• Sun
  • Dec 28, 2014
  • Updated: 6:15pm
The Hongcouver
PUBLISHED : Wednesday, 21 May, 2014, 8:37am
UPDATED : Wednesday, 21 May, 2014, 7:32pm

A sorry saga: Why an apology won’t erase legacy of Canada’s racist tax on Chinese


Ian Young is the SCMP's former International Editor. A journalist for more than 20 years, he worked for Australian newspapers and the London Evening Standard before arriving in Hong Kong in 1997. There he won or shared awards for excellence in investigative reporting and human rights reporting, and the HK News Awards Scoop of the Year. He moved to Canada with his wife in 2010 and is now the SCMP's Vancouver correspondent.

If British Columbia’s government thought its apology last week for the discriminatory “head tax” and other racist legislation once imposed on Chinese immigrants would lay the issue to rest, veteran activist Sid Chow Tan wants it to think again.

“This is more about vote pandering and photo ops than it is about justice and honour for pioneer Chinese families,” said Tan, whose grandfather, Chow Gim Tan, was among those forced to pay the tax when he arrived in Canada in 1919.

The notorious head tax was imposed by Canada’s government on tens of thousands of Chinese arrivals for nearly 40 years. The per-person tax was C$50 when it was introduced in 1885, rising to C$500 in 1903. That was equivalent to about two years’ wages for a Chinese labourer.

The tax was abolished in 1923, when it was rendered obsolete by the more-draconian Chinese Exclusion Act, which placed a near-total ban on Chinese migration to Canada until 1947.

BC’s provincial treasury is estimated to have received about C$9 million in head tax revenue.

The apology issued by Premier Christy Clark’s Liberal government last Thursday received unanimous cross-party support, yet the issue was horribly bungled by her government in the so-called “quick wins” scandal. Howls of outrage followed last year’s emergence of a political strategy paper that touted ways for the government to engage with ethnic voters.

The paper said “some ethnic communities, particularly Chinese, feel that they are ignored by government between elections”, and that one way to quash this perception was to “identify and correct ‘historical wrongs’” in order to score some “quick wins”.

The proposed head tax apology was thus shelved for a year amid suggestions that it would represent nothing more than insincere politicking.

Tan, a founding and current director of the Head Tax Families Society of Canada, still holds that belief. He said he would not be satisfied until the C$9 million in head tax funds was repaid by the government to head tax survivors and their descendants.

“The apology in the BC Legislature is an apology by current status quo politicians for past status quo politicians’ racism and discrimination. I am disappointed by this apology by BC legislators who are very unfeeling, dismissive and arrogant to the surviving directly affected elderly sons and daughters of head tax and exclusion families,” said Tan in a statement.

“The message here is you can profit from racism in BC and an apology makes it okay. Shame on our politicians and community leaders who fail to understand this is about justice and honour for elders of pioneer Chinese families in BC.

Tan told me that he considered last Thursday “an utter humiliation day for all pioneer Chinese families”, because of the BC government’s failure to pay back the C$9 million. “I am sure that she [Clark] would argue that her government is being incredibly sincere and that community leaders would feel that it is quite heartfelt. I did not go to the legislative session on Thursday, though I was invited. I did not see the purpose.”

The motion read by Clark in the provincial legislature apologised “for more than a hundred laws, regulations, and policies that were imposed by past provincial governments that discriminated against people of Chinese descent since 1871, when British Columbia joined Confederation, to 1947.

"These laws and policies denied British Columbia's Chinese communities' basic human rights, including but not limited to, the right to vote, hold public office, or own property; imposed labour, educational and employment restrictions; subjected them to health and housing segregation, and prevented them from fully participating in society.

"The House deeply regrets that these Canadians were discriminated against simply because they were of Chinese descent.”

Although Clark rejected the notion of compensation, a C$1 million legacy fund for educational initiatives was announced.

In 2006, the federal government offered C$20,000 compensation payouts to head tax survivors or their widows. About C$16 million in compensation was eventually paid out to 800 people, representing less than one per cent of all who paid the tax.

But Tan said the hurt imposed by the old racist policies was not just financial. Families were kept apart for decades by laws banning Chinese women from joining their husbands in Canada.

“My grandmother was separated from grandfather for the first years of their marriage until family reunification in 1950. It wasn’t until I got into the [head tax redress] campaign in the 1980s that I really understood what my grandmother and grandfather had been talking about, how difficult it was for them.” 

The Hongcouver blog is devoted to the hybrid culture of its namesake cities: Hong Kong and Vancouver. All story ideas and comments are welcome. Connect with me by email ian.young@scmp.com or on Twitter, @ianjamesyoung70.


For unlimited access to:

SCMP.com SCMP Tablet Edition SCMP Mobile Edition 10-year news archive



This article is now closed to comments

Your egalitarian perspective places idealism over reality. The majority of Filipino and Indonesians that come to Hong Kong come from poor backgrounds.
The reason why Hong Kong government rejects their citizenship applications is because they offer no real skills that Hong Kongers can't offer.
Hmmmmm. How the Chinese were treated 100 years ago sounds a lot like how many Philippinos and Indonesians are treated here in Hong Kong in the 21st century. I wonder when compensation and an apology will be coming?
Dai Muff
You do not know mainland China very well do you? How many Indians can become Chinese?
Off topic- I think not. Those who don't learn from the past are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.
No helper can gain residency after working in HK for 7 years. Officially it is explained away by conditions of the visa, but the reality is that this is a way to deny helpers/Philipinnos and Indonesians residency.
Whether the rationale is to deny them because of their race or their occupation, the outcome is the same- discrimination- just like Chinese faced when they went to Canada (or other western nations for that matter) in the 19th and early 20th century.
Philippinos and Indonesians work in Hong Kong for 7 years but then can't get permanent residency. Westerners can. What's the difference- race!
Is this really all that different from what the Chinese faced in Canada a 100 years ago- except that here in Hong Kong it is the 21st century?
…….your comment shows a lot of ignorance about who domestic helpers are. Many domestic helpers are more highly educated than some westerners living in Hong Kong.
But then, that is what breeds prejudice- ignorance
You're using emotions for your argument and your parenting comment is pure ad hominem. You only target Chinese. You are selective to whom you target, ignoring the fact that westerners per capita has more maids than Chinese
the difference is education and skills! no race!
Yknot is using his own personal emotions as a justifier for his argument and screams DAS RAYCISS!! If we don't give him a yacht.




SCMP.com Account