Evaluation of Canada’s Membership in the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance

3. Evaluation findings

3.1 Relevance

Continued need to belong to the IHRA

Interviewees indicated that Canada should continue its membership in the IHRA. Many noted that Canada has a responsibility to participate because of its large number of Holocaust centres with expertise to share. Canada also has an important role to play as a conciliator and "bridge-builder" from its relatively objective position with respect to the Holocaust. According to interviewees, if Canada were to withdraw from the IHRA, the international community would question Canada's commitment to Holocaust education, research and remembrance.

A few interviewees also noted that the IHRA provides a needed forum for connecting Canadian Holocaust researchers, educators, and museum curators, and without such a forum Holocaust education, research and remembrance in Canada would be less robust. In addition to information exchanged at the IHRA meetings, contacts are made that facilitate future access to globally available information, programming, educational tools, exhibits, etc. Interviewees believe access to such material provides a benefit to their NGOs as well as to Canada as a whole.

As Canada becomes increasingly multicultural with immigration from regions such as Asia, Africa and the Middle East, where the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) survey found low levels of awareness of the Holocaust, Holocaust education will continue to be increasingly important in the future and require a long term focus.

Trends and levels of awareness in anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia in Canada

Canada has the fourth largest Jewish population in the world (375,000), following Israel (5.9M), the United States (5.4M) and France (480,000).^{Footnote 18} The literature review showed that anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia persist in Canada, as seen through the following reports:

• B'nai Brith Canada reported 1274 anti-Semitic incidents across Canada in 2013, which included 872 cases of harassment, 388 cases of vandalism, and 14 cases of violence.^{Footnote 19}
• Tel Aviv University's Cantor Centre reported that Canada had the third largest number of major violent anti-Semitic incidents (83 in 2013), exceeded only by France with 116 and the United Kingdom with 95.^{Footnote 20}
• An international ADL survey showed that 14% of Canadians held anti-Semitic attitudes compared to 9% in the United States, 24% in Western Europe, and 26% globally.^{Footnote 21}

While documents indicate that between 2009 and 2013 the number of anti-Semitic domestic incidents in Canada remained constant^{Footnote 22} or declined slightly,^{Footnote 23} certain interviewees were of the view that anti-Semitism has increased in Canada in terms of levels of insult and harassment. Interviewees attributed the increase to a variety of factors, such as the relaxation of standards of civil discourse, ease of access to online propaganda, and the anonymity of posting information online. These statistics further demonstrate an ongoing need for Holocaust education and research.

Alternatives to the IHRA

In addition to the IHRA, a number of other international organizations also work to combat anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia and promote human rights, including, for example, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and European Agency for Fundamental Rights. While these organizations undertake a variety of activities including research, monitoring human rights situations and compliance with international conventions, their mandates are much broader than holocaust education, remembrance and research. Interviewees identified that there is no effective alternative to the IHRA. They felt that the IHRA's unique character where diplomats, government policy makers, and domain experts work together make it particularly well suited to achieving the objective of strengthening Holocaust education, remembrance and research.

Alignment with CIC and Government-wide priorities

Alignment with Government-wide priorities

Membership in the IHRA is aligned with the Government of Canada (GoC) priorities with respect to the promotion of human rights. Similar examples of the GoC's commitment to this priority include:

• participation in international fora that promote human rights, such as the OSCE, the Council of Europe and various United Nations bodies;
• creation of the Office of Religious Freedom;
• endorsement of the Terezin Declaration on Holocaust Era Assets; and
• signing the Ottawa Protocol on Combating Anti-Semitism.

The document review also showed that the Minister of Multiculturalism has expressed the government's commitment to Holocaust education, remembrance and research and membership in the IHRA on numerous occasions.^{Footnote 24}

Alignment with CIC and the Office of Religious Freedom priorities

Membership in the IHRA is aligned with CIC's Multiculturalism Program and falls within the Multiculturalism Awareness component. In particular, membership in the IHRA supports the Program's third main objective to "actively engage in discussions on multiculturalism and diversity at the international level."^{Footnote 25}

The Multiculturalism Awareness component includes public outreach and promotional activities funded by CIC grants and contributions, primarily targeting young people, designed to engage newcomers and Canadians on multiculturalism, racism and discrimination issues.^{Footnote 26} The IHRA's objective to encourage member countries to engage in Holocaust education, remembrance, and research aligns with CIC's Multiculturalism Awareness approach.

Membership in the IHRA is also aligned with the mandate of the Office of Religious Freedom: to protect and advocate on behalf of religious minorities under threat; oppose religious hatred and intolerance; and promote Canadian values of pluralism and tolerance abroad.^{Footnote 27} While the Office focuses on themes associated with the Multiculturalism Program (e.g. combating intolerance and promoting Canadian values), the Office does not have a domestic mandate but rather seeks to advance Canada's values elsewhere in the world.^{Footnote 28}

As Canada's Ambassador for Religious Freedom assumed the role of Head of Delegation in 2014, Canada's involvement in the IHRA is now a joint initiative between CIC and the Office of Religious Freedom.^{Footnote 29} Yet interviewees felt that CIC should continue to have a role in the IHRA, as it is an appropriate fit under the Multiculturalism Program in terms of its objectives of combating anti-Semitism, racism and xenophobia, and building a more tolerant society in Canada.

Alignment with federal roles and responsibilities

Membership in the IHRA is aligned with the Multiculturalism Act which authorizes the Minister to engage in a variety of activities including:

• undertake and assist research relating to Canadian multiculturalism and foster scholarship in the field;
• encourage the preservation, enhancement, sharing and evolving expression of the multicultural heritage of Canada; and
• provide support to individuals, groups or organizations for the purpose of preserving, enhancing and promoting multiculturalism in Canada.^{Footnote 30}

While formal education is the responsibility of the provinces, the majority of interviewees felt that the GoC has a responsibility to inform all citizens on issues of national importance including combating anti-Semitism and racism and promoting Canadian values of tolerance and respect for human rights. Broader education can also be delivered through museums and NGOs, such as Canada's Holocaust centres, as well through a wide variety of initiatives funded through grants and contributions programs.

3.2 Performance

Awareness of the Holocaust and impact of Canada's IHRA membership

Supporting Holocaust education

Interviewees credited Canada's membership in the IHRA with strengthening interest in Holocaust education and informing educators about international best practices in this area. As a result, interviewees indicated that common themes and approaches to Holocaust education are increasingly being adopted across the country, aided by teachers using CHRP-funded teaching materials. One example provided to demonstrate the work undertaken on Holocaust education was the creation of 20,000 copies of the Welcome to Canada? (a B'nai Brith publication)^{Footnote 31} student curriculum book, DVD, and teachers' manual for high schools by the National Task Force.^{Footnote 32} It was also noted that Holocaust studies are more present in schools and at lower grades, and key informants felt that this resulted in more students being aware of the Holocaust by the time they leave high school.

Holocaust research

Interviewees noted that CHRP funding enabled top researchers to become involved in Holocaust research. Examples include the following:

• The National Task Force under the leadership of the League for Human Rights helped establish connections among about 50 representatives from government, academia, educational organizations and foundations and created a network for information and exchange.
• A conference in June 2009, hosted by Canada with the IHRA Liaison partners the United States and France, brought together the latest research on issues that stemmed from Canada's restrictive immigration policy during the Second World War.
• The travelling exhibit entitled Enemy Aliens: Internment in Canada involved original research.

In addition to positive contributions resulting from CHRP funding, an October 2013 conference was held in conjunction with the IHRA meeting in Toronto during the Chair Year.^{Footnote 33} Interviewees were of the view that this was important to ensure continuation of Holocaust research in Canada. Library and Archives Canada research guide^{Footnote 34} to Holocaust-related materials developed during the Chair Year was also cited as an important contribution to research.

Holocaust remembrance

Interviewees observed that the Jewish community has always been involved in Holocaust remembrance due to the large number of survivors in Canada (estimated at between 13,000 and 15,000^{Footnote 35}). Increased ministerial support for Holocaust remembrance, demonstrated in part by joining the IHRA, has raised the profile of Holocaust remembrance and signalled that remembrance is not just for the Jewish community but is important for all Canadians. In addition to increased government support, other initiatives such as the National Holocaust Monument in Ottawa and the Canadian Museum for Human Rights in Winnipeg have also contributed to increased visibility.

Holocaust awareness

Interviewees felt that awareness of the Holocaust has improved in Canada in the last five years. This was attributed to portrayals in films and books, and in efforts by schools, NGOs, governments, and faith communities. CHRP funding for Holocaust centre educational projects were identified by interviewees as having helped raise awareness of the Holocaust. As many of the initiatives were CHRP-funded projects, the Evaluation of the Historical Recognition Programs indicated that the projects had "resulted in an increase in public awareness of wartime measures on immigration restrictions."^{Footnote 36} However, attributing attitudinal and behavioural changes to a single program is difficult and an inherent problem in evaluating anti-racism programs.^{Footnote 37}

Achievement of objectives of Canada's Chair Year

The goals for Canada's Chair Year included the IHRA content-oriented objectives, international engagement objectives, and the IHRA organizational goals, as well as Canadian domestic initiatives developed in consultation with an Advisory Council.^{Footnote 38}

Achievement of Chair Year domestic objectives

During implementation, interviewees agreed that domestic objectives for Chair Year were achieved. The most significant accomplishments identified included: digitization of survivor testimony, the teacher award and poster competition, the Library and Archives Canada research guide, and more generally, activities to raise awareness of the Holocaust in Canada.^{Footnote 39} While it was noted that media attention was limited, the completion of these activities meant that Canada met its domestic objectives for the Chair Year.

While overall, interviewees did not raise issues with the planning of domestic Chair Year objectives, a small degree of divergent views indicated that there was little clarity on the overall goals of the Chair Year, and limited consultation with the Advisory Committee concerning the planning of the domestic Chair Year projects.

Exhibit 1: Objectives and Goals for Chair Year

Chair Goals:

1. Advance the collective work of the IHRA, in partnership with key international organizations.
2. Organize two international meetings in 2013, and other meetings and events as required.
3. Establish contacts with governments and international bodies.

International Goals:

1. Continue to build on the IHRA organizational changes and engage with international partners and other countries whose membership would benefit the IHRA.
2. Move the IHRA multi-year plan forward, making improvements to the IHRA governance and engaging international organizations.
3. Advance international support for the Ottawa Protocol.

Domestic Goals:

1. Demonstrate Canada's national leadership on Holocaust education, remembrance and research.

Achievement of Chair Year international objectives and chair goals

In addition to domestic objectives, a number of international and chair-specific objectives to be achieved during Canada's Chair Year were set (as outlined in Exhibit 1), including advancing the collective work of the IHRA, continuing to build on the IHRA organization changes, and moving the IHRA multi-year plan forward. The evaluation found that these objectives were met. In addition, interviewees identified a number of other significant achievements, including:

• the adoption of a definition of Holocaust denial and distortion, which had been under consideration for a number of years.^{Footnote 40} The definition gives member states a tool to use domestically to address denial and distortion.
• the streamlining of the IHRA structures and processes. According to interviewees, Working Groups are now more effective and are producing more content for consideration at plenaries. In addition, according to interviewees, there is now greater transparency at the IHRA with the new working rules.
• greater international awareness of the IHRA through improved communication (e.g. the inauguration of an annual report) and the Chair's meetings and consultations with prospective new member states, the Vatican and the IHRA's Permanent International Partners.

Canada's contribution to the IHRA

Canadians have chaired all four IHRA Working Groups since Canada joined the organization in June 2009. Interviewees considered Canada's chairmanship of the Working Groups, in the relatively short period it has been a member, recognition of the quality of the contributions and expertise of Canadian delegates. There was a general sense that Canada has contributed beyond its relative size and duration of membership. For example, interviewees noted the significance of Canada's contribution to the IHRA's branding exercise and consequent name change.

It was reported that Canada is one of the member states that the IHRA Chairs consult informally for advice. More generally, it was noted that Canada has played the role of "bridge-builder" at the IHRA, working to bring together divergent opinions, resolve blockages and bridge varying understandings of the Holocaust and human rights. According to interviewees, Canada's "honest broker" role has facilitated consensus building and decision-making (e.g. about the definition of Holocaust denial and distortion).

Canadian delegates bring the perspective of Canada's multicultural model to the IHRA. In particular, interviewees highlighted Canadian expertise with respect to Holocaust education in a multicultural context and the Canadian Holocaust centres' experience in reaching out to immigrant communities and introducing the Holocaust to new Canadians who may have little to no knowledge or awareness of the topic. According to interviewees, Europeans have shown a particular interest in the Canadian experience as a model for reaching minority communities.

Leadership in Holocaust education, remembrance and research

As a result of joining the IHRA, Canada's Holocaust research is known more widely in Canada and abroad. Canada's Liaison Projects, exhibits and events at the IHRA meetings in Canada highlighted Canadian scholarship and educational approaches internationally. Canadian expertise in Holocaust education in a multicultural context and approaches used by Canadian Holocaust centres to introduce the topic to those with no prior knowledge have been noted by other IHRA member states.

Interviewees felt that Canada's rapid progression through the membership process constitutes recognition of Canada's leadership in Holocaust education, remembrance and research. They indicated that obtaining membership is not an automatic process and in some cases can involve much debate at the IHRA meetings. In the same vein, interviewees noted that Canada has chaired all four of the IHRA Working Groups during its short period of membership, an indication of the strength of Canada's expertise.

Within Canada, the National Task Force and the Liaison Projects connected networks (e.g., academics, educators, museum professionals, researchers) that would not otherwise have been linked, increasing awareness of Canadian activity and capacity for Holocaust education and research.

While Canada has demonstrated leadership in the IHRA, a few interviewees suggested that more could be done to sustain the future direction for Holocaust education, remembrance and research in Canada. While there were initiatives undertaken and launched during the Chair Year, there was an interest in an ongoing GoC direction on how Canada will fulfill its pledge to support Holocaust education, remembrance, and research.

A few interviewees noted that a lack of a clear Canadian position or strategy with respect to the IHRA meetings limits the ability of the Canadian delegation to effectively communicate Canada’s overall approach and to develop a collective voice or a sense of “delegation”. Furthermore, a few of the Canadian delegates felt that Canada’s approach to developing an integrated and socially cohesive society could be conveyed to the IHRA much more effectively if more discussion and exchange among delegates in preparation for the IHRA meetings could take place.

In addition, with the transfer of the role of Head of Delegation from CIC to the Office of Religious Freedom, accountabilities and roles of the respective departments in delivering on the IHRA membership commitments have not been clearly articulated.

3.3 Efficiency and economy

Expenditures associated with Canada's participation in the IHRA

In addition to the annual contribution to the organization, expenditures related to Canada's on-going participation in the IHRA include costs associated with attendance at semi-annual plenary sessions and participation in working groups, and on-going efforts to promote education, remembrance and research about the Holocaust. During Canada's Chair Year (March 2013 to February 2014), additional funds were allocated to undertake activities in alignment with the Chair's goals and objectives.

Ongoing efforts to promote education, remembrance and research about the holocaust

Between FYs 2009/10 and 2012/13, CIC funded a number of projects through CHRP that are aligned with the commitments made when Canada became a member of the IHRA. In total, $2.8M in funding was used to fund nine projects (Table 4).

Source: CIC program documents.

In addition, OGDs funded projects that support the IHRA objectives including a National Holocaust Monument and research on Holocaust era artwork (Table 5).

Source: CIC program documents.

Attendance at plenary sessions, participation in working groups and Chair Year activities

As mentioned previously, plenary sessions are held twice a year and are attended by a Canadian delegation. Between 2009-10 and 2013-14, the head of the Canadian delegation was a senior CIC official, with travel and support provided by CIC.^{Footnote 44} During this period, CIC also provided support and paid the travel expenses of members of the Canadian delegation.

When Canada assumed the chairmanship of the IHRA for a period of one year, starting in March 2013, a preliminary budget of $1.5M was set. The budget was to cover costs associated with Chairmanship, including the Chair's salary, expenses and support, and the costs of two IHRA meetings to be held in Montreal and Ottawa.^{Footnote 45} Subsequent to the establishment of this budget, a decision was made to hold the first meeting at the Canadian Embassy in Berlin, Germany, which decreased the initial budget from $1.5M to $1.3M. The second meeting was held in Toronto (October 6-10, 2013).

Actual expenditures

Information on operating and maintenance (O&M) expenditures related to participation in the IHRA and salary expenditures associated with Chair Year activities were available for FYs 2011/12 to 2014/15 (see Table 6).

Source: CIC financial data.

O&M expenditures in FY 2011/12 and FY 2012/13 averaged $124,456. O&M expenditures increased during the Chair Year (FY 2013/14) to $373,557 as a result of increased activities (e.g., costs associated with hosting the two meetings). In early 2014, CIC informed Canadian delegates that in future it would only pay travel costs for Canadian delegates in leadership positions (i.e. members of Working Group troikas^{Footnote 46}) so that a greater number of Canadian organizations could be invited to join Canada's delegation and participate in the IHRA meetings. While some interviewees expressed concerns regarding this shift, indicating that it may limit the ability of smaller organizations to participate in meetings, it is in alignment with the United Kingdom, United States, France and Israel, who do not pay travel expenses for the members of their delegations.^{Footnote 47} As a result of this change, O&M expenditures for FY 2014/15 dropped significantly from previous years to $52,756.

Salary expenditures associated with the Chair (including office staff) totalled $229,502 in FY 2013/14. Given there was a significant amount of preparatory work to be conducted leading up to the Chair Year as well as residual work in the year following, total salary expenditures of $206,997 were recorded over these three years (i.e., FYs 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2014/15).

In addition to hosting the meetings, during its year as Chair, Canada advanced the IHRA's work by supporting various projects, the bulk of which was funded using existing sources, outlined in Table 7.

Source: CIC program documents.

Comparable contributions

Financially, Canada's membership costs for the IHRA are comparable to other contributions undertaken by CIC. Based on information from CIC's Evaluation of the Migration Policy Development Program (MPDP), the IHRA's membership dues were compared to similar programs (international organizations with working groups and/or advisory committees) such as the Intergovernmental Consultations on Asylum, Refugee and Migration Policies (IGC) and the Regional Conference on Migration (RCM). The IHRA's cost of $45,000 sits well below the cost of CIC's similar membership fees.

Sources: IHRA - Public Accounts. IGC and RCM - CIC (2013) Evaluation of the Migration Policy Development Program.

• Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6 (current)
• 7
• 8
• 9
• 10
• Next