focusing on
social programs, including counselling
and treatment programs, reduces the
serious problems linked to drug use.
Other approaches, such as government
regulation of the sale of soft drugs like
marijuana, could eliminate many of the
social problems caused by the use of that
drug.
Follow-up
1. With a partner, compare the information in your organizer. Help each
other complete any missing information.
2. In this article we have two approaches to dealing with drugs: making
them illegal, stopping them at the source, and charging their users with
a criminal offence; or legalizing the distribution of “soft” drugs and
treating the use of other drugs as a health problem. What do you think
are the main advantages and disadvantages of each approach? Do both
approaches have a role to play in our policies on drugs? Which one should
be our main focus as Canadians?

THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
The Canadian Connection
Reading Prompt
Before reading this section, write down some words or phrases that would
express your impressions of Mexico—both positive and negative.
For the most part, Canadians think of
Mexico as a land of fun and sun and as
a place to spend a winter holiday away
from the cold. In 2010 about 1.6 million
of us visited the country.
Despite its popularity with tourists,
Canadians seem to have a fairly poor
impression of Mexico. A 2010 survey
conducted by Leger Marketing reported
that only 39 per cent of Canadians had
a favourable view of Mexico; 47 per
cent had a negative view (www.focal.ca/
publications/focalpoint/474-july-2011armony-and-jedwab).
Media coverage of Mexico is often
cited as a main reason for this negative
image of the country among Canadians.
2010 was a banner year for stories about
Mexico in the Canadian media. About
23 000 stories were published, but only
20 per cent of them showed the country
in a favourable light.
Very Scary?
Consider this example of media
coverage, from a January 24, 2012,
article in the National Post (http://news.
nationalpost.com/2012/01/24/canadiansflock-to-mexico-despite-ongoing-drugwar/):
“Here are three things you may not know
about Mexico.
“1) They have a city that’s deadlier than
all of Afghanistan.
“Ciudad Juarez, a city on the Rio Grande
just south of El Paso, Texas, is overrun
by drug cartels trying to wipe each other
out by spilling blood. In December, the
city surpassed 10 000 homicides in four
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 51
years. That’s more than the number of
civilians killed in the war in Afghanistan
over the same time period.
“2) You can fly there, but you shouldn’t
drive there.
“Crossing the border to Mexico from
the U.S. isn’t the same as crossing
into the U.S. from Canada after a day
of shopping. Much of the violence
in Mexico is concentrated along the
American border, where the drug war
runs rampant.
“3) Cruise ships sit among drug cartels.
“Tourists and their cruise ships flock to
the state of Sinaloa because it’s home
to Mazatlan, a beach-side resort town.
But the state is also home to the world’s
most infamous drug lord, Joaquin ‘El
Chapo’ Guzman, whose nickname means
‘Shorty’ due to his diminutive size.”
Add to this the warning from the
Canadian government on the Department
of Foreign Affairs website:
“OFFICIAL WARNING: Foreign Affairs
and International Trade Canada advises
against non-essential travel to the border
areas between Mexico and the United
States, due to continuously high levels
of violence linked to organized crime in
those areas.
“Canadians should avoid crossing
Mexico’s northern border by land and
should do so only if it is absolutely
necessary, after making appropriate
arrangements to ensure their personal
safety. Shootouts, attacks, and illegal
roadblocks may occur at any time.
Criminals especially target SUVs

Quote
Gordon Kendall was
one of two Canadians
believed to have been
involved in the drug
trade who were killed
in the resort town
of Puerto Vallarta in
2009. Kendall’s father
has some advice for
anyone hoping to
profit by dealing with
Mexican drug cartels.
“After what we’ve
gone through and not
having the chance to
say our goodbyes to
Gordon and [Gordon’s
friend] Jeff, I would
say get your ducks in
a row before you go
down there. Say your
goodbyes because
there’s a very good
chance your family is
going to hear on TV of
your demise” (www.
cbc.ca/news/canada/
british-columbia/
story/2012/03/05/bcmexico-gangs.html).
and full-size pickup trucks for theft
and carjacking along highways in the
states of Nuevo León, Tamaulipas,
Baja California, Chihuahua, Coahuila,
Durango, Sonora, and Sinaloa.
Travellers should also avoid travelling
by land to or through these border states
and should do so only if it is absolutely
necessary, and after making appropriate
arrangements to ensure their personal
safety” (www.voyage.gc.ca/countries_
pays/report_rapport-eng.asp?id=184000).
Just the Facts, Please
Countering this type of publicity is a
story in the January 25, 2012, issue of
The Globe and Mail. It reported that
this winter, with at least one million
Canadian tourists in the country,
two Canadians visiting Mexico were
murdered and another five reported being
assaulted. In 2010—the year that 1.6million
Canadians visited—six murders
and 50 assaults were reported, a low
number that would be hard to match in
many other countries.
Tourists certainly seem to believe they
are safe in Mexico’s resorts. In 2009
(October 12), Maclean’s reported that
tourists are not targets in the Mexican
drug wars—and that they realize that.
A survey taken in March 2012 on the
Mexican Riviera reported that 100 per
cent of tourists felt safe within their
resorts; 96 per cent felt safe on tours.
Mexico is home to about 50 000
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 52
permanent expatriate Canadian residents,
mainly retirees. Some 8 000 of them live
in Ajijic, on Lake Chapala, about a 30minute
drive from Guadalajara, Mexico’s
fifth-largest city. It is believed to be
the largest concentration of expatriate
Canadians in the world. They are all
pleased to point out that their community
is actually safer than the city of Toronto.
Mexico is also Canada’s third-largest
trading partner, with about $20-billion
per year in two-way trade. Mexico is
home to the foreign operations of about
2 500 Canadian corporations and a focus
for the expansion of Canadian economic
ties with the nations of Latin America.
The Drug Connection
Do illegal drugs from Mexico come
into Canada? They do, with most of the
traffic believed to be from the United
States across the border between Detroit,
Michigan, and Windsor, Ontario. Much
of that traffic is in cocaine.
Recently some British Columbia
gangsters have started dealing with the
Mexican cartels, and five of them have
been killed between 2007 and 2012.
Increasingly B.C. gang members seem
to be trying to cut out the middlemen
(distributors in the United States)
and deal directly with their Mexican
sources. A kilogram of cocaine from a
U.S. supplier costs a B.C. dealer about
$20 000. That same kilogram is about
$8 000 to $10 000 in Mexico.
Follow-up
1. With a partner, review the list of words or phrases that expressed your
impressions of Mexico that you made before reading this section. Did
reading it change or confirm your impressions? Discuss your responses with
your partner.
2. Based on what you have read in this section, is Mexico a safe destination
for Canadian tourists? What steps should tourists to Mexico take to ensure
their personal safety?

THE DRUG WAR IN MEXICO
Activity: How to Deal with Drugs
How to deal with drug abuse remains a major problem for Mexicans and
Canadians alike. Mexico’s drug war may be especially violent, but drug abuse
takes its toll on Canadian society as well.
In the Canada and the World Respond section, we read about a serious
movement to have governments look at drug abuse as a health issue rather
than a problem for the police and the justice system, and to treat drug abusers
as people suffering from an illness, rather than as criminals. Supporters of this
idea like to point to the example of Portugal. In 2001 the country decriminalized
drug use and began treating addicts rather than punishing them. Restricted
drug use has not been legalized, but users are not arrested. Instead they are
forced to appear before special addiction panels that recommend treatment
based on each case’s specifics. The number of addicts in Portugal has declined by
50 per cent since the 1990s.
Your Task
1. Should Canada adopt a drug policy similar to that of Portugal?
As a class, brainstorm the pros and cons for Canadians of decriminalizing
drug use in conjunction with expanded treatment for addicts. Once you
have developed your lists, vote to determine an overall recommendation
for or against a new policy.
2. Would decriminalization of drugs help to alleviate the drug wars in
Mexico?
Again, as a class brainstorm the pros and cons of Mexico’s decriminalizing
drug use among its own population. Would this have an effect on the
government’s ongoing conflict with the drug cartels? Would either side be
weakened or strengthened by such a policy? Hold a second class vote to
determine a recommendation for or against decriminalization.
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 53

News in Review Index
A list of the stories covered last season and to date in the current season is provided below.
The complete chronological index for all 21 seasons of News in Review and a subjectoriented
index listing News in Review stories appropriate for various subject areas can be
accessed through our Web site at http://newsinreview.cbclearning.ca.
SEPTEMBER 2010
The Controversy Over the Census
The G20 Summit: Talks and Teargas
The Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico
Residential Schools: Truth and Healing
OCTOBER 2010
The Tamil Boat People Controversy
Pakistan’s Catastrophic Floods
The Fate of the Long-Gun Registry
Journey Back to Nagasaki
NOVEMBER 2010
Hurricane Igor Hits Newfoundland
Canada’s New Governor General
Afghanistan: A Frontline Report
BPA: The Chemical Inside Us
DECEMBER 2010
The Trial of Omar Khadr
The Oil Sands and the PR War
A New Campaign to Fight Bullying
The Rescue of the Chilean Miners
FEBRUARY 2011
Wikileaks and the Information War
Haiti in a Time of Cholera
The Assassination of Rafik Hariri
How Healthy Are Canadians?
MARCH 2011
Parliament and the Election Question
Egypt and the Days of Anger
The Shooting of Gabrielle Giffords
Vacation Nightmare in Mexico
APRIL 2011
Japan and the Nuclear Nightmare
The Uprising in Libya
Hockey and the Concussion Debate
How Facebook Changed the World
MAY 2011
Canadians Vote in a Spring Election
Canada and the Afghanistan Legacy
Revising the History of the Americas
The Real Story of the King’s Speech
SEPTEMBER 2011
The Massacre in Norway
War and Famine in Somalia
The 9/11 Attacks: Ten Years Later
Life, Work, and Smartphones
CBC Learning
P.O. Box 500, Station A
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M5W 1E6
Tel: (416) 205-6384
Fax: (416) 205-2376
E-mail: cbclearning@cbc.ca
CBC News in Review • April 2012 • Page 54
OCTOBER 2011
The Life and Death of Jack Layton
Terry Fox: Remembering a Canadian Hero
Libya and the Fall of Gadhafi
The Vancouver Riot: What Went Wrong?
NOVEMBER 2011
Teen Suicide: Breaking the Silence
The Eurozone and the Economic Crisis
Amanda Lindhout’s African Journey
Coping with the Stress of Graduation
DECEMBER 2011
The Rise of the Occupy Movement
Canada’s Controversial Crime Bill
The Struggle to Save Canada’s Farmland
Healing the Invisible Wounds of War
FEBRUARY 2012
The Emergency in Attawapiskat
Canada and the Jobless Crisis
The Horror and Fear of Honour Killing
The Bloodbath in Syria
MARCH 2012
The Great Oil Pipeline Debate
Egypt’s Revolution One Year Later
Research In Motion’s High-tech Woes
The Vancouver Hockey Riot