Motion to drop racism definition panned as 'really bad look' at council

Ottawa city council waded into a brief but testy debate over the definitions of racism and colonialism on Wednesday, amid questions over whether a funding policy should specifically mention that racism benefits white people.

The debate came as Barrhaven East Coun. Wilson Lo made a motion to remove definitions included in a new cultural funding policy. He said the motion was merely technical, since staff are already reviewing definitions in the existing anti-racism strategy and that could create "mismatched definitions" or force council to rewrite the funding policy.

But the motion triggered confusion, disbelief and anger around the council table — as some questioned what signal the move could send.

"We can't ignore the political context that a motion like this is coming in when we're seeing attacks on anti-racism policies and diversity, equity and inclusion strategies, not just in the U.S. but here in Canada," said Somerset Coun. Ariel Troster.

"It's just a really bad look."

Rideau-Rockcliffe Coun. Rawlson King, who is council liaison for anti-racism, called the motion "counterproductive" and "divisive."

"Removing these definitions from this policy now creates a harmful gap in policy language that guides important funding decisions," he said.

"The timing of this motion is also peculiar, as the city just recognized the international day for the elimination of racial discrimination last week."

City staff reassured councillors that Lo's motion would have little impact, since they would simply interpret the terms in accordance with the existing anti-racism policy.

The new cultural funding policy would define racism, in part, as "a rooted system of power hierarchies based on race — infused in our institutions, policies, and culture — that benefits white people and hurts racialized people."

It would define colonialism as "a practice of domination, which involves the subjugation of one people to another."

The definitions in the anti-racism strategy are similar. It defines "institutional racism" as "the network of institutional structures, policies, and practices that create advantages for white people and disadvantage for Indigenous, Black and other racialized people."

Orleans East-Cumberland Coun. Matt Luloff defended Lo and questioned one aspect of those definitions.

"I don't think that this is an attack on the policy," he said. "I think that what's being discussed here is that, within this definition, it says that racism is a system that benefits white people. Racism benefits no one. It denigrates everyone. It denigrates our entire society."

He said that there are examples of racism that don't involve white people, and suggested that singling them out in the definition could be viewed as a form of racism as well.

"Racism is insidious and disgusting," Luloff added. "To use a definition of racism that describes it as benefiting a certain group of people specifically is both untrue and kind of blind to the reality that we've seen in the world."

Knoxdale-Merivale Coun. Sean Devine countered that he believes that racism does frequently benefit white people, including him. 

"I look around this horseshoe," he said Wednesday, referring to the largely white faces at the city council table.

Lo raised the same questions as Luloff at a community services committee meeting last month. He asked whether other city policies say racism is infused in institutions and benefits white people, and heard that the anti-racism strategy does so.

"That line does concern me," he said. "Racism doesn't come from just one group of people. We've seen examples of racism from every group, every ethnicity in the city, and it's not just one group that benefits from this type of behaviour.

"I don't think it's fair to single out a certain group of people, because that in itself is also racist. So I'm not comfortable with that kind of language."

On Wednesday, Lo said that remains a concern, telling CBC that a policy that specifically mentions one ethnicity and "turns them into a monolith" is problematic. He reiterated that he wanted to strike the definitions as the city waits for the anti-racism strategy update.

Clara Freire, the city's general manager of community and social services, said her department is indeed reviewing the definition of racism to bring clarity. But her statement did not suggest that removing references to how racism benefits certain groups is in the offing.

"It is not just about white people for instance, but it is important to name race, and racial groups, in any definition and underline that the concept of race is about the hierarchy that is designed to hold and maintain a predominant group," she said.

As Wednesday's debate continued, Beacon Hill-Cyrville Coun. Tim Tierney, who had initially seconded the motion, joined other councillors to suggest Lo withdraw it.

He did.