Canadian Politics Today

Those stats are from 2010, well before the Trudeau/woke era.

No - from 2019.

https://www.canada.ca/en/treasury-board-secretariat/services/innovation/human-resources-statistics/demographic-snapshot-federal-public-service-2019.html

Your reasoning is deficient.  Nowhere does it say that NSERC has said he was denied because of refusing to hire on merit. 

Did you even read the story, you overbearing snot?

But his application for a $450,000 grant this month from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) was turned down because, the council said, “the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion considerations in the application were deemed insufficient.”

His grant application a year ago to the federally funded National Frontiers in Research Fund  — whose object is “to support world-leading interdisciplinary, international, high-risk/high-reward, transformative and rapid-response Canadian research” — was also turned down on similar grounds.[/quote]

Blah blah blah... you continue to double down and are discrediting yourself more and more in my mind.  I already talked about social structures and how they influence perceptions and so on... in your quest for "facts and logic" you ignored what I said and labelled me as afraid.

LOL. There it is again. This sense of disbelief that YOU have pronounced upon a subject and yet someone still seems to disagree! Whatever can be wrong with them! They're just not as enlightened and thoughtful and insightful as you are, standing up on that pedestal you built for yourself. If only you could find a way to educate them so they thought exactly as you do!

I've come across woker posters but never one with such a massive sense of superiority as you display. Do you constantly bang into trees and poles because you walk around with your nose so high in the air you can't see in front of you?

Prove there are quotas.

Anyone who denies there are quotas has sh1t in his ears as well as his head, or is just full of sh1t overall. Everyone knows the pressure in government organizations to hire and promote POC. It's constantly brought up in discussions about hiring. My girlfriend is an EX2 and she's under constant pressure to hire minorities and women - any minority or woman.

Yeah except we don't live in a fantasy world where meritocracy exists. Anyone who has ever had a job anywhere knows this instinctively to be true.

Maybe merit doesn't exist in your world. I suppose that's hardly a surprise since you don't appear to have any. But it certainly has in mine.

Your reasoning is deficient.  Nowhere does it say that NSERC has said he was denied because of refusing to hire on merit. 

He implies that, and in your bloodlust for Cancel Culture bullshit, you bought it.

THIS is what I mean when I say 2% of these things have merit.  This makes the news in a National newspaper and people like you parrot it .... "Cancel Culture Cancel Culture".

I'm trying to listen to you, as I do.  I'm trying to give consideration to your point of view, because you are a fellow poster on here.

But I have to say Black Dog's position strikes me as more and more accurate: this is becoming made-up hysteria by the angertainment industry.  And - no - I'm not "afraid" of the PC police.  I'm looking at facts, which you are not doing.

All I have to work with here is what's in the article.  Based on the article, most of what I said still seems true.  Unless the National Post and this researcher is lying to us, it seems pretty obvious why he was denied the grant.  He filled out the form, they didn't like his answer because it wasn't "woke" enough about DIE (diversity, inclusion, equity lol).  Here's the article again:

Patanjali Kambhampati, a professor in the chemistry department at Montreal’s McGill University, believes the death knell for the latest grant was a line in the application form where he was asked about hiring staff based on diversity and inclusion considerations. He says his mistake was maintaining that he would hire on merit any research assistant who was qualified, regardless of their identity..  “We will hire the most qualified people based upon their skills and mutual interests,” Kambhampati wrote on the application.  “I’ve had two people say that was the kiss of death,” said Kambhampati.

I have no idea how you would make sure to have "diversity" or "equity" in hiring staff on a project without giving preferential treatment to minorities.  This is exactly what the Liberal government does in other hiring practices.  Cabinet is an example.  It didn't choose members simply on merit, it has a 50% female quota.  I once attended a Justin Trudeau campaign stop and 100% of his security detail are POC.  That wasn't a coincidence, I'm not an idiot.

If you can point out how the article was inaccurate then i'm all ears.  Your source says it was, but why should I believe 2nd-hand info from your source over the article?

You said "There's nothing in the article that says the NSERC grant won't let you hire on merit.".  In the article it said there was "a line in the application form where he was asked about hiring staff based on diversity and inclusion considerations".  If diversity/inclusion is part of your hiring decisions, then you aren't only hiring on merit, you're also hiring with skin colour/gender etc in mind, which have nothing to do with merit  If 5 people need to be hired and 20 people of all backgrounds apply, and the 5 most qualified candidates happen to be white and male, I can only assume that this would be deemed insufficient by the NSERC grant folks because its not "diverse and inclusive" enough.  Like MH what exactly do you think the point of the question from NSERC was?  This is a government that had a Canada Summer Jobs program that had an attestation on the grant application for organizations not to have any mandates/efforts to undermine abortion rights.  This government has a history of requiring compliance for its woke social engineering agenda.

The gov said the grant was denied because "the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion considerations in the application were deemed insufficient.”  So what are we to conclude from this???  It seems pretty obvious.  Maybe i'm wrong but the evidence seems to point to me and the article being correct.  I'm not the one "being duped", I am not naive.

Blah blah blah... you continue to double down and are discrediting yourself more and more in my mind.  I already talked about social structures and how they influence perceptions and so on... in your quest for "facts and logic" you ignored what I said and labelled me as afraid.

IN our country, unfortunately, you count as a reasonably informed voter and yet you are being duped and continue to ignore it.  You're an argument against democracy.

I didn't ignore what you said, I just don't agree with what you said because it doesn't jive.  It's possible I don't quite understand some of your points and there's miscommunication, I dunno, but it still doesn't make sense.  I'm sorry you were offended by what I said because I like you personally and we're forum chaps but I will not apologize for it as I believe it, as my subjective opinion/thesis, to be true., based on a large amount of evidence (thousands of forum posts over years).