York president weighs in on religious-rights controversy, calls for discussion – The Globe and Mail

Minister stronger than York U president, who remains in the wishy-washy category:

Brad Duguid, Ontario’s Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, said he respects the university’s jurisdiction to make its own decision, but “my inclination would be to side with the views of the prof on this.”

“It’s my opinion that … our universities should not be obliged to alter course curriculum in any way that would be seen as discriminatory with regard to gender equality,” Mr. Duguid said, calling such equity a “sacrosanct” principle.

York president weighs in on religious-rights controversy, calls for discussion – The Globe and Mail.

Professor Grayson writes a long letter to York U admin, effectively skewering the arguments of the Dean:

York University prof fires back over religious accommodation controversy | Toronto & GTA | News | Toronto Sun

Lastly, Globe editorial today better than the earlier wishy-washy editorial:

Under Canadian law, public institutions and employers have a duty to accommodate difference. That could mean accommodating a disability, for example. It also covers religion. At a university, there are many requests, like a student asking to have an exam reschedueled for a religious holiday, that can be considered and sometimes addressed without harming or disadvantaging other students, or undermining values of gender and racial non-discrimination. That has to be the key test.

So what about a student asking to be segregated from fellow students? That crosses a line.

The York case was unusual, in that the course was online, in-person meetings were rare, and some students were allowed to miss them for non-religious reasons. We disagree with the university decision, but it isn’t a slippery slope to gender-segregated university classrooms. That just isn’t on the menu. Freedom means the right to privately practice a religion, and to publicly profess it. But the right extends only so far as it does not impose those beliefs on others or on institutions. A student asking for the classroom to be curtained off, to separate him from members of another sex, race or religion should not be granted his wish, and will not be.

 When rights collide, in Quebec and at York 

The Show Begins: Quebec secular charter hearings set to begin

Lots of coverage on the start of the Quebec hearings and will continue to post the more interesting articles. First, some basic background (Quebec secular charter hearings set to begin – Montreal – CBC News).

More interestingly, the sequence of  witnesses appears to favour those in favour of the Charter at the beginning. Feels similar to the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, which started its hearings in the regions, with witnesses strongly against accommodation, with the tone shifting as the hearings moved to urban areas like Montreal. Not sure if this is a wise strategy (for proponents of the Charter) given that people may remember the last submissions, more negative on the Charter, more than the first series, but we shall see:

Un début à l’avantage du gouvernement

Minister Drainville states that the government can count of the support of many Liberal party members. This may well be true, but there is also a lot of opposition among sovereignist ranks, so the net effect may balance out (Drainville dit pouvoir compter sur l’appui de militants libéraux). No signs of flexibility as the PQ government continues to dig in its heels (​Drainville: l’interdiction des signes religieux n’est pas négociable).

Woman to remove niqab to testify in Toronto case | Toronto Star

While I was not a fan of the Supreme Court ruling, which left open the door to the niqab in court, the application of the test seems to have been reasonable in ruling that she must remove the niqab to testify, including before the accused.

Woman to remove niqab to testify in Toronto case | Toronto Star.

York dean has ‘regret,’ but defends religious-accommodation choice – The Globe and Mail

As noted in an earlier post, Andrew Coyne has it right (York accommodation and Quebec values charter aren’t opposites, in fact they are the same); the problem is not the policies, laws and regulations, it is the absence of good judgement in its application:

In an interview, York provost Rhonda Lenton said if the student had made the same request for an in-class course, rather than one offered online, “I think that would be highly unlikely that the university would agree to grant such accommodation.”

After consulting York’s legal counsel and human-rights officials concerning the Ontario Human Rights Code, however, Dr. Singer also concluded that granting the accommodation “would have no substantial impact on the experience of other students.” And he suggests “the student would presumably not have enrolled” had the course not been advertised as exclusively online, even though Dr. Grayson says he knows the student has taken in-person courses at York.

“I wish I had had another choice, but neither I, nor those who advised me, believe that I did,” Dr. Singer’s letter concludes.

York dean has ‘regret,’ but defends religious-accommodation choice – The Globe and Mail.

Lisée, la Charte et les États-Unis Commentary

Good piece by Richard Hétu of La Presse, systematically taking apart the false logic and counterproductive messaging of Quebec Ministers in the New York Times, the latest of course Jean-François Lisée’ piece (Quebec’s Latest Stand). But even Hétu in noting Lisée’s comments on Cameron and Merkel’s comments on multiculturalism is unaware of just how much both have moved in terms of practical policies to improve integration (Baroness Warsi’s ongoing engagement with Muslim and other communities, Merkel’s efforts with the Turkish community and opening up dual citizenship):

Il y a lieu de se demander si le ministre québécois n\’a pas brouillé son propre message dans sa plus récente intervention américaine. Après tout, aux États-Unis, le rejet du multiculturalisme est aujourd\’hui surtout associé à la droite populiste, comme l\’a exprimé récemment Andrea Tantaros, commentatrice de la chaîne Fox News.

«Les élites croient au multiculturalisme, elles croient en la diversité. Le Tea Party croit au patriotisme», a-t-elle dit.

Lisée, la Charte et les États-Unis | Richard Hétu, Collaboration spéciale | États-Unis.

In English language media, Graeme Hamilton of the National Post makes similar points in PQ minister twists facts to defend Values Charter and The Toronto Star has an overview of some of the recent developments (Parliamentary hearings on Quebec’s values charter could ignite secularism nationwide, PQ says). Don Macpherson of The Gazette notes correctly that the PQ is practising Dog-whistle politics.

Charter fuels stereotyping, tension: poll

More on the Charter as the hearings begin. First, the latest poll showing the same divisions of support between francophones and non-francophones. More interesting is the impact of the proposed Charter:

Fifty-three per cent of people polled, including 49 per cent of francophones and 69 per cent of people from other linguistic groups — said they believed relations between communities have already deteriorated since the debate over the charter of values began.

Forty-nine per cent of people polled said they believe adoption of the charter will give rise to civil disobedience in public institutions.

Roughly half of those polled said they believe there has already been an increase in stereotyping against religious minorities. Fifty-seven per cent of people polled — including 80 per cent of non-francophones — said they believe Quebec’s Jews, Muslims and Sikhs should have an equal say to other groups in discussions about the charter.

Support for the charter was higher among manual labourers, retired people and people with incomes of $60,000 to $100,000 than it was for young adults, students and homemakers.

Charter fuels stereotyping, tension: poll.

A good overview of organizations in favour and opposing the Charter, and the related politics and political strategy by Chantal Hébert of The Star:

Get ready for Quebec values charter debate replay: Hébert

York U Accommodation: Quebec and Other Commentary

More on the York University accommodation case.

No surprise, but Minister Drainville tries to portray Quebec as ahead of the curve, and that similar debates over approaches will occur in English Canada. He misses the point: debate over what is reasonable will always occur, the question is whether, and how far, one can codify this or handle issues on a case-by-case basis, subject to laws, regulations, and values. Ontario rejected sharia (and other faith-based) religious tribunals and funding for faith-based schools. While the risk of ad hoc case-by-case approaches is that sometimes administrators will get it wrong (as did York), government charters will likely get it more wrong, impacting more people, as the QC charter indicates.

Religious rights controversy will spread across Canada, PQ minister warns – The Globe and Mail.

Drainville also has an interview stating that the Charter is an indispensable tool to against fundamentalism. But why such a broad approach if it is really the small percentage of fundamentalists in all religions?

Charte de la laïcité: «Indispensable» contre l’intégrisme

Andrew Coyne reminds us that judgement, not trying to codify everything, is a better approach. Professor Grayson exercised good judgement, York U administration did not, particularly given that part of their mission statement includes:

A community of faculty, students, staff, alumni and volunteers committed to academic freedom, social justice, accessible education, and collegial self-governance, York University makes innovation its tradition.

York accommodation and Quebec values charter aren’t opposites, in fact they are the same

The Globe editorial, while raising some valid points (the sky is not falling over this request) and ends up on the correct note, nevertheless views this as a complex case, in addition to slamming Justice Minister MacKay for his jingoistic – but correct – response:

What has been overlooked to some degree is the fact that, when the student was initially turned down, he accepted the decision and agreed to attend the online course’s group session. York officials were right to reconsider the student’s request after the professor’s refusal. Their decision to accommodate him, on the grounds that the course is online, is not something we support, but it’s not inherently objectionable – especially because the school implied it would not have made the same decision if the request had come from a student taking a regular, in-class course. This is a hard case, on which reasonable people can and do disagree. What cannot be in dispute is this: York’s decision is not a slippery slope leading to segregated classrooms.

Reasonable accommodation at York is not a slippery slope 

Reasonable Accommodation: What is Reasonable? – New Canadian Media

My piece on reasonable accommodation, trying to clarify what is reasonable and what is not, focussing on common spaces, common norms, and encouraging participation, and providing examples of what is more or less reasonable:

Reasonable Accommodation: What is Reasonable? – New Canadian Media – NCM.

York University Accommodation Controversy

No surprise, that editorial and other commentary is uniformly in favour of the York U Professor Grayson and against York U Admin (University stands by controversial decision to allow female-free schooling for religious student).

National Post editorial board: Rights crusaders run amok at York University | National Post.

York professor was right to deny student’s request to work apart from women: Toronto Star Editorial

York U prof won’t let male student opt out of working with female classmates – Sun

Ottawa Citizen Editorial: Unreasonable accommodation

 What York University forgot: Gender equality is not negotiable  (Sheema Khan)

Interesting, in Quebec media only (to date), Professor Grayson was quoted in being in favour of the Quebec Charter of Values:

« Tout ceci indique qu’il y a un certain besoin pour le genre de choses qui sont débattues au Québec, lance Paul Grayson en entrevue téléphonique avec Le Devoir. Nous avons des universités publiques. Elles doivent être laïques. On ne peut pas avoir des droits religieux qui ont préséance sur les droits laïques des étudiantes. »

Un prof réclame une charte pour le Canada

La démagogie au pouvoir | Gérard Bouchard

The strongest condemnation of the Quebec Charter of Values to date, by Gérard Bouchard. Says it all:

Pour ce qui est de la connaissance du terrain, on s’en remet aux perceptions courantes plutôt qu’aux études rigoureuses. En matière de suppression des droits, on s’appuie sur le précédent créé par trois ou quatre pays ou régions d’Europe en faisant abstraction de toutes les démocraties du monde qui ont choisi de respecter les libertés, y compris en Europe même. Et on évite soigneusement de parler des traités de droit internationaux auxquels le Québec est assujetti.

Il fallait que tout cela survienne dans le grand parti que fut celui de René Lévesque, si soucieux des droits et de la démocratie, si attaché à la transparence, et dont l’héritage a été fidèlement perpétué par des générations de politiciens et politiciennes, jusqu’à ce qu’il soit perverti par nos actuels dirigeants. C’est triste.

La démagogie au pouvoir | Gérard Bouchard | Votre opinion.

An illustration of demagoguery in action see this op-ed by Jean-François Lisée, Quebec minister for the Montreal area and for international affairs. As always, striking that the model referred to is always European, rather than North American, despite Europe largely failing at integration, and the usual caricature of multiculturalism:

Quebec’s Latest Stand

As well as a further illustration of the absence of evidence-based policy and program work, no studies on the potential impact on the education sector:

Charte: Québec ignore l’avis d’un comité du milieu de l’éducation