Raymond de Souza: The hole left by crucifix's removal says much about Quebec today

Perhaps it could be stored beside other relics of Quebec’s past, like religious liberty and a parliamentary tradition of moderation

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/raymond-de-souza-the-hole-left-by-crucifixs-removal-says-much-about-quebec-today

The crucifix that hung in the National Assembly of Quebec since 1936 was removed on Tuesday. Despite all-party support for the crucifix over the speaker’s chair in recent years, it became untenable in the face of the CAQ “secularism” law, which bans the wearing of religious garb by public sector workers.

Premier François Legault had attempted to have it both ways, arguing that the crucifix was not “religious” but rather a cultural or historical item. It could be religious and cultural and historical, but it was absurd to say it was not religious. Quebec’s Catholic bishops long ago said that the decision about what hung in the chamber was up to the National Assembly but, whatever the decision, the crucifix could not be reduced to a cultural vestige or historical souvenir.

I don’t lament the removal of the crucifix. The empty space above the speaker’s throne is a better representation of Quebec’s public culture today, and much of what transpires in the chamber is at odds with Quebec’s Catholic history in any case. Yet the confusions about the crucifix also illustrate why the Quebec government is floundering on its secularism law ...

The chief returning officer told a legislative committee that Bill 40 flies in the face of fundamental democratic and electoral principles.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/abolishing-school-boards-is-undemocratic-quebec-voting-chief-says?fbclid=IwAR0VWpAb1j4e-K7uF7DSAr1XDB1Ik40W7nC55THAWCcmKCyTNNVffVJOopE
A Legault government law that would abolish school boards and the elections that form them is undemocratic, the agency responsible for overseeing elections in Quebec told a legislative committee on Tuesday.

Pierre Reid, who is Quebec’s chief returning officer and who submitted the Directeur général des élections (DGE) brief to the committee, told the panel that Bill 40 flies in the face of fundamental democratic and electoral principles in the way it determines the composition of service centre boards and the criteria required to join them.

“The legislation on school elections should be maintained, be it for the anglophone milieu as well as for the francophone milieu. The (existing) legislation permits the assurance of integrity and fairness in the electoral process,” Reid said. “The exercise of a healthy democracy should be supported by clear rules and we believe that the (current) legislation offers these guarantees.”

Réforme du mode de scrutin :Legault respectera-t-il son engagement ?

https://www.lapresse.ca/debats/opinions/201907/04/01-5232701-reforme-du-mode-de-scrutin-legault-respectera-t-il-son-engagement-.php?fbclid=IwAR3tAGClXu5DiGoweuhkFg5aSUblvExeAURPkH_ozvZ2theCpTy5ifQjnw0

Dans une entrevue publiée dans Le Devoir vendredi dernier, le premier ministre François Legault déclare envisager la tenue d'un référendum sur la réforme du mode de scrutin « comme lui demandent plusieurs caquistes ».

« François Legault refuse aujourd'hui de promettre la main sur le coeur d'instaurer un mode de scrutin proportionnel mixte à temps pour les prochaines élections, prévues le 1^er octobre 2022. D'ailleurs, il dit ne s'être jamais engagé à accomplir une telle réforme dans un premier mandat », poursuit l'article du quotidien. Le premier ministre soutient maintenant ne s'être engagé qu'à déposer un projet de loi le 1^er octobre 2019.

Toutefois, si l'on se réfère au texte de l'engagement qu'il a signé au nom de la Coalition avenir Québec, le 9 mai 2018, conjointement avec Manon Massé de Québec solidaire, Jean-François Lisée du Parti québécois et Alex Tyrrell du Parti vert du Québec, M. Legault s'est bel en bien engagé à ce que « les députés de l'Assemblée nationale soient élus, à partir de la 43^e législature, selon un mode de scrutin semblable à celui étudié et avalisé par le Directeur général des élections du Québec (DGEQ) dans son avis de décembre 2007 ».

Re-election means never having to say you’re sorry

Paul Wells: The Trudeau Liberals return confirmed in their beliefs and comforted by big numbers in Central Canada. The introspection is over.

https://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/trudeau-re-election-means-never-having-to-say-youre-sorry/?fbclid=IwAR0ptBDmxebcrJBVNgFKg7hil9RKVpBwhqM0MEY5RSRMfVTNuvQw1hZZ7F4

I’ve got a hunch that when the federal Liberal caucus meets, observers will be surprised, even taken aback, by the jovial tone among Liberals. And an emerging theme of federal politics in months to come will be the scale of Justin Trudeau’s electoral triumph.

Now there’s a word you don’t hear often. Triumph. It’s not one that came automatically to any observer on Oct. 21. It sure isn’t how the results looked to me, at first.

You know the results as well as I do: The Liberals won 20 fewer seats than in 2015, falling from 177 to 157, losing their majority in the House of Commons. They lost a million of their 2015 votes. They lost the popular vote to Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives and it wasn’t close: the Conservatives’ edge was nearly a quarter of a million votes. The Liberals were shut out in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Their share of the popular vote, at 33.07 per cent, is the lowest ever for a governing party in Canada. The Bloc Québécois is resurgent, there’ve been Western separatist meetings, it’s all pretty chastening.

Twitter fury after Quebec education minister posts photo with Malala Yousafzai

"Nice meeting with @Malala Yousafzai, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, to discuss access to education."

https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/twitter-fury-after-quebec-education-minister-posts-photo-with-malala-yousafzai?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&fbclid=IwAR2yf8DUmm8S4HzWr6z5vvqh57vFqHmwpUk9A0OSndvohd9UyqGdDQGhGM8
 
Quebec Education Minister Jean-François Roberge tweeted a photograph of himself and Pakistani activist Malala Yousafzai on Friday.

“Nice meeting with @Malala Yousafzai, winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, to discuss access to education and international development,” tweeted Roberge, who is in Paris, taking part in planning meetings to discuss education during the G7 in France in August
.
Social media lashed out at Roberge for posting the photo, with many mentioning her activism and Quebec’s Bill 21, which prohibits some public employees from wearing the kind of headcovering that Yousafzai wears.

From icy sidewalks to Mount Royal, opposition slams Plante's record

Opposition councillors accused the Plante administration of failing to deliver on its promises to improve mobility and help merchants losing business because of construction.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/from-icy-sidewalks-to-camillien-houde-opposition-slams-plante-administration?fbclid=IwAR3fDU309hikxaVdrWUbGlsmJBlVVJC5d8q6xfE1WOg518R7yYodLI2pghs
Mayor Valérie Plante is long on lofty ideals but short on clearing snow, attacking racial profiling and solving the traffic mess, the opposition Ensemble Montréal charged Monday.

At a press conference on Plante’s first two years in power, three opposition councillors accused her administration of failing to deliver on its promises to improve mobility and help merchants losing business because of construction.

Projet de loi sur la laïcité: arbitraire | AGNÈS GRUDA | Agnès Gruda

https://www.lapresse.ca/debats/editoriaux/agnes-gruda/201906/12/01-5229939-projet-de-loi-sur-la-laicite-arbitraire.php?fbclid=IwAR1CHzNH2KqTxyVEKfAp_hOVIsh0DFU9Gmuzh_DK1P8fPM0mOfx98g7yzXk

Un jonc de mariage constitue-t-il un signe religieux ?

Cette question a été posée hier à François Legault dans la foulée de l'amendement censé définir les signes religieux ciblés par le projet de loi 21 sur la laïcité de l'État.

En apparence, la question est simple. Mais le premier ministre n'a pas été en mesure d'y répondre ...

Rest of Canada problems: Why don’t cheese curds squeak in Toronto?

Think of the nightmare lived by a man scouring a city for chips that crunch but finding each bag stale. I am him

https://montrealgazette.com/news/toronto/why-the-cheese-curds-in-toronto-dont-squeak-a-national-post-investigation/wcm/7a497873-1be0-440f-b53c-6e829dad913b?fbclid=IwAR2BCsQzZ2_p3V8W1y0dwOOwcRTJgH-nYg1_a72gDyg3JSRyBh_bLYJ5IQQ

Some time ago, I realized that in Toronto, the cheese curds do not squeak. And cheese curds that do not squeak are a dangerous thing. They can trick you into thinking that cheese curds are just chopped-up cheese. The whole idea, to those unlucky enough to have never had a good one, must seem absurd: Eating cheese by itself, piece by piece in the same compulsive way that someone eats more chips than they need.

Think of the nightmare lived by a man scouring a city for chips that crunch but finding each bag stale. I am him.

As food-obsessed as it is, Toronto is living a cheese curd lie. It’s not always a popular assessment, though. One local cheesemonger took it rather badly.

To minorities worried about religious symbols law, Quebec premier says he 'could have gone further'

New law responds to desires of long-spurned majority, François Legault says in interview

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-religious-symbols-law-legault-interview-1.5180353?fbclid=IwAR0sYWfXwjQGnsPvDuboPA7g0Kf8Jg4wR_vYeJCa7ZRwM5BZJE3Q60MUlh4

Quebec Premier François Legault had a blunt message Tuesday for minorities worried about his government's new religious symbols law: the legislation, he said, "could have gone further."
The law, which was passed late Sunday, bars civil servants in positions of authority — including public school teachers, government lawyers and police officers — from wearing religious symbols while at work.

It's been roundly denounced by minority groups in the province that warn it will institutionalize discrimination by limiting employment opportunities for people who wear such commonplace religious garments as the hijab, turban or kippa ...

Johnson: Rectifying the misrepresentation of Alliance Quebec

http://www.thesuburban.com/opinion/op_ed/rectifying-the-misrepresentation-of-alliance-quebec/article_e15688a2-3fb8-5cbe-8ab3-db6c33b9bcc9.html?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=user-share&fbclid=IwAR2w-UHv9iHvOxJMHqY0vy3fmSKy4T7F8OIPH2o16K0JqeNUD5jW68GCI00

Once again, the English-speaking people of Quebec are divided on how to defend their vital interests against aggressive restrictive nationalism. Eight organizations, former members of the Quebec Community Groups Network, recently signed an open letter explaining “Why we left QCGN.”

I’ll not express an opinion on the validity of their disagreement with the QCGN. But I do want to correct the historical record about this statement from their open letter:

The QCGN was founded nearly 25 years ago, in part to fill a void left by Alliance Quebec (AQ), which, as the largest and most prominent organization representing English-speaking communities at the time, had lost the confidence of its members.

Andrew Coyne: Will leaders tolerate religious segregation just because it's Quebec?

If Bill 21 had been tried in any other province, the feds, media and the rest of the great and the good would descend on the offending province full of fiery denunciations

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-will-leaders-tolerate-religious-segregation-just-because-its-quebec?fbclid=IwAR1otlifRxuyl7VZu68xsCMCc40sxAh8NIkbs65Gf3PZSG4nQlq4jspcjgU

According to the premier of Quebec, it’s all about pride. Quebecers, Francois Legault claims, are forever stopping him in the street to tell him “‘Mr. Legault we are happy.’ I say why and they say ‘it’s because we are proud.’… To feel this regained pride among our people, who are standing up, advancing, makes me the happiest man in the world to be their premier.”

And what is this miraculous thing that has restored Quebecers’ sense of pride to them? What has prompted ordinary Quebecers to buttonhole the premier to tell him how happy — and proud — they are? A bill that prohibits those in “positions of authority” in the civil service, including not only judges and police officers but teachers, from wearing religious symbols on the job.
Which is to say, that prohibits those whose faith obliges them to wear such symbols from working in those positions. Or if we are really being frank, that bars them to observant Muslims — also Sikhs and some Jews, but really Muslims ...

Quebec's rural-urban split in the federal election was normal, Legault says

"In addition, in Montreal, there are more anglophones and allophones, so you have to take that into account."

https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/quebecs-rural-urban-split-in-the-federal-election-was-normal-legault-says?fbclid=IwAR3c5YyOS5Tp1I23INKkx-4RdNcRViOElH5tFUEmJsqVCSYQjTbEk_2_RZQ

QUEBEC — The province’s rural-urban split once again revealed in Monday’s federal election is normal, Premier François Legault said Thursday.

“It exists all over the world,” Legault told reporters arriving for question period at the legislature. “There is a difference between cities and the rural world. So we are not different in Quebec from elsewhere in the world.

Martin Patriquin: Quebecers' double standard on women and their bodies

Quebecers back a woman’s right to have an embryo removed from her own body, but not to choose whether to wear a piece of fabric on her head.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/martin-patriquin-quebecers-double-standard-on-women-and-their-bodies?fbclid=IwAR2BgoU6Q90vA3WEu1kCxEojBQLPnSNZftCP8Iw0FbBJX2HBY7wTImwMS9g
 
Richard Martineau, as Richard Martineau wants you to know, is pro-choice. “I am an atheist and I support access to abortion,” the Journal de Montréal columnist wrote a couple of years ago. The same goes for fellow columnist Sophie Durocher, who happens to be Martineau’s wife. “Abortion isn’t a sin. It’s a fundamental right,” as Durocher wrote in 2015. Her reasoning is, dare I say it, remarkably sensible: women have authority over their own bodies.

I highlight the tempestuous twosome’s abortion pensées not to give them more attention (they don’t need it). Rather, it’s to point out a dominant hypocrisy when it comes to women’s rights in this province, of which Martineau and Durocher are arguably the most conspicuous offenders.
In short: Quebecers are overwhelmingly supportive of a woman’s right to have an embryo removed from her own body. Yet if that same woman chooses to wear a piece of fabric on her head in the name of her religion, those same people suddenly become armchair mullahs, convinced they have the right and duty to coax it off. The resulting ire directed toward certain women, including observant Muslims, would make a happy man out of the average misogynist.

Andrew Coyne: Our winner-take-all system turns too many voters into losers and leaders into gamblers

If we were trying to come up with a way to divide and destroy the country, we could hardly do a better job of it than the first past the post system

 https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/andrew-coyne-our-winner-take-all-system-turns-too-many-voters-into-losers-and-leaders-into-gamblers?utm_term=Autofeed&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter&fbclid=IwAR11ZPfcNiDN-3kpg2cVbaYN0v8YtGq__Ixi9xkgObwsovn972MmXi9jtH4

You’d have thought he’d just won another majority. There was Justin Trudeau on election night, boasting of the “clear mandate” he had just been given. No mention that his party had been reduced to a minority, or that it had won a million fewer votes than it did the previous election — a quarter million fewer, in fact, than the Conservatives.

At 33 per cent of the votes cast, it is, in fact, the weakest mandate any Canadian government has received in any election since Confederation. It is only because of the accidents of first past the post — how the vote divides between different parties in different ridings; whether a party’s vote is spread evenly or happens to bunch in the right places — that the Liberals remain in power. With less than a third of the vote, a shade more than the Conservatives received in losing in 2015, they won nearly half the seats — 36 more than the Tories.

Martin Patriquin: Here come Quebec's secularism enforcers

Some may find comparison with the Saudi mutaween excessive, but fundamentally, what the enforcers will be doing is not so different.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/martin-patriquin-here-come-quebecs-secularism-enforcers?fbclid=IwAR3oviOqXdZ7nlXQ-KujRmdc8RKXh2gZ3hGCuX7MuZ3wFV-4NODqsZtPFeY
 
In Saudi Arabia, there is a group of righteous men whose job is to enforce the country’s strict laws regarding dress and gender segregation. Practically speaking, the mutaween, as these men are known, spend much of their time haranguing people for all sorts of alleged crimes, but mostly women for things like visible hair, uncovered faces, unconcealed skin, and painted fingernails and eyelids. Saudi Arabia’s frankly terrifying obsession with how women dress has long been bureaucratized; the Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice, for whom the mutaween toil, employs some 6,000 people.

As of Sunday, thanks to a series of last-minute amendments shovelled into the already-onerous “laicity law,” Quebec now has its own version of the mutaween. To be sure, the province’s forthcoming secularism enforcers won’t be patrolling Quebec’s streets, beaches and malls, as their focus will be government workplaces, not the public square. And due to the government’s studied opacity on the issue, we aren’t yet sure who they will be. As it stands under the law, affected government ministers can appoint “a person” to verify whether all is kosher in the proverbial ministerial kitchens. Assuming the process is complaints-based, these may well be very busy people indeed.

Some may find comparison with the Saudi mutaween excessive, but fundamentally, what the enforcers will be doing is not so different: policing what people, mostly women, wear on their bodies, with the imprimatur of the government behind them. The potential consequences of this are alarming. Any government worker with “power of authority” — a category into which the government has shoehorned teachers — who refuses to doff religious items can lose their job. Thanks to a grandfather clause, those already wearing these religious objects will be spared, but only if they remain in the same position. A transfer, demotion or promotion means they can no longer display their religiosity. (Inexplicably, they can get a visible tattoo, shave their heads or grow a long beard in accordance with their religion — all still permissible under the law.)

Loi sur la laïcité: une deuxième contestation en Cour

C'est la Commission scolaire English Montreal qui va au front, soutenant notamment que la loi contrevient à l'égalité des sexes.

https://bit.ly/2JzB1kP

MONTRÉAL — Une seconde contestation judiciaire a été déposée en Cour supérieure contre la Loi sur la laïcité de l’État, anciennement connue sous le nom de “projet de loi 21”. C’est la Commission scolaire English Montreal qui va au front cette fois-ci, soutenant notamment que la loi contrevient à l’égalité des sexes.

La commission scolaire avait déjà annoncé son intention de saisir les tribunaux, et c’est maintenant chose faite.

Elle allègue entre autres que l’interdiction de port de signes religieux viole l’égalité des sexes, car elle cible principalement les femmes musulmanes.

«25 mythes à déboulonner en politique québécoise»: de la nécessaire épreuve des faits

https://www.ledevoir.com/lire/525104/livres-de-la-necessaire-epreuve-des-faits

Mais c’est encore et toujours un constat juste, croit Michel C. Auger. « À écouter le débat public ces temps-ci, on pourrait penser que la loi 101 n’a jamais été adoptée il y a 40 ans et qu’elle ne fut pas un remarquable succès, écrit-il dans la préface de l’ouvrage. On pourrait aussi croire que l’immigration est la première menace à la survie d’une société francophone en Amérique. Ou que le Québec est le prisonnier d’une Constitution néocoloniale et immuable qu’il ne peut modifier. »

Election 2019: 'We are very much alive,' Blanchet says of Bloc victories

“Our work is not to make Canadian federalism work,” the Bloc Québécois leader said. “Our mandate from voters is also not to impede it."  
https://montrealgazette.com/news/national/election-2019/election-2019-analysis-bloc-quebecois-victory-blocks-liberals-route-to-majority?fbclid=IwAR22_1UCBeVuvIqGpQxBDvBkx_BMzFUfpvneeiJpJqaZ7sV7RE5_KLolTBU

QUEBEC — Dismissed as a party on life support, the Bloc Québécois roared back to life Monday, leaving a trail of defeated New Democratic Party candidates in its wake and disappointed Conservatives who again failed to make gains in the province.

And the Liberal vote in Quebec proved more durable than many anticipated.

As election results poured in from all over Quebec, it was clear the Bloc would be avenging its losses to the New Democrats in 2011 and the Liberals in 2015.

Only a criminal trial will reveal whether SNC-Lavalin’s corruption infected the government, too

Opinion: It would also expose who in government might have been involved

 https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/only-a-criminal-trial-will-reveal-whether-snc-lavalins-corruption-infected-the-government-too

Trials are designed to detail wrongdoing by government and corporate officials alike and to mete out justice in a transparent forum that the public can understand. Deferred prosecution agreements (DPAs) are designed to cover up details of wrongdoing and replace jail time for corrupt government and corporate officials with fines for corporations.

Montreal engineering giant SNC-Lavalin, facing charges of corruption and fraud under Canadian law related to its Libyan operations, understandably wants to avoid trials now and in future. The company claims that past misdeeds can be entirely laid at the feet of a few so-called “bad apples” who have since been removed. If SNC-Lavalin were nevertheless found guilty through an exhaustive examination of witnesses and the presentation of evidence, that claim could be eviscerated — the “bad apples” in question have already said they were carrying out widely employed company practices. If so, the company not only stands to lose federal government contracts over the next 10 years, its officers stand to be incarcerated.

 

 

(Federal) Election shows us why Montreal and the rest of Quebec are so different

The Bloc's success is due to a move to right-of-centre policies in the regions, while urban centres remain progressive.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/election-shows-us-why-montreal-and-the-rest-of-quebec-are-so-different?fbclid=IwAR2DI-Ehkvac7JaixNvls4pHf0rtFqUjREnSZThk1leh3eHaRvnYf-RTkJc

The federal election has once again shone a spotlight on the difference between overwhelmingly Liberal Montreal and the rural parts of the province, where the Bloc Québécois reigned supreme.

The Bloc’s success is due to a move to right-of-centre policies in the regions, while urban centres remain progressive, noted Daniel Béland, director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada.

He said today’s Bloc Québécois party is far different than the one that had success with Gilles Duceppe as leader, with a strong anti-poverty agenda.

Quebecers say separatism is passé, but worry about future of French: poll

The concern was more pronounced among older respondents, with Quebecers 55 and older saying language is an important part of their identity.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebecers-say-separatism-is-passe-but-worry-about-future-of-french-poll

A Canada-wide survey suggests that Quebecers are equally indifferent to the ideas of separatism and federalism, but remain worried about the future of their language.

The survey of 5,700 Canadians, conducted by six research firms and published in La Presse on Friday, suggests that 54 per cent of respondents from Quebec said they were neither federalist nor sovereignist, while 23 per cent described themselves as federalists — the same proportion as those who said they were sovereignists.

The poll also found that 55 per cent of Quebec respondents believed strongly or somewhat that the idea of sovereignty was passé. Only 18 per cent of Quebec francophones aged 18-24 described themselves as sovereignist, while three-quarters of that demographic felt they were neither sovereignist nor federalist.

Quebec no longer participant in national political conversation

"The tragedy is that federal politicians are so afraid of Quebecers like Blanchet and his effective political boss, Premier Legault, that they never make the argument for federalism and for Canada."

https://ipolitics.ca/2019/10/18/quebec-no-longer-participant-in-national-political-conversation/?fbclid=IwAR3N83Nf4UPozSZyR1QP3LD-CWkw8EqbrIJ9HpKd3aWloIZF8ueBGW_SBl0

Quebec may still be part of Confederation but it’s no longer really a participant in the country’s political conversation. That much is clear from the zombie-like revival of the Bloc Québécois in the current election campaign.

From holding caucus meetings in a large phone booth not long ago, the party is now nipping at the heels of the Liberals in public opinion polls and could even end up with more seats in Quebec than the Liberals in Monday’s election.

Credit is given to the strong performance on the hustings by Yves-François Blanchet, a previously relatively obscure cabinet minister in the government of Parti Québécois premier Pauline Marois, who long had a reputation within the party as “a goon” for his aggressive demeanour.

Supporters of public faith in Canada are young, educated, Liberal and 'quite dug in': pollster

This puts the lie to the impression that support for public religiosity in areas like health care, social services and education is driven by conservative ‘holy rollers’

https://nationalpost.com/news/religion/supporters-of-public-faith-in-canada-are-young-educated-liberal-and-quite-dug-in-pollster?fbclid=IwAR2DTuNgUK-Br6CGDyTu0at9Gd1G5QS5nr1N8j5C1fkc49hAoRhBIPB6YIw

Proponents of religious faith in public life in Canada tend to be younger, more highly educated, and more likely to have voted Liberal, according to a new survey.

The counter-intuitive discovery puts the lie to the common impression that support for public religiosity in areas like health care, social services and education is driven by evangelical church goers and deeply observant, older, conservative “holy rollers,” said Angus Reid, chairman of Angus Reid Institute.

“What we find is exactly the opposite,” Reid said.

Martin Patriquin: Quebec finds separatist threat not needed for clout

If the result is what polls suggest, Quebec issues will loom large in the next federal government, just as they have in this election.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/martin-patriquin-quebec-finds-separatist-threat-not-needed-for-clout?fbclid=IwAR2q0V8igvurV04oyWHuHQoBWItqmHLEvY3iiyb63gLGNmO8dUlmaAPkxHY


One of the longstanding existential worries of Quebec sovereignist movement is the province’s diminished political clout should the movement become passé. The thinking: remove the separatist threat and Quebec becomes a province like any other. Quebec must always be a threat to Canada in order to remain relevant in Canada, in other words.

The 43rd federal election campaign, which comes to a welcome end next week, has laid waste to this blinkered logic. A little more than one year after Quebecers themselves pushed the Parti Québécois (and therefore sovereignty) a little further into oblivion, Quebec has retained its outsized importance on the federal landscape.

First, consider that three of the four debates held over the last several weeks took place in Quebec. (Justin Trudeau couldn’t be bothered to show up to the Maclean’s/CityTV debate in Toronto last month.) To this apparently symbolic happenstance you can add this: Many of the most important electoral issues hashed out during those six hours of television directly involved Quebec.

Macpherson: How the CAQ anti-hijab legislation would affect all Quebecers

The bill would have the effect of encouraging discrimination against Muslims, and weaken protection for the freedoms and rights of all.

https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/macpherson-how-the-caq-anti-hijab-legislation-would-affect-all-quebecers

A political trial balloon tells us what a government is thinking of doing. Its purpose is to test reaction to an idea before committing to it.

Okay, then, as a service to the Legault government, here’s one reaction to the balloon floated this week about its ... anti-hijab bill.

The ...  “secularism” bill would forbid government employees in “positions of authority” from wearing any religious symbols while on duty. In theory, it would apply to all religions and to judges, prosecutors, police and prison guards ...

Chris Selley: The federal leaders are all pretty appalling on Bill 21

With their cynicism, the party leaders have diminished any credibility Canada might have internationally in promoting religious freedoms or other minority rights

https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/election-2019/chris-selley-the-federal-leaders-are-all-pretty-appalling-on-bill-21?fbclid=IwAR3TJkf_NEsy1WxKe31VNfcf-uNM9JWl8EBqBRwYpUt3tZcbaBH-RakJQxQ
QUEBEC CITY — From a civil libertarian standpoint, the federal party leaders’ positions on Bill 21, Quebec’s new restrictions on certain civil servants’ attire, are all pretty appalling. The Liberals and Justin Trudeau could lay dubious claim to the most stringent opposition — they have “left the door open” to intervening in court challenges — but only if they did so quietly. Instead they boast of it just like it’s something for the self-styled “party of the Charter” to be proud of. Trudeau criticizing turban-wearing NDP leader Jagmeet Singh for his position during the English-language leaders’ debate was one of the more jaw-dropping moments in a campaign that has wanted for many things, but never chutzpah.

But then, Singh’s position — “door closed” until it reaches the Supreme Court, at which an NDP government would “look at” intervention” — makes him impossible to defend, especially since he derides the idea of earlier intervention as “political interference.” One wonders how would he describe a bunch of politicians telling teachers and police officers what to wear.

William Johnson: The myth of disestablished English - The Métropolitain

The myth of disestablished English - The Métropolitain

Even as English is again under attack at the National Assembly during the hearings on Bill 14, it is perhaps true that most Quebecers have been misled into believing that English is not also an official language of Quebec. But that’s entirely unfounded in fact or in law. English has been an official language of Quebec ever since 1763. Every law passed since then has been passed in English. Every law to be passed by the current Parti Québécois government will be passed in English as well as French, and the English text will be official, just as will be the French. 

English is part of Quebec’s very identity. That part is largely what makes the difference between Quebec and other former colonies of France, such as Guadeloupe, Martinique, Louisiana, Haiti, Vietnam or Algeria. 

So how has the myth been propagated that French is the “sole official language?”  It began with the trickery of Robert Bourassa’s Bill 22 of 1974, the so-called “Official Language Act, which proclaimed – in English as well as French: “French is the official language of the province of Québec.” ...

La commission scolaire English-Montréal prise en défaut

(Québec) La commission scolaire English-Montréal (CSEM) a enfreint les règles dans l’attribution de contrats valant plusieurs millions de dollars, concluent des vérificateurs du Conseil du trésor.
https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/education/201910/15/01-5245516-la-commission-scolaire-english-montreal-prise-en-defaut.php?fbclid=IwAR37MM7vVK41bE3T0RXbCr3CCO3ZpikcBcjMnRdozVWcsq-tnsaV69JANws

Dans leur rapport, que La Presse a obtenu, ils relèvent en outre que des contrats ont été accordés sans passer par le processus d’appel d’offres public prévu à la loi.

Le président du Conseil du trésor, Christian Dubé, avait mandaté ses vérificateurs en janvier pour faire enquête sur la CSEM. Sa décision faisait suite à un reportage de La Presse sur une série d’allégations portées à la connaissance du gouvernement au sujet de la gestion des contrats dans la plus grande commission scolaire anglophone du Québec.

Le rapport du Trésor alimentera la réflexion du gouvernement Legault, qui envisage de mettre la CSEM sous tutelle. Une décision devrait intervenir le mois prochain. La tutelle fait partie des recommandations d’un rapport d’enquête accablant du ministère de l’Éducation sur la CSEM qui a été remis au gouvernement en septembre.

QESBA to lead judicial charge against school boards elimination

http://www.thesuburban.com/news/qesba-to-lead-judicial-charge-against-school-boards-elimination/article_6bb5164f-63f0-526a-ae81-50b3ee06876a.html?fbclid=IwAR1mDs_dBYzwXosnrL7d2VRR-zlh1vEGFf0RO2Ln6PsdhQKQN9ZY2rpQYYI

Following last week’s announcement about the CAQ administration’s plan to follow through with its plans to abolish Québec’s school boards, Québec English School Board Association (QESBA) director Russell Copeman told The Suburban that he expects the association to lead the judicial fight against the bill.

“Not only is it an offense against local democracy, but the CAQ’s new bill (Bill #40) clearly doesn’t meet the Supreme Court’s criteria under section 23 of the Canadian Charter,” said Copeman. “If it goes to court, I have no doubt the QESBA will lead the charge.”

While Québec Education Minister Jean-François Roberge described Bill 40 as a radical plan to reform public education in Québec, the new law is expected to abolish local school boards in order to replace them with so-called ‘service centers’ made up of 16 people – essentially volunteers as they will not be paid for their service. Although board members will be paid $100 to participate in their monthly meetings, the money is little more than pocket change when compared to the responsibility that defines a responsible commissioner’s work. While the law will allow the province’s 9 English language public school boards to elect their commissioners (as usual) in order to accommodate minority language community rights to operate and manage their own schools, the ‘service centers’ will still be responsible to the minister and his (her) bureaucracy who will effectively have the last word about public education in Québec. According to Copeman, it’s the end of local school board democracy because he doubts that the new service centers will have the kind of power and responsibility to be able to provide both the oversight and the scrutiny that’s required to manage and operate an efficient school board.

La loi sur la laïcité est-elle raciste ?

La loi sur la laïcité est-elle raciste ? Cette question met les Québécois en colère, et surtout ceux qui fréquentent les réseaux sociaux.

https://www.lapresse.ca/debats/opinions/201910/10/01-5244919-laicite-pour-zainab.php?fbclid=IwAR0vvMYuHeLxS25ue720dfp2lgWSpsBUv9rFsozD2I_XCt6ezfiU4bJH9Sw

Mon compte Twitter déborde de commentaires depuis que j’ai soulevé le fait qu’aucun des chefs lors du premier débat télévisé n’avait osé affirmer ce qui me semblait être une évidence : cette loi ne discrimine pas seulement sur une base religieuse, elle discrimine aussi sur une base ethnique. L’image même de Jagmeet Singh, chef du NPD, incarne cette double discrimination : corrigez-moi si je me trompe, mais je n’ai pas encore vu de masses de sikhs à la peau blanche !

La réalité est que la majorité des personnes touchées par la loi proviennent de minorités visibles. Je comprends que ce n’est pas l’intention de la loi d’être raciste, mais son effet est proportionnellement plus grand au sein de ces groupes. Il s’agit du concept de « racisme systémique » qui touche les institutions telles que le système judiciaire, où l’on retrouve un nombre disproportionné de minorités visibles, mais aussi d’autochtones. Les lois sont les mêmes pour tout le monde, mais dans leur application, elles ont un impact plus grand sur certains groupes.

Au Canada anglais et en particulier à Toronto, on parle beaucoup de racisme systémique. On fait des enquêtes. Des recommandations. On fait des manifs. On parle moins de religion, et quand on le fait, c’est généralement en lien avec le discours sur le racisme, pour les raisons que j’ai mentionnées plus haut. La laïcité tout court, ce n’est pas une préoccupation.

Opinion: Quebec's Bill 21 and the lessons of France

Anti-veiling laws that govern Muslim women’s bodies and lives have been passed without much concern for those bodies and lives.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/opinion-quebecs-bill-21-and-the-lessons-of-france?fbclid=IwAR27GY-_cO8-mI7ZEdpVJNHxaeloXos3pcb0OTo7X2DL2PhgEdmNpQE-e_A

In the wake of the National Assembly hearings on Bill 21, one might think that everything that needed to be said has been said. However, despite valiant efforts by a handful of civil society groups — most notably the Coalition Inclusion Québec and the Fédération des femmes du Québec — the voices of those most concerned by the application of Bill 21 have largely been left out of the conversation.

As a researcher who has studied anti-veiling legislation in France as well as in Quebec, and as someone who wears a head cover, I do not find the lack of consultation with those directly affected by the proposed law to be surprising. This same pattern could be seen during the 2003 Stasi Commission in France — where only two headscarf-wearing women were invited to speak out of hundreds of intervenors, and only as an afterthought. And again during the Gerin Commission that preceded the 2010 law restricting face-coverings, where a grand total of zero niqabi women were invited to speak before the commission. In both cases, commissions made up mostly of white men recommended laws that constrained the freedoms of a marginalized minority female population.

The reality is that anti-veiling laws that govern Muslim women’s bodies and lives have been passed without much concern for those bodies and lives. While some claim to be liberating Muslim women from their supposed oppression by their fathers-brothers-husbands and/or Islam itself, such laws are oppressive and do nothing to promote gender equality — much less integration ...

Op-ed: Leaders wrong to accede to Quebec’s symbols-ban demand

https://news.umanitoba.ca/op-ed-leaders-wrong-to-accede-to-quebecs-symbols-ban-demand/?fbclid=IwAR1rlBjXGqo4XpBHxYC2S-W3VUJN05K0TpxJrn7gALAZ8H6lI7jIRPUjpuU

In the early days of the federal election campaign, Québec Premier François Legault called on leaders of Canada’s federal parties to pledge not to take part in any legal challenges against the province’s Act respecting the laicity of the State, also known as Bill 21, the secularism law that bars public servants in positions of authority from wearing religious symbols including a hijab, turban or kippah. Justin Trudeau, the Liberal leader, was the first to promise that he would reserve the right to intervene at a later date. Following Monday night’s English leaders’ debate, NDP leader Jagmeet Singh stated that he might consider intervening if the challenge were heard by the Supreme Court of Canada. For their part, Conservative leader Andrew Scheer and People’s Party leader Maxime Bernier acceded to Premier Legault’s request. Their decision to commit in advance not to participate in a legal challenge is wrongheaded. A decision whether or not to intervene should be made only once the federal government has had the opportunity to assess all constitutional arguments raised by the parties to the litigation and decide whether it is in the public interest to participate in the proceedings.

Well-established procedural rules provide that interested attorneys general must receive notice of litigation that raises the constitutional validity of a law to ensure they have the opportunity to address this question. On an appeal to the Supreme Court, a notice of constitutional question must be sent to all attorneys general that are not already parties to the appeal, including the Attorney General of Canada and attorneys general of the provinces and territories.

As noted by several constitutional law experts, the invocation of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ notwithstanding clause in Bill 21 would not prevent a court from reviewing that law’s constitutionality. While the court could not declare that the secularism law has no force and effect, rendering it inoperative, nothing would prevent it from declaring that the law nevertheless violates the rights to freedom of religion, freedom of expression and equality and that the limits that it imposes on these rights are not reasonable and demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

Clashing rights: Behind the Quebec hijab debate

https://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/clashing-rights-behind-the-quebec-hijab-debate?fbclid=IwAR0OAwHMaR-m6dO7JmoJqsH7eXISShQaK8-u9MowdBrkGeWShPfu200SefE
The Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ) government has introduced Bill 21, a law that would supposedly entrench religious neutrality in the province. It would do so by prohibiting providers of government services in positions of authority such as judges, police and teachers from wearing religious symbols, including hijabs (headscarves for female Muslims), turbans (for male Sikhs), kippas (skullcaps for male Jews) and visible Christian crosses
.
Bill 21 also prohibits providing or seeking a government service with one’s face covered. This principle is relatively uncontroversial in Quebec, though some worry that it might discriminate against the very few Muslim women who cover their faces.

The principle behind Bill 21 is laicity, or secularism. Quebecois are currently debating the human rights implications of Bill 21, just as they debated earlier versions proposed by the Parti Quebecois government in 2013 and the Liberal government in 2014 ...

Laïcité et discrimination

Est-ce faire preuve de « mépris » envers la nation québécoise que de qualifier la Loi sur la laïcité de l’État de « discriminatoire » ?
https://www.lapresse.ca/elections-federales/201910/09/01-5244800-laicite-et-discrimination.php?fbclid=IwAR1-nzB1JS3JXYhQCfVWu958y3RC671Ef96DkO8UbzTEzH6qwjxjocAbTyU

À entendre les hauts cris suscités par la question de la journaliste Althia Raj lors du débat des chefs diffusé par la CBC, il semblerait que oui. Certains réclament des excuses publiques et dénoncent ce qu’ils perçoivent comme du « militantisme » de la part de la cheffe du bureau parlementaire d’Ottawa pour le HuffPost Canada. Comme s’il fallait désormais s’excuser de mettre les politiciens devant leurs contradictions en posant des questions qui s’appuient sur des faits.

Rappelons d’abord quelques-uns de ces faits… Dans un segment du débat en anglais portant sur la polarisation, les droits de la personne et l’immigration, Althia Raj, qui était l’une des modératrices, a posé une question sur la loi 21 au chef du Nouveau Parti démocratique, Jagmeet Singh.

« Votre campagne est axée sur le courage, mais vous n’avez pas eu le courage de combattre la loi discriminatoire du Québec. [Cette loi] interdit aux personnes qui, comme vous, portent des symboles religieux d’occuper certains emplois dans la province. Si vous étiez premier ministre, resteriez-vous en retrait et laisseriez-vous une autre province pratiquer la discrimination à l’endroit de ses citoyens ? Ne faites-vous pas passer les intérêts de votre parti au Québec avant vos principes et les droits à l’égalité de tous les citoyens – vous et, franchement, tous les autres chefs sur la scène ? »

UN human rights observers warn Quebec about secularism bill

3 rapporteurs signed letter expressing several 'concerns' about religious symbols bill

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/bill-21-united-nations-human-rights-concerns-1.5145344?fbclid=IwAR2_vzdWpnsopcRY1jh0fJ-5YKCfIqNzvRK1HP2vJkYqQa03pm_yjxItp_g

High-ranking human rights monitors with the United Nations are concerned the Quebec government will violate fundamental freedoms if it moves ahead with legislation to limit where religious symbols can be worn.

Three UN legal experts, known as rapporteurs, signed and sent a letter written in French last week to the Canadian mission in Geneva. They asked the diplomats to share the letter with Quebec's Legislature.

The letter says the province's so-called secularism bill, which the Coalition Avenir Québec government is rushing to pass by next month, threatens freedoms protected by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ...

New court challenge brought against Quebec's secularism law

Muslim women 'can't help but feel like we are being targeted' says plaintiff

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/court-challenge-quebec-s-secularism-law-1.5299183

Quebec's secularism law, which bans some civil servants from wearing religious symbols at work, is facing a new legal challenge.

Lawyers representing a multi-faith group filed a motion Thursday in Quebec Superior Court that argues the law violates constitutional protections of gender equality and religious freedom.

The motion, a copy of which was provided to CBC News, also argues the law exceeds provincial jurisdiction and fails to live up to its own definition of laicité — or secularism ...

Khan: Quebec's Bill 21 isn't about secularism, it's about atheism

The principle of the separation of “church” and state in western democracies is based on the premise that the state will not mandate or advocate an official religion. But that is not what Bill 21 would do.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/khan-quebecs-bill-21-isnt-about-secularism-its-about-atheism?fbclid=IwAR2A3sKBUnKgNsaqDkOwhgbdbB27723J3XR6vIWXL0JWdJeZHw_7juq5Bxg

In the debate surrounding Quebec’s secularism legislation, Bill 21, which is currently being examined by a legislative committee in public hearings, the Quebec government has made much of the fact that the legislation is intended to maintain the secular nature of Quebec’s public institutions, and ensure that the government is not officially promoting a particular faith or religion.

However, the manner in which the CAQ government of Premier François Legault is implementing its interpretation of secularism, and the anti-religious fervour apparent in the debate around the bill, demonstrates that the de facto state religion of Quebec is radical atheism, shrouded in the language of extremist secularism.

The principle of the separation of “church” and state in western democracies is based on the premise that the state will not mandate or advocate an official religion, as can be found in some European countries, many Muslim majority nations, as well as some nations where Buddhism is dominant. The intent of the principle is for the state to be neutral in matters of faith, not elevate the status of one faith over others, and allow citizens to practise their faith without fear of state coercion or persecution, particularly if their faith is different from that of the majority population ...

Untested legal options could give feds ways to intervene on Bill 21

OTTAWA — National party leaders’ reluctance to intervene in a court challenge to Quebec’s controversial Bill 21 may have left the erroneous impression that there’s nothing the federal government can do to try to stop the law that bans teachers, police and certain other public servants from wearing religious symbols at work.

The Quebec government has, after all, invoked the Constitution’s notwithstanding clause to prevent its secularism law from being struck down as a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

But while use of the notwithstanding clause makes a court challenge more difficult, constitutional experts say it does not necessarily provide a blanket shield against charter challenges, nor does it prevent the federal government from pursuing other legal avenues ...

Andrew Coyne: Quebecers pick their own [Supreme Court justice] and the feds are letting them do it

https://o.canada.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-quebecers-pick-their-own-justice-and-the-feds-are-letting-them-do-it/wcm/0580f0aa-683c-40e3-9eb7-fca829a24912?fbclid=IwAR3c4W8Xw0S4aQsxsScwY2s3FODhBNQSB24BW-PecNiv8ndnFek-H_o9g_U

Announced last week, it was described in most news reports — where it was reported at all — as a “deal.” The government of Quebec would be given, for the first time, a formal say in the appointment of Supreme Court justices from the province, a prerogative hitherto reserved exclusively to the prime minister of Canada.

And in return? What would Quebec give up, or Ottawa gain, from this “deal”? The same as in most such deals between the federal government and the provinces, Quebec in particular: nothing. No concessions to federal authority, either in this field or another. Not so much as a thank you note. Federalism is all about give and take, of course; it’s just that it seems it’s always the feds that give and the provinces that take.

Prime ministers are well advised to consult widely on any Supreme Court appointment, no matter which province the appointee is from, as generally they have. The Trudeau government had previously gone so far as to codify the process in the form of a seven-person advisory board for each appointment — four drawn from the Canadian legal community, three selected by the federal government ...

Macpherson: François Legault's Brexit referendum for Quebec

Rarely has a government shown so little enthusiasm for its own proposal as the Legault government for its bill to change the voting system.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/macpherson-francois-legaults-brexit-referendum-for-quebec?fbclid=IwAR0vDNjV2bjuNRkZyTflQWGUDfkl-8lQUytJvU0LCeLj2ClADlhat_8neuA

So, apparently, we’re to have a referendum in Quebec — maybe — like the one in Great Britain in 2016 on Brexit. No, not on seceding from Canada; rather, on a proposal that the government calling the referendum hopes will be rejected.

Rarely has a Quebec government shown so little enthusiasm for its own proposal as the Legault government this week when it presented its bill to change the voting system.

Macpherson: Under the CAQ, the exceptional is becoming normal

No previous Quebec government has attacked minority rights as systematically as François Legault's.

https://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/macpherson-under-the-caq-the-exceptional-is-becoming-normal?fbclid=IwAR01H9zfkQdRItG5FuJ8xTtlv3nyvXABCfW9aNeCQNbHWgxsXtGGMFZ4jrw
When Education Minister Jean-François Roberge exercised a rarely used power to order the closing of an English-language high school at the end of this school year so it could be handed over to a French-language board, he called his action “exceptional.”

That was in late January. Less than four months later, the exceptional is becoming normal.
The sudden closing of Riverdale High School in the West Island became a cause célèbre in the English-speaking community. That hasn’t deterred Roberge, however, from threatening to again dispense with the normal one-year prior consultation provided for in the Education Act in order to transfer three more English schools to a French board, this time in east-end Montreal ...

Loi sur la laïcité : une seconde contestation déposée en Cour supérieure

Trois mois après son adoption, la Loi sur la laïcité de l’État (projet de loi 21) fait l’objet d’une nouvelle fronde devant les tribunaux. Un second recours judiciaire a été déposé hier en Cour supérieure pour la faire invalider.

https://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/justice-et-faits-divers/201909/26/01-5243014-loi-sur-la-laicite-une-seconde-contestation-deposee-en-cour-superieure.php?fbclid=IwAR2kwat1hmD9DXp8tZEPaBgX0bIFuO2KsjDh5B6jZz0c4P2TdYUxBOvfJfE

Trois enseignantes (une catholique et deux musulmanes), épaulées par le comité juridique de la Coalition Inclusion Québec, organisation qui regroupe des citoyens et des groupes communautaires opposés à la loi sur la laïcité, ont mandaté un bataillon d’avocats pour qu’ils élaborent les arguments qu’elles comptent défendre en cour.

La Coalition compte faire valoir son point de vue en s’attardant sur ce qu’elle estime être des « contradictions » dans le texte de la loi, un non-respect du principe de l’égalité des sexes garantie par les chartes, une intrusion dans un champ de compétence fédéral, et même une rupture avec l’esprit de l’Acte de Québec de 1774, qui éliminait des dispositions discriminatoires envers les Canadiens français catholiques.

Quebec hurtling toward religious symbols ban, which critics say would not only be discriminatory, but a nightmare to enforce

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-quebec-hurtling-towards-religious-symbols-ban-which-critics-say/?fbclid=IwAR2f9RcsNVvoy-3eOVvOe4qeEUVP8qqMjEUgdfFFaujxSBhgqrACcSJFwR4

Bouchera Chelbi, a schoolteacher who wears a Muslim headscarf, sat in the ornate salon rouge of the National Assembly and spilled her heart out to the legislators before her. Quebec’s plan to restrict teachers’ right to wear religious symbols, she said, was going to hurt.

“As a woman, I don’t accept that you dictate to me how I can dress,” she told the MNAs.

Ms. Chelbi’s comments were both pointed and remarkable: After six days of committee hearings into Quebec’s disputed legislation on religious symbols, she was the first and only teacher in a headscarf to address politicians about it

Bill 21 feeds intolerance, Gérard Bouchard tells hearings

"History is filled with examples where a majority abused its powers at the expense of its minority."

https://montrealgazette.com/news/quebec/gerard-bouchard-challenges-legitimacy-of-bill-21-at-hearings?fbclid=IwAR1gNuZbzmVVAjSnkVS2-H_5CBIlytCwNSJV-uRV33o2bJGs-EU4ObCu-m0

QUEBEC — The co-author of the 2008 report on reasonable accommodations says Quebec’s Bill 21 doesn’t make the province look like a “decent society” and will only feed an intolerance toward minorities, which has been festering for years.

And Gérard Bouchard said that before the majority decides to override the rights of its minority, it needs to have a good reason, some kind of “higher motivation” other than just wanting to get the debate over with fast — and the Coalition Avenir Québec government has yet to prove its case.

It has not even produced a scientific study proving a teacher wearing a hijab, for example, could indoctrinate, intimidate or traumatize a student into following a particular path, Bouchard said ...

EMSB has highest Quebec public school board success rate, new stats show

https://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/emsb-has-highest-quebec-public-school-board-success-rate-new-stats-show?fbclid=IwAR37muQRWHAa3kOYuRWTPDquxOOfimlrNM4uhVnyM8eODJxy3HmFa-SAsXw

Quebec’s Bill 21 misapplies religious neutrality principle

Bill 21 is supposed to be about religious neutrality, but it is inconsistent with how this constitutional principle is understood in Canadian law.

https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2019/quebecs-bill-21-misapplies-religious-neutrality-principle/?fbclid=IwAR1OGLhFPSpVTydKUN4m5JTwxyt062XVvNCrJSXqyguH3MzNc9jr5VVqiyQ

The Quebec government has introduced its promised legislation restricting visible religious imagery in the public service. In essence, Bill 21 prohibits state employees such as prosecutors, police officers and teachers from wearing religious symbols — including head and face coverings — when carrying out their civic duties. It will apply only to new public service hires, exempting existing civil servants from its provisions. The Bill, tabled in late March, follows similar legislation passed in 2017 that banned the wearing of face coverings by individuals providing or receiving certain public services.

The new law is ostensibly supported by four principles: the religious neutrality of the state; the separation of religion and the state; the equality of all citizens; and freedom of conscience and religion. But perhaps even more significantly, Bill 21 seeks to amend the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, the quasi-constitutional provincial statute with which all Quebec laws must comply, and which itself is subordinate only to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Although the Quebec Charter guarantees freedom of religion, its preamble will now include a declaration affirming the “fundamental importance” of state secularism.

In response to warnings from civil libertarians that these provisions will disproportionately target members of minority religious groups, Premier François Legault has insisted that the Bill is consistent with the views of most Quebecers that the state ought to be religiously neutral.

Jedwab: Should federal leaders intervene on Quebec's Bill 21?

Quebec politicians seemingly feel it is inappropriate for 'outsiders' to involve themselves in the business of their province. These same politicians are happy to intervene in other provinces' affairs though, particularly when it comes to minorities.  
https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/jedwab-should-federal-leaders-intervene-on-quebecs-bill-21?fbclid=IwAR2EftrFZ0iq4URlm7xsRhdUadcds_zJXog5-2bwbHsYt2t5k6QJlOSiLPQ
At the very start of the election campaign, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau did not entirely dismiss the possibility of some intervention on Quebec’s Bill 21. This prompted Quebec Premier François Legault to ask all party leaders to permanently stay out of this purely provincial matter.
Conservative leader Andrew Scheer was quick to heed the call, suggesting that it was not the place of the federal leaders to encroach on the province’s jurisdiction. Legault also secured support for his stand from provincial Liberal leadership front-runner Dominique Anglade (a former member of Legault’s political party) who echoed the premier’s view that any decision regarding Bill 21 – the province’s law banning many public servants from wearing religious symbols – had to be made by Quebecers only.
Quebec politicians seemingly feel it is inappropriate for “outsiders” to involve themselves in the business of their province, and in particular when it comes to concerns expressed by “their” minorities. But they don’t always follow their own rule when it comes to other provinces.

The faulty received wisdom around the notwithstanding clause

Invoking the notwithstanding clause, as Quebec has done with Bill 21, does not shield a law from being reviewed by a court for violating rights. 

  https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/may-2019/faulty-wisdom-notwithstanding-clause/?fbclid=IwAR0c-a7zS_wmlY72cf7Nz5z1zpTkgQ6U8d56OLXbXvDvPVdjS3Yrm2wGvlA

Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has often been described, including by the Supreme Court of Canada, as an “override provision” that allows legislation to override Charter rights and freedoms. According to received wisdom, the notwithstanding clause bars judicial review of legislation that is shielded by it. Quebec Premier François Legault so supposes when he explains his government’s recourse to the notwithstanding clause in Bill 21, An Act respecting the Laicity of the State, as a way to “avoid lengthy judicial battles.”

And yet the text of section 33 does not support this received wisdom. The word “override” appears nowhere and there is no mention of “judicial review.” Rather, the text of section 33 focuses on shielding a law’s “operation.” It states that declaring that a law shall operate notwithstanding one or more Charter rights will secure for the legislation “such operation as it would have but for the provision of this Charter referred to in the declaration.” The equivalent term in the French version of section 33(2) is “effet,” providing that a law invoking the notwithstanding clause “a l’effet qu’elle aurait sauf la disposition en cause de la charte.”
In the Charter’s nearly 40 years of existence, no court has addressed the meaning of this phrase in section 33(2), let alone settled it. The Supreme Court of Canada in Ford v. Quebec (1988) ruled on the formal requirements in section 33(1) for invoking the notwithstanding clause. But the Court was not asked about, nor did it rule on, the significance of shielding a law’s operation. What does it mean?