Don Macpherson: What's wrong with Quebec's proposed new electoral map

http://montrealgazette.com/opinion/columnists/don-macpherson-whats-wrong-with-quebecs-proposed-new-electoral-map

You can’t please everybody, as we are reminded every time Quebec’s electoral representation commission proposes to re-draw the boundaries of the 125 provincial ridings to reflect changes in the distribution of the population.

This time around, the loudest complaints have come from Québec solidaire MNA Manon Massé.

Massé has been leading what so far has been an unsuccessful legal as well as political campaign to preserve her riding of Sainte-Marie—Saint-Jacques in south-central Montreal.

Chris Selley: Charles Taylor … niqab defender?

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/chris-selley-charles-taylor-niqab-defender

Nor was there anything disreputable about Messrs. Bouchard and Taylor’s undertaking, which was to travel around the province and listen to Quebecers of all stripes vent their various cultural angsts, from the very theoretically legitimate (there’s a reason people would object to cops wearing niqabs) to the thoroughly bizarre (the mortal threat of unlabelled halal chicken). You can’t sneer such worries away, much as urban elites try. The Bouchard-Taylor report is in the main a sober call for calm and unity, an assurance that Quebec is not reasonably accommodating itself toward theocracy. And while forcing agents of the state to wear a non-religious uniform might run afoul of the Supreme Court — which settled turban-wearing cops a quarter-century ago — it’s not inherently outrageous ... 

But they must have known, from their observations and their travels, that Quebecers tend to be less resolutely secular than preferentially secular — particularly suspicious of Islam and particularly respectful of ostensibly “cultural” Christianity. Pauline Marois epitomized a very popular version of secularism that leaves in place a crucifix hanging over the speaker’s chair in the National Assembly that was installed in 1936 by noted non-secularist premier Maurice Duplessis. Ms. Marois’ “values charter” at least had the decency to target all religious symbols in the public sector; now Premier Philippe Couillard, channelling Mr. Harper, proposes to ban both giving and receiving public services with a covered face because “certain principles have to be clarified;” because “I think this is a line in the sand for many Quebecers and Canadians.” How convenient that it only affects the world’s least popular religion! ...
Of course, leaving those insecurities alone more or less entirely worked out rather well for Canadian politics for a very long time. That’s a pretty good option, too.

‘We are beginning to overcome the divisions’ in Quebec, Charles Taylor says of reasonable accommodation | National Post

‘We are beginning to overcome the divisions’ in Quebec, Charles Taylor says of reasonable accommodation | National Post

Nine years after signing a report that called for a ban on religious symbols worn by public servants in positions of “coercive” authority -— police and judges — McGill philosophy professor Charles Taylor says times have changed and Quebecers have changed along with them, and that he no longer endorses the recommendation.

In an open letter published Tuesday in La Presse, Taylor, who with sociologist Gérard Bouchard co-chaired a commission on reasonable accommodation of cultural communities in Quebec, wrote that his support for the measure was never more than qualified, but added that at the time, “to not impose these restrictions would have shocked public opinion to the point of jeopardizing our proposal for open secularism.”

But Taylor writes now that “things have very much changed since then, and that’s more than just my opinion.”

Angus Reid: Could our national leader be: _____? Most in Canada, U.S. say they’d vote for more diverse candidates - Angus Reid Institute

Could our national leader be: _____? Most in Canada, U.S. say they’d vote for more diverse candidates - Angus Reid Institute

Could the PM be monolingual? English Canada says ‘yes,’ Quebec says ‘non’

Visible religious symbols have long been a source of contention in Quebec, which perhaps explains why two-in-three say they could not support a party led by a person who wears a religious head-covering:

[PQ's Charter of "Secular" Values] is clearly unconstitutional, but could still become law - The Globe and Mail

Quebec’s secular charter is clearly unconstitutional, but could still become law - The Globe and Mail

By contrast, the PQ argues that preventing public servants from exercising religious freedom at work is part of a broader secularism or “state neutrality” with respect to the state’s role vis-a-vis religion. This is a perversion of the principle of the separation of church and state, which is normally regarded as preventing government from imposing particular religious doctrines on citizens (such as requiring children to say the Lord’s Prayer at school). Instead, the PQ government proposes to strip citizens of any overt religious identification when working in the public sector. That is a far cry from a “neutral” state objective.

As an entirely symbolic enterprise, the legislation should fail on the first step of the judicial test for determining whether an infringement of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is “reasonable in a democratic society,” which states that the government requires a substantial and pressing objective when it seeks to limit a right. In a case on prisoner voting rights, the Supreme Court majority made it clear that objectives which are symbolic in nature are “problematic” and noted that a legislature “cannot use lofty objectives to shield legislation from Charter scrutiny.”

Globe editorial: It’s time for Quebec to kill Bill 62, and stop targeting religious minorities

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/its-time-for-quebec-to-kill-bill-62-and-stop-targeting-religious-minorities/article34073614/

The murder of six Muslim men praying in a Quebec City mosque on Jan. 29 has provoked a watershed moment in the thinking of Quebec politicians, intellectuals and the public at large. Where Muslims were once an easy target for nationalist populists and radio shock jocks, now it is not quite so easy to stigmatize them for the sake of votes and ratings.

That’s a start. But there is still a stain on the province – one last official vestige of the fear-mongering that flowed from Quebec’s post-9/11 debate over the accommodation of immigrants and religious minorities. That is Bill 62. It needs to die, and now is the moment to kill it.

The mosque attack prompted an unprecedented show of grief and solidarity among Quebeckers of all beliefs. Premier Philippe Couillard spoke emotionally of the “demons” in Quebec society. Nationalist politicians, including Parti Québécois Leader Jean-François Lisée, acknowledged the need to tone down their anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Line between religious heritage and discrimination unclear despite ruling against city council prayer

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/line-between-religious-heritage-and-discrimination-unclear-despite-ruling-against-city-council-prayer

By saying “not all” are in breach of the duty of neutrality, the implication is that many are. Gascon goes on to quote favourably a passage from the 2008 Bouchard-Taylor report on religious accommodation: “(We) must avoid maintaining practices that in point of fact identify the state with a religion, usually that of the majority, simply because they now seem to have only heritage value.”

And yet when the court had an opening to make a statement about two such symbols — the crucifix and the statue of Jesus with a glowing red heart found in two locations where Saguenay council meets — it declined. The Court of Appeal had declared the symbols were mere historical artifacts stripped of their religious meaning for most residents. The Supreme Court dodged the question by finding that the human-rights tribunal that originally heard the case and ordered the removal of the crucifix and Sacred Heart statue had no jurisdiction to consider the symbols.

Professors question health of academic freedom at McGill after Potter resignation

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/professors-question-health-of-academic-freedom-at-mcgill-after-potter-resignation

A CAUT official said the association received information from within McGill alleging ‘political pressure (was) placed on the institution to get rid of Potter’

Quebec and the Constitution: A timeline of dead ends

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard wants to reopen the constitutional debate. Here’s a timeline of previous attempts.
 
http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/quebec-and-the-constitution-a-timeline-of-dead-e

Globe editorial: Why did McGill fail to defend Andrew Potter’s academic freedom?

https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/globe-editorial-why-did-mcgill-fail-to-defend-andrew-potters-academic-freedom/article34411662/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&

'Unless McGill offers a viable explanation, or Mr. Potter himself clears the air, the logical conclusion is uncomfortable: McGill professors can write whatever they want, as long as their views are palatable to Quebec’s establishment. There can be no harsher condemnation of a university. Or of a society, for that matter.'